Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 22.214.171.124
1. Who or what is Dave's list? (I have seem discussions saying its number x on Dave's list)
2. How do you determine how high your site is ranked in Google on a particular keyword?
3. Any utility one can use to plot how a keywords are doing on a search engine over time?
4. Is it true that if a site on the same IP gives you a link, Google will not count that link?
5. Is it true that Google only count links that come to your website from a IP block owned by a completely differ organisation to the one that owns your site is hosted on?
6. What is the most important factor Google uses to award page rank?
7. Does giving links to sites with lower PR lower your site's PR?
Thank you in advance.
2. Type it in to a Google search and start scrolling (my incentive to be in the top 5 is so i dont have to scroll to see what position im on! ;))
3. Not that I know of. You could set up an excel spreadsheet and manually enter phrases and positions over time.
4. Not sure - doubt it though.
5. Where are you hearing all this? :) I would say that a link is a link is a link. Yes, certain links may flag your site, and certain patterns of flags may cause your site to be penalised.
6. PR is inbound links (pretty much 100% AFAIK) - rankings are based on hundreds of factors.
7. No, it's accumulative. You won't get a reduction, you'll just get less of a boost (but a boost nonetheless).
I could be wrong though! ;)
Thanks for clearing some of the "old wife's SEO tales" I have picked up and the links has been useful. Thanks gentlemen.
but I at least didn't need to change my handle. :)
TemiTheOne to expand on comments from the previous thread.
Good ranking in Google is a combination of 100 variables that no one really knows for sure what they are.
We observe and analysis, and some even share their findings for open debate.
Dave lists is a short version of this (highly probable findings) however, in the context of "ranking" following the list of 10 verbatim (and only) -- may or may not produce top 10 ranks.
I was not discrediting his list - only suggesting that there are 90 more variables and although possibly weaker in ranking potential "individual", if compiling those 90 versus the "Dave's list" then you may not actually achieve what you hope to.