Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Now we've enhanced the information we provide and will show you the complete phrases sites use to link to you, not just individual words. And we've expanded the number we show to 100...
Webmaster Central Blog [googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com]
It sounds great, I looked all over, read the blog, read the help, read other sites info on it. But it just doesn't show.
On Statistics > Page Analysis I get Type and Encodings, but no phrases or even a hint of where it's supposed to be. It's not empty or no data, it's not even evident where they are supposed to put it.
Is there anything I can do to enable this? Am I blind?
Meta tag error:
Last attempt Mar 16, 2007: We've detected that your verification file returns a status of 412 (Precondition failed) in the header.
File verrification error:
Last attempt Mar 16, 2007: Our system has experienced a temporary problem.
I tried this previously and it never worked either. I got the sitemap to work, but I can't access the advanced tools until I verrify...
I want the timing to be a coincidence.
But the intent doesn't seem to be.
We've just reached the conclusion on how this tool could be used to match the strength of certain words in inbounds vs. your actual content. You know, to evade theme/phrase based penalties.
Now it became ten times harder if not impossible to interpret it.
( See this is why I keep track of all inbounds' URLs. )
As now, it doesn't tell what words were used most often.
Google isn't Yahoo, it doesn't care whether your inbounds carry a phrase by individual words or in their entirety. A site with 100 inbounds "Blue" and "Cheese", 50-50 each ( my favourite example ) WILL rank for "Blue Cheese" in Google. They combine any and all on- and off-page relevance in the background, it's not like you needed your anchors to be a match to your exact keyphrase all the time... what's the message here?
This will cause confusion.
We gained the third most important data and lost the second.
( I guess they won't list the anchors/links based on their WORTH, ever. )
As a SEO tool this is a step backwards.
At least for those who know how relevancy travels through anchor text.
Would Google do that to SEOs?
Whatever, I think I got the message.
1.: Google reads the threads. ( here and elsewhere, but we knew that )
2.: We ( as in webmasters ) were onto something.
( Please don't take me seriously, I have hay fever. )
But since I'm at it, I see ( "natural" ) Wikipedia and Blog links all over the list. Why does the linking profile show nofollow links I wonder. That's not much help either. Could it be, because if it didn't, Wikipedia would have become a dead end in the system, along with all WordPress and other Blogs, and this would have triggered the filters to penalize them?
If not, please turn it off, I don't think we need to know.
Is there a Google command I can use to see who is linking to me with a certain phrase.
This is a great move by Google but I am sure Google is not a dump SE to still use anchor text for ranking. Anchor text can only fetch OOps.
maximillianos, we keep the stats updated even if the site becomes unverified. We recommend that you leave the verification file or meta tag on your site so when we reverify periodically, your account remains verified.
Muskie, I'll check into that. Can you send me your site URL?
Miamacs, we've had several people request that we show the individual anchor words we had available before, so we're looking into potentially providing both.
We are working to make the anchor text phrases available for more sites, so if you don't see this data now, you should hopefully see it in the coming weeks.
the .com which was set up last year is succesfully spidered and listed in google, but all i get on the page analysis page in WT is
However, on the .co.uk domain which is listed in WT but not indexed yet (why i still dont know)
I was, (just checked but it says no data available) getting all sorts of interesting information like common words etc.
Why does this show for one site and not the other and why (for over 24 hours now) has the .co.uk not shown any stats?