Forum Moderators: open
I'm seeing quite a few sites with good PR on all pages except their links page. These pages had PR before, now they are either PR0, or grey ( not indexed ).
It seems it's more consistent at sites that have just one links page with multiple topics on it, sites with multiple links pages (directory style links pages) on topic seem OK.
the consitencies I see are:
Most have link text pointing to them called links
Most are called links.htm or have links in the URL.
Most are 1 page, multi-topic links pages, e.g., there is no targeted theme to the page, anything from greeting cards to health sites all on same page.
Could these be mistaken for FFA's?
I haven't checked fully, but many are listed on "link trading" sites. Maybe peple have created link farms and don't realize it?
I've seen this on many sites. It doesn't seem like a coincidence.
All the nine 'main' pages also have links to each other and the home page on each one.
Pages with trailing slash, would receive a different PR with the url that does no have a trailing slash and sometimes simply refreshing the page (may need multiple times) would give the 4 PR again. (may page flactuates to 0 and 4 PR)
As I analyze this, for example my page shows 0 PR and then I try to search my site in the Google Directory, it would not show up. Then if I try to refresh the page (over and over again) until it shows 4 PR, try to check out Google Directory, my site is listed there.
If I check dmoz, it still list my site.
This ends up in 2 possible scenario. First, is my site being penalize (if it was it should have a gray pr?!?) ... Second, wait patiently while google updates.
if this happens ...
I hate to say this, but if your page is PR4 and you see fluctuation to PR0, then most likely that page is going to end up at PR0 after everything settles down.
i think i would really need a beer, i mean a lot!
Now if they are presented in context with more text and naturally within the site, it is more likely they are legitimate useful links that are not just there because of a "swap".
Case in point are two industry specific portals. Site A requires reciprocal link from home page while Site B doesn't specify. Almost half of Site B's backlinks are from link pages. Both sites had 2000+ backlinks 3 weeks ago. Today Site A has 2080 links and Site B has 867 links.
I think what you are seing after refreshing and eventually getting a higher PR is the result of eventually connecting to one of the other datacenters that still has that PR.
Hey, sounds like enough people have chimed in with counter evidence to dispel this..
But it would be much more reliable coming from you than from our anecdotal evidence. :-)
Care to give us Google's definition of a link farm?
I would assume that the quality of the fertilizer determines the quality of the link once it matures.
With an answer like that, people are again going to start accusing you of being too cryptic.
So are you trying to 'weed out' the genetically modified (GM) links?
I changed the file names to protect the innocent. It was a case of BFD, so I did it.
But it would be much more reliable coming from you than from our anecdotal evidence.
There have been enough posts by respected members of WebmasterWorld dispelling the theory of a penalty for legitimate links pages, that it should have been self evident. If GoogleGuy has to chime in on every thread to have their comments and views validated ...
Think about it! Penalizing legitimate, on topic links pages would be entirely counter productive and contrary to the entire premiss of the www.
I have two links pages on my site. I don't care what the PR for those pages is. They are there for my readers/customers ... not Google. They are staying regardless of PR as they add to the overall informational value of my site.
I think this will all come out in the wash ... after the update settles ... if it settles. ;)
There have been enough posts by respected members of WebmasterWorld dispelling the theory of a penalty for legitimate links pages, that it should have been self evident.
Absolutely no disrespect intended, but to many, there is very little about what is happening right now with Google that is self evident.
It didn't take much work to change everything and I would rather be on the safe side, inspite of the so called counter evidence there "is."
Whether or not they are targeting links.html pages, it no longer matters to me.
As I stated in another thread, traffic diversification away from Google dependency is a lesson I learned in September when THAT algo change hit many websites like this recent one has/will. This algo change will deliver a punch against my site, which is super clean, but not a detrimental one.
And discussion of whether or not the algo change is actually better or worse for Google is useless. Why care about it? That's their problem, not ours. Ours is to concentrate on our site and improving traffic no matter where it comes from. If I hadn't been busy working on diversification for the last 6 months, this new algo change would have killed me. But I learned my lesson in Sept.
If I hadn't been busy working on diversification for the last 6 months, this new algo change would have killed me. But I learned my lesson in Sept.
I am a firm believer in diversification because anything can happen at any time. However, there are some things which are just over the top. My personal opinion only :) ... but I believe penalties against legitimate links pages would be outrageous.
The thing which seems to be overlooked throughout this thread is that even if there were some sort of penalty being imposed in the Dominic update (which is still NOT over) ... it will be applied across the board. In past months, many, millions of sites had their PR reduced. The reduction in PR for my site had zero results in regards to positioning or number of inquiries.
You speak of a new algo change ... but there has not been any substantive proof of any algo change whatsoever. Until the update is done and run, (which it is NOT) it is (IMHO) premature to speculate how disastrous it may or may not be. We still have some waiting to do before we can see and evaluate the final results.
[edited by: Liane at 12:22 am (utc) on May 21, 2003]
As I also wouldn't like some kid doing a search for "nice forms to play around with" on sites, I also put this tag on any pages that contain forms that send email, and on all of the target pages that show after the form has processed.
Will this harm things? I'll let you know.
But I swear, there is nothing wrong with my sites, no spam, nothing even close. Not within miles. I followed Brett's 12 months to a good site in Google thread which has become scripture.
I'm still trying to figure out what an all organic link is. Anyone? Anyone?
But figuring out Google's algo hasn't been my main concern for awhile. Diversification. It's everything. I'm brainstorming right now for more methods to diversify. A little creative thinking is all it takes.
Organic. Definitely organic. :)
We have our basic cow and pig manure to help raise healthy leeks, err I mean links on our 100% certified Organic Link Farm (tm) (sm) (pat pend.)
Cheers,
theBear
Good daffynition there GG
SOMETHING had definitely happened to A LOT of honest link pages. If nothing else, this could indicate that Google is tightening their algorithm to try and stop "spammy" link pages and/or FFA link pages.
My guess is that we're going to be seeing a smaller weight put on reciprocal links for boosting PR. Actually, I think from the end-user's point of view, this makes sense. A one-way link should weigh more than a reciprocal link, IMHO.
My link page was PR0'd out today... and ALL of my links on my links page are reciprocal. Anyone have a links page PR0'd out today that has one-way (non-reciprocal) links?
Just curious.
As Googleguy said at the Boston Pub Conference, they will be applying spam filters "in the very near future". I am all but certain that Google is rolling out some of these new filters in the Dominic update ... but it is too soon to tell what the effects might be.
But I swear, there is nothing wrong with my sites, no spam, nothing even close. Not within miles. I followed Brett's 12 months to a good site in Google thread which has become scripture.
Then I doubt very much you should have anything to worry about! ;)
I'm still trying to figure out what an all organic link is. Anyone? Anyone?
From the Concise Oxford dictionary: Structural, inherent, systematic, coordinated.
I would decipher GG's comment as being "on theme" with and relevant to the topic of your site. Just my opinion though ... perhaps he means little byte sized links you find on the midwest link farms! :)
But figuring out Google's algo hasn't been my main concern for awhile. Diversification. It's everything.
Agreed! :)
