Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.208.186.19

Forum Moderators: martinibuster

Message Too Old, No Replies

Tips for getting high PR 1 way links

     
6:10 pm on Jul 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 24, 2005
posts:53
votes: 0


Just got a nice 1 way high pr link from a .edu library website. Have heard it said that a few like this are worth many recips from lesser pr'd sites. Any tips to share on getting similar high pr links? .govs seem like they are almost impossible, haven't found any suitable .org's in my niche to make requests to.....
9:22 pm on July 10, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:June 16, 2006
posts:188
votes: 0


Thanks for the tip! I didn't even think of the .edu sites.

You are correct about the .gov's. They won't link to anyone... simply because of dumb legal reasons, that in all honesty, shouldn't affect them as far as the web is concerned.

In fact, I just got stiffed by a .gov. I donated a bunch of product for a Kids Day, hoping that I would get a post event write up. It's been a month now, and all I got was a 'Thanks'.

That'll be the last time I work with anything related to .gov's

.Orgs are pretty tough sometimes too, depending on your niche. There are a couple of .Orgs in my niche, but no body wants to make a link unless you donate thousands of dollars.

6:43 am on July 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:June 6, 2006
posts:3
votes: 0


thankx for the infos
8:18 am on July 11, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member sem4u is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Dec 18, 2002
posts:3086
votes: 5


Library sites can be good as well. Got one good link from the British Library with another to request.
12:35 am on July 13, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 29, 2006
posts:63
votes: 0


matt cutts said that .edu, .gov links etc. aren't more valuable than others.

there were discussion on highrankings forum. Most people agreed that .edu, .gov etc. aren't more valuable.

12:07 am on July 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member jane_doe is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:July 7, 2002
posts:2894
votes: 1


matt cutts said that .edu, .gov links etc. aren't more valuable than others.

The value comes in because they are often high trust rank sites.

All things being equal I'll take a one way .edu link over a link from place like the phentermine web site that just sent me a really cool 3 way link proposal. ;)

3:45 am on July 15, 2006 (gmt 0)

Moderator This Forum from US 

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 13, 2002
posts:14938
votes: 495


Well said, Jane. That may be what Matt may have been alluding to.

matt cutts said that .edu, .gov links etc. aren't more valuable than others.

I believe the adamovic is changing the meaning of the quote by not considering the entire quote. Here is the entire quote:

there’s no special “Yahoo boost” or edu-boost or gov-boost. Those links just tend to be higher quality.

So there are Matt Cutt's words speaking for themselves. It's clear that he says .edu links tend to be higher quality. The word tend is a qualifier, which can reasonably be interpreted to mean that there are exceptions in the .edu space. No surprise there, right?

High quality is a huge issue when seeking links. So while technically a dot edu is not intrinsically valuable, what makes it high quality is the neighborhood it finds itself in, or the trust factor.

Where many people are lacking is the ability to recognize a high trust website in the .com, .org, .info, etc. spaces.

12:16 am on July 16, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 29, 2006
posts:63
votes: 0



The value comes in because they are often high trust rank sites.

I agree.

9:18 pm on July 17, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 15, 2006
posts:50
votes: 0


If you want to get down to sheer number crunching then .edu etc are more valuable.
Content!
Most websites today are just so full of rubbish, that good novel content is rare. Bear in mind that most .edu links have some of the worlds best minds contributing it is no wonder TR was developed.
The answer which is hard for all of us is to step outside our own little bubble and pick just 5 sites that really are the best in our own particular field, and get links from these. Bought scrounged, point a gun whatever. If all linked to you I bet you would have the highest SERP for that KW!
It really is that simple.
2:36 pm on July 20, 2006 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 26, 2005
posts:486
votes: 0


matt cutts said that .edu, .gov links etc. aren't more valuable than others.

The value comes in because they are often high trust rank sites.

All things being equal I'll take a one way .edu link over a link from place like the phentermine web site that just sent me a really cool 3 way link proposal. ;)

All things being equal I would not go out of my way to get a .gov or .edu site if one from a .com, .net or any other TLD is more readily available with the same PR and influence.

5:04 pm on July 20, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:July 28, 2004
posts:156
votes: 0


with the same PR and influence.

I think the point is that all things being equal, the .gov's and .edu's won't have the same PR and influence. They should carry more because of the trust associated with those TLDs.

4:56 pm on July 21, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:June 16, 2006
posts:188
votes: 0


Hogwash, every one of you is missing the real point here.

Sit back for a second and think about this.

Matt said that links from those sites tend to be higher. In no way did he say mention that .edu and .gov sites give better link quality simply because of the dumb domain extension.

Pay attention here... he just gave you the bread and butter of the algorithm for links and not one of you listened. (i'm a newbie at this, but christ... pay attention children)

Tend: in other words, most of the time. Not all of the time. That being said, you have to ask WHY most and not all. Hold that thought for a sec....

Unique, Quality Content: Everyone knows this is king, but how much content do you need? What is considered unique? Again, hold that thought....

Natural, One-Way Links: They've made it very clear that they can pick out the one-way links, and tell if it's worth anything or not.

Can't you see now? You guys are thinking like a one way street, which is why you can't figure it out.

A link from a .edu or .gov tends to produce great results because the link in question is SOMETIMES attached to an article that has a TON of UNIQUE, QUALITY content, written by people that are (by no suprise), slightly more educated than you are.

It doesn't always work, because google is measuring the uniqueness of the content, applying that to the quantity (not quality) of content, the relationship of your site to that particular article, where your link is literally LOCATED in that article, and finally how that article compares to all the other content on the web (which in the end, defines quality and uniquness).

The reason he said TENDS, is because any yahoo can call his friend that has a son in college, and ask him to generate some bogus page, and put a link on it.

That being said, NOTHING is equal because this is simply a multi-dimentional math problem that constantly adjusts itself as the web changes and develops.

And even with that blatant roadmap i just gave you, keep in mind that there are several other variables involved.... but i'd say that has to be the core of it, when discussing the overall value of your brand new, one-way link.

Tell Matt I said Hi. hahahaha

thgyspsy

5:34 pm on July 21, 2006 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


Hey there Stich, Lilo here… (sorry kids here… lol)

Ok, I like your tenacity for “a newbie at this”. Your insight and grasp of the mathematical realities is commended as well. I have seen Matt’s little post analyzed to death in the SEO community, to the point of mass hysteria. I don’t believe ‘the answer’ lies there. That is “thinking like a one way street” for me since it’s myopic and belies the true complexity of the algos.

Your comment, “NOTHING is equal because this is simply a multi-dimensional math problem that constantly adjusts itself as the web changes and develops.” Is bang on and very appropriate. While there are many parts of the algo that are taken from stored data valuations, a great deal is done ‘on the fly’. No true measure can be had as the web is a live, evolving beast, as such so are the parameters of any potential analysis.

Since we’re talking Google, (I assume since the mention of the CUTTlefish) I would say you take a little journey back to hurricane ‘Florida’ and read the ‘Hill Top’ white papers and info to see the addition of the ‘authority’ weighting, sometimes referred to as the ‘Local Score (LS). I could actually put the PRE and POST formula changes but it’s a bit of a dull read.

Do this, and you shall get a better idea of the whole .edu, .gov and relative ‘authority sites’ issues as far as weighting is concerned. That knowledge will clarify your goals as far as link building programs are concerned I hope.

If you'd like some links to the Hill Top stuff, let me know. A read through a few Google Patents I have also sheds some light as far as LSI and authority site calculations.

6:44 pm on July 21, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:June 16, 2006
posts:188
votes: 0


(sorry kids here… lol)

Hahah... I laughed when I read that... then about ten minutes later, it kicked in with a whole new (and probably more accurate) meaning.

Kudos

When it comes to linking, and serps, is there any weight at all to linking OUT to trust worthy places of equal themes. Does doing anything like that give you bonus points (per say), for sending users to highly relevent trustworthy, make-you-feel-all-good-inside websites?

thgyspsy

7:18 pm on July 21, 2006 (gmt 0)

Inactive Member
Account Expired

 
 


My kids must have watched that movie to a PR10

Anyways, YES. While it is not as heavily weighted as incoming (back links) outbound links and internal linking structure (a-la ‘tagging’ et al)do give some weight.

This can be gleaned form the documentation, but I shall give you a simpler example.

There is a site I manage for a client that was sitting in the 3-5 rank in the SERPs for a reasonably competitive term (100 Million+). I decided to tweak things a bit at a time to see what actually had an affect. One of the experiments was to start adding ‘authority’ site text links to the page in questions Not a tone. Only 4.

I waited a week or so and voila, it was bouncing from 2-4. Interesting. I then started adding ONE new authority link each week. I would warn against ‘spamming’ this technique as with any. I never go past more than 6-7 total outbound authority links (for the term in question of course). Ending up with a TON, dilutes actual value of them.
There is some data on this in the Google Patent documents I mentioned earlier… but that’s the simpler version

5:08 am on July 25, 2006 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:May 18, 2002
posts:126
votes: 0


off topic:

In fact, I just got stiffed by a .gov. I donated a bunch of product for a Kids Day, hoping that I would get a post event write up. It's been a month now, and all I got was a 'Thanks'.

This makes me sick. Donate to kids to donate to kids. When I donate, I don't even expect a thanks. Sheesh.

2:51 am on July 28, 2006 (gmt 0)

Moderator This Forum from US 

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 13, 2002
posts:14938
votes: 495


Hogwash, every one of you is missing the real point here... Matt said that links from those sites tend to be higher. In no way did he say mention that .edu and .gov sites give better link quality simply because of the dumb domain extension.

Relax, you're just repeating what has already been agreed on, and clarifying what is already clear in this thread. Not sure what gave you the idea that EVERYONE in this thread is stating dot edu's are intrinsically better.

In case you missed it:

The word tend is a qualifier, which can reasonably be interpreted to mean that there are exceptions in the .edu space. No surprise there, right?

No one is saying that the TLD in itself is magic. Jane Doe states very clearly that the value is not in the domain extension but in the trust factor which generally results from the motives of those publishing information, the scholarly and authoritative nature of the information, the non-commercial aspect of it which all together TENDS to make it a link magnet and TENDS to put it in a good neighborhood, etc, etc.