Forum Moderators: martinibuster
Please guide me on this:
I have spotted a .gov site. This site has a single PR3 Blog Page having just ONE Official Blog Entry as written on Feb 24, 2005.
Now anyone can add comment to this blog entry, and insert <dofollow> Weblinks as well. Already 243 spammers have posted their 243 adult links to this page. Well, they are enjoying the Page Rank of 3 from an authority .gov site.
Google is also counting the links from this page as backlinks for the listed sites.
______________________
Now I have my client's website which is 2 days old. I have been allocated the task of SEO and Link Building for this site.
I want to know from you all well experienced pros, that
In order to get fast crawling/indexing by search engines and PR3 link; Should I publish the link of this new website on the PR3 Blog Page of .gov site OR Not? Will it be valuable in the long run?
(The only thing I am worried about is "Bad Link Neighborhood" which is already established on that .gov Page.)
Please let me know your response and guide me on this.
Sincere Thanks to all for your time!
The only thing I am worried about is "Bad Link Neighborhood" which is already established on that .gov Page.
And that's all you need to worry about. Keeping company with 243 spammers is not something I'd choose. Ever.
And don't foget that visible page rank can be months out of date.
Is the page even relevant to the content of the site you are promoting?
Finally, despite the PR, not every .gov page walks on water - SEs judge the pages on their merits (it just so happens that, in general, they HAVE merits!).
That however, does not mean it wouldn't give you a boost. At worst it should supposedly give you 0 benefit but not a negative.
If the page has a PR3, there's some sort of link juice being passed to the page. And I would expect some of that juice to pass through to your page (though at link 250, that may or may not be negligible).
If you're looking at short term results, go for it. If you're planning on long term results, it may or may not be worth it. Again, I wouldn't do it with any of my primary sites but that does not mean it won't be beneficial.
All my life I've been chased by the incompetent but ambitious who have no recourse but lying and cheating to get ahead in life. It's annoying to see the undeserving get ahead by cheating those who work harder and better.
This circles back to the .gov link. Walk away from it. Read the Link Dev Library to learn better aproaches. The library is a manual on how to print your own money, and it's free. Or you can not study it and resign yourself to mediocrity and thinking of ways to "get" your competitor.
That was a real beneficial explanation I needed at this point of time.
No doubt, I was tempted by .gov PR3 but after getting the expert comments: I would not go for it! Thanks a ton for giving me the direction!
BradleyT
Do it and if you think the results are negative rather than neutral then put your competitors links up there.
I am sure you would have been joking. My conscious does not allow doing this ever.
God Bless LUCK to all of us!
Finally, despite the PR, not every .gov page walks on water
but do they walk on trust?
[webmasterworld.com...]
That is a controversial notion, and from what I've read and heard from Googlers, trust is not a matter of TLDs. Trust, imo is for a large part a matter of what inbounds and outbounds they have plus time. I've had good success identifying high trust sites and obtaining links. They can be from the unlikeliest websites, like from a mom and pop that doesn't know anything about SEO.
For my purposes, the search for trust begins in walking away from sites that link out to sites unrelated to it's niche, especially to SEO related sites.
Just be aware that there's varying levels of 'this link helps'. It may add some juice to your page, maybe it takes some away. But what you're not considering is what happens if your site gets looked at by Google manually. Do you think that link is going to help you, hurt you, or be neutral if someone in California reviews your backlinks? Me, I'd be betting that you getting slapped into last week with a link like that in your profile :).
Better spend some extra time finding some .gov links that haven't been eaten clean to the bone already. Find yourself a .gov link that no one else can get - then you've got something.
I mentioned in another recent thread about starting at your local/regional government website and asking for a link then working up from there.
If .edu inbound link edge is proved, then for sure all will rent links from .edu sites in one way or other. After all we are very much used to game any system available.I'm not too certain that will be an option. And even if it were, remember, we're talking about one signal in relation to the quality of a TLD. There are many others. Link networks are easy to detect so that's really a no brainer for Google and the others, hopefully. :)
Certain tlds may have a potential advantage - but they can blow that in a flash, either by deliberate exploitation, or by poor control of (say) student 'homepages'.
Further, P1R hits the nail right on the head about detection: an edu or gov domain that was being link-abused would stand out from the rest like a polar bear in Antarctica.
[edited by: Quadrille at 10:32 am (utc) on Feb. 7, 2009]
Do it and if you think the results are negative rather than neutral then put your competitors links up there.
^^ I was joking about the competitors thing.
If your site doesn't already have .gov backlinks then I would take the link to increase the sites link diversity profile.
^^ I am joking about the spam thing
;)
In order to get fast crawling/indexing by search engines and PR3 link; Should I publish the link of this new website on the PR3 Blog Page of .gov site OR Not? Will it be valuable in the long run?
@ eod after 5 yrs @ it, neither of my sites have gotten banned for inbound links coming from anywhere. i have seen where sites have lost page rank built by paid links or lower quality links like directories: the sites would come up on position 7 or page 2 instead of 2 or 3 on page one. so if google were to apportion pr3 link juice to your site because of that link today but found out that the site is a ffa 3 months from now, imo you would effectively lose that pr3 'juice.' so if that pr3 got you on page 1 position 8 when you were on page 2 position 4, you would probably go back to page 2 position 4.
i professionally like to advocate and execute the practice of traffic development when seeking links:
[webmasterworld.com...]
i prefer influential blogs, websites with fresh content, and social media popular sections, when seeking links, for they drive more traffic than the typical 1 click you get from the directory editor who is checking the link you submitted. i have even gotten a few hundred referrers from blogs with low to moderate popularity; it's a bigger world than 'juice' and algos ;)
Would it hurt you, maybe yes, maybe not.
Now I have my client's website which is 2 days old.
I don't think it's ethical to do that to a client--at least without explaining the risks.
Even if the site gets the link and at some point that link is removed, the site's trust may never fully recover.
Even if the site gets the link and at some point that link is removed, the site's trust may never fully recover.
i have seen links get devalued and sites lose ranking; and i have also seen asynchronous link building that have helped sites get back to where they were on the serps.
how does a search engine know if the owner of the site was the one who submitted the site to leverage the link's weighting?
now this form of link building can be cataloged under what google refers to as a link scheme:
Links intended to manipulate PageRank
then where do you cross the line between ethical link building and a "link scheme?"
what can also be classified as a link scheme with the sole objective of manipulating PageRank? if we are in the business of link building, and the results should indeed be 'organic,' couldn't any method of acquiring links be deemed as an intention to manipulate page rank? it is clearly an open submission form similar to what is offered in a directory; directory submissions have been removed from the guidelines, so that may be what substantiates a 'risk.'
so the question stands: what can be classified as a link scheme other than the process of buying links?
