PDA

View Full Version : Link Building



the goat
09-03-2008, 12:07 AM
It seems that most common link building practices are going by the wayside as of late. Everyone is down on directories, google doesn't credit forum signatures and now I hear that reciprocal links are worthless.

I used to put aside a little bit of time everyday to work on link building. I would submit my sites to a few directories and send out some personal emails to a few sites that I thought would be interested in link exchanges. Of course I always felt that the time I spent on forums was helping too. (they still seem to on yahoo, but not google)

So lately I have found myself not paying attention to link building since the last thing I want to do is waste time on a futile strategy.

I am wondering if anyone has any link building techniques they care to share with the board? I am under the impression that pretty much the only thing left is to concentrate on content and traffic and hope that the links just come naturally. Does this sound about right?

billbenson
09-03-2008, 12:32 AM
I rely heavily on adwords and don't do to much link building although I should. Having said that, I know a lot of webmasters who develop a network of industry related webmaster friends to do exchanges with. It's easier to do in certain markets than others. For me, I sell construction equipment. It's hard to find a construction equipment webmaster forum to make contacts.

IMO, the only link of value is a relevant content one way link.

The other problem is so many webmasters still think the links you mentioned; directory, recip, forum, etc have value. Not only do you have the problem of finding a group of sites you would like to get into a linking network, but you have to have webmasters that aren't using yesterdays strategies. Hard to do.

Like I said, I really haven't tried that hard, but your strategy of building good content pages that people want to link to is probably easier than hunting for decent linking partners.




I am under the impression that pretty much the only thing left is to concentrate on content and traffic and hope that the links just come naturally. Does this sound about right?

theGypsy
09-03-2008, 10:03 AM
Ok, for starters, I have never done recips... not for a few years at least. That dog was beaten down a while ago...

As for directories, that is part of what is considered foundational link building ( as is article directory subs). While not as valuable, it can be done with effect by hitting the higher quality locales.... so it can still be part of a link building campaign.

Forum sigs (and blog commenting) is also not a major player... if you're on a related forum/blog... great, drop them; but it isn't a seek and destroy tactic... merely coincidental.

I would also consider some competitive analysis... look at your core target terms and the top sites in the SERPs to see where they have gotten links from. This always gives some great ideas... once again, only the higher quality opportunities.

Beyond that, it depends on the market, business model (website type) and more as far as what one should do when developing a link building campaign.

I also like to occasionally look at the various methods of link baiting for new ideas... I had a post a while back on Link bait ideas (http://www.huomah.com/internet-marketing/link-building/hooked-on-link-baiting.html) and have a bunch of links to link building tools and resources (http://www.huomah.com/Tools/Search/Search-Marketing-Tools.html) which also might come in handy (all free tools etc..)

Social media marketing programs are often good for finding links (exposure) that you may not find elsewhere... but I would get a better idea of how to run one first... doing SMM as a standalone link building tactic, is not a good idea....

..but once again, each situation will differ.

BTW, I am almost finished my 'SEO Handbook; Link builders edition' if you PM me I shall put you on my list of peeps getting advanced copies (free of course...)

vangogh
09-03-2008, 04:58 PM
Pretty much everything Dave said.

I'll certainly add sites to a few directories, though I think the majority aren't worth a lot of time. A few of the better generals and then some searching to find the more specific topical directories.

I don't do recips though I suppose I engage in the modern equivalent of relationship building. The relationships aren't specifically built for links, but if you make freinds with people who own sites related to yours you'll end up with some links without having to ask for them.

Similar for social media. I'm not one to generally push my own content, though I meet other people who are happy to do so without me having to ask. Likewise I'll help promote their content without them having to ask.

Speaking of content I think the best way to get links is to create content worthy of getting linked to. So many people seem to skip this part. Creating linkworthy content isn't easy, but it's worth the time. If you have truly good content and give it a push it'll start pulling its own links.

the goat
09-03-2008, 06:32 PM
Wow great info and great links Gypsy, thank you for such a detailed response. That should keep me busy for a while.


Speaking of content I think the best way to get links is to create content worthy of getting linked to. So many people seem to skip this part. Creating linkworthy content isn't easy, but it's worth the time. If you have truly good content and give it a push it'll start pulling its own links.

That's pretty much what I have been banking on lately, I have been using the time I usually used to build links and focused on content, and being more active in some social networks as per your advice. Thanks again for that.

vangogh
09-03-2008, 06:59 PM
Glad to help. I do think you need to give your content a push, particularly in the beginning. Waiting around for it to be discovered doesn't work either unless your content is so good that it can't help but be found.

Still I think the best investment most people can make is in themselves. If you keep making improvements to your site, your content, etc it will pay off.

orion_joel
09-06-2008, 01:21 AM
Maybe correct me if i am wrong but, while the main objective of link building would be for search results, would you not also be trying to get links in places that people are likely to click on them.

So while a link in your signature at a forum may not be much use for the search engine results, what happens for someone searches for a specific topic you wrote on the forum about it shows up in the search results, then they follow your sig link to find out more. While i would expect this is going to provide less traffic then search engines might, what is the goal to get more visitors or to get better search results or both. So while search results may not get a big impact from forum posts, other things can result from them.

the goat
09-06-2008, 01:33 AM
I have gone back and forth on that very thing orion_joel. My problem is that my sites aren't based on coding, design or internet marketing. My posts have no worth to my customers, but if someone googles one of my sites they might get one of my posts on this forum.

Now let's say the post that they get is me asking how I can multiply my clickthroughs in order to maximize my efforts at monetizing my site. That would turn them off. My sites are info first and product reviews and links second.

I always end up removing my sites links from my signature because the last thing I want is for my users to realize that I am luring them in just to try and make money off of them.

I feel like the small amount of value I get from the links in my signature are not worth someone googling my site and ending up reading about how I don't think that sig links are worth it to my bottom line.

vangogh
09-06-2008, 03:02 AM
I think links are about a lot more than just search engines. I guess Dave and I answered in the perspective of SEOs, but links are advertising. I can tell you that for years forums have been among the top drivers of traffic to my site.

Of course it's not just the links themselves that lead to the traffic, but the fact that I actively participate. If I stopped posting the traffic would all but stop regardless of how many sig links I had.

I also think when trying to decide what is a good link it can help to take search engines out of the equation. Pretend search engines don't exist and then ask yourself if a certain link is still something you want. If you still do then it's probably a good link in the eyes of search engines. Even if it's not you won't care.

I'd be very happy if the New York Times decided to link to me even if they nofollowed the link and it provided no search engine benefit. People still click links. Businesses used links to market themselves before search and they would continue to use links to market themselves if search engines disappeared.

orion_joel
09-06-2008, 07:07 AM
the goat, that may be true for this forum, i do not know what you business actually is but i would assume that if you found a site that had similar content that complemented your product or information, then you may find that the idea of sig links is different. Int hat case you would be posting as an expert and more then likely not asking about how you get more people to click on your links and such. Then your links would actually be worth considerably more to you because people would read your post, see you know a lot about the topic, and then want to know more.

I can totally understand the point that you are coming from in that the value of a link here for you may be worth nothing and in some respect's be a negative. However as i said i think that this depends a lot of the business and the relevance to your business.

the goat
09-06-2008, 10:11 AM
I see what you mean, if this forum were relative to my industry I would certainly utilize links in my sig. I actually do on some forums so I am not really sure what my point was with that post. I guess the lesson is to hold off on posting after too many Guinness'.

Spider
09-06-2008, 11:38 AM
I haven't pursued and have ignored requests for reciprocal links for years, also. I believe that one-way links are still valuable, though, incoming and outgoing. Getting one-way links is pretty difficult unless your site is already so well established that you don't need them, while giving one-way links is very easy. So, here's an offer to everyone---

1. I have several sites on which I can place a one-way link to you. I'll do that and ask you not to link back to that same site from the site to which I linked. (ie. no reciprocal linking.)

2. If you want to link back to me from another of your sites, that's fine. If you want to link back to another of my sites, that's fine, too, but I do not want same site-to-same site reciprocal links.)

3. If you think any of my sites will benefit your visitors in any way and want to link to my site, I will be grateful, but likewise I will not reciprocate.

This way we help each other - and ourselves - with one-way linking yet won't fall foul of any contrivance-detection that search engines may deploy. At least, I think we will not break any 'rules.' Perhaps the experts can confirm that.

And this offer is only open to members of this forum who have at least 20 posts under their belts.

Here are the sites/pages on which I will provide one-way outbound links to your sites. Just let me know--

Great Money Clubs - Resources (http://greatmoneyclubs.com/resources.html)
Frederick Pearce, Business Coach - Resources (http://frederickpearce.com/resources.html)
The Self Improvement Pages (http://selfimprovementpages.com/) (This site is new and has no Resources page as yet. I can easily add one.)

Other domains go directly to sections within the above--

I45mc.com (http://I45mc.com/)
Want-to-be-a-Millionaire.com (http://want-to-be-a-millionaire.com/)

...or link to my book at Amazon

Keep Your Eyes On The Prize (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/141969023X/i45mc-20)

Is there anyone else who has written a book and would like a link?

* I hope this doesn't sound like self-promotion. Because I'm sure we can all gain by linking between our websites, being careful to avoid reciprocal links. To be fair, perhaps all who participate can promise to provide as many one-way outbound links to other members' sites as they receive in one-way inbound links.

What do you all think?

billbenson
09-06-2008, 12:15 PM
Spider, if you are talking about linking to my site A and I link back to you from my site B, Google will figure this out. It will be treated the same as recip linking.

Spider
09-06-2008, 12:33 PM
Spider, if you are talking about linking to my site A and I link back to you from my site B, Google will figure this out. It will be treated the same as recip linking.Okay, then let's not do that. Let's keep it strictly one-way.

Spider
09-06-2008, 04:01 PM
There! I have linked to the following--

Van SEO Design (http://www.vanseodesign.com/) - Search Engine Friendly Web Design.

Marketing Success Blueprint (http://marketingsuccessblueprint.com/) - Simple Secrets to Business Marketing

Limited Liability Company Center (http://www.limitedliabilitycompanycenter.com/) - Making LLCs easier to understand

Erin Writes (http://www.erinwrites.com/) - Erin Huffstutter, Copywriter. Conversational prose and savvy writing style.

Creative Business Services (http://www.cbscreative.com/) - Creative solutions To your business marketing challenges

Success For Life (http://www.coachmorse.com/) - George Morse, Life Coach, Author, Entrepreneur

billbenson
09-06-2008, 05:00 PM
Where did you link to them from Frederick? I appreciate what you are trying to do, but I'm not sure its the best way to go about it.

To clarify a bit, I bet most or all of the people you linked to would prefer a link contained in a SEO content page that is on your site. They write the page, you put it on your site matching your site format.

For the Erin Writes page for example, IMO it would be best if she writes a page for her site as a landing page, and writes a page with a link to her landing page that you place in a copywriting section or page on your site.

That way you have a relevant content link going to a relevant landing page.

Spider
09-06-2008, 05:48 PM
Where did you link to them from Frederick? I appreciate what you are trying to do, but I'm not sure its the best way to go about it.
To clarify a bit, I bet most or all of the people you linked to would prefer a link contained in a SEO content page that is on your site. They write the page, you put it on your site matching your site format.
For the Erin Writes page for example, IMO it would be best if she writes a page for her site as a landing page, and writes a page with a link to her landing page that you place in a copywriting section or page on your site.
That way you have a relevant content link going to a relevant landing page.I linked to them here, Bill - Great Money Clubs - Resources (http://greatmoneyclubs.com/resources.html)

With regard your suggestions, I look at linking from a logical point of view. If someone is going to write a page for my site purposely to drive traffic to their site and I agree to carry that page, we are thereby contriving to manipulate the search engines and I think the search engine owners will object and find ways to identify and nullify that manipulation. The whole point of a link, if I have read the Google basics correctly, is a vote for the linked-to site by the linked-from site. I am not suggesting we link to each other to manipulate anything, only to vote for.

Besides, I'm less interested in doing this for the search engines and building search engine traffic, and more as a service to our site visitors. If we do that, I believe, we will be doing it right for the search engines.

When I chose the sites I would link to, my consideration was, "Would this site benefit my visitors?" One person had a fence business, and I could not see how my visitors might be interested in building a fence when they leave my site. But a marketing site would benefit my visitors. That is what I consider a vote and the correct reason for linking.

vangogh
09-07-2008, 02:10 PM
Frederick I appreciate what you're trying to do as well, but I agree with Bill that it's not the best way to go about it. From a search engine perspective this is just building a link farm and it's not likely to help and it could possibly hurt a little. It doesn't matter if the links aren't 1:1 reciprocal it still form a network of sites that in many cases aren't all that relevant to each other. I know you just said you're less interested in search engines, but you're original post above seemed to indicate the whole idea wa for the purposes of search engines.

A far as it being valuable to visitors I'd still say it's not necessarily as valuable is you might think. A listing of resources only makes sense if they're all relevant to what your site is about. It sounds like that's what you're trying to do which is great, but I can tell you right now I'm not planning on creating a page on my site that just links out to other businesses. I know my visitors well enough to know they aren't going to look to that page.

Before I link out from my site I'd want to have used the services or products I'm linking to.

I'll come back to the search engine aspect though. The page you're creating isn't going to be seen in good light if we're all linking to each other's sites. You may not be as concerned with search engines, but I am and I think Bill is and maybe others would be as well.

Spider
09-07-2008, 09:43 PM
To clarify:

My first post on this subject - here (http://www.small-business-forum.net/internet-marketing/326-link-building-2.html#post4069) - says nothing about trying to manipulate the search engines and that is definitely not my intention. The only time I mention search engines is to make sure that any action on my/our part does not break their rules.

There is no way that my Resources page can be construed as a link farm when the only sites linked from it are sites that logically follow from and could interest departing visitors - ie. visitors who were leaving a site about money. Thus, a site about LLCs is included but a site about fencing is not.

I don't believe it forms a network of nonrelevant sites any more than linking between relevant sites does, where there is a relevance and a link between A and B and between B and C but not between C and A.

But coming back to search engines - of course, I am interested in any links I create on my site benefitting me on search engines. And I thought I made it clear that links need to be relevant. And one-way.

And I never said we would ALL be linking to EACH OTHER. That obviously would create a link farm because of the generally diverse nature of our individual businesses. I envisaged one-way links to relevant sites. I said, and I quote, "If you think any of my sites will benefit your visitors..." = relevance. And the sites to which I linked are sites that would be relevant to my visitors.

I am interested in linking as was intended and has been stated by Google. I am not interested in creating special pages designed to directly influence any search procedure. The links I have suggested would not, I believe, put a Resource page in bad light if we adhere to the Google guidelines.

Frankly, I feel we get too clever about linking and fall foul of our own cleverness. Providing a link to a site that relates to the content on our own site for our visitors when they are ready to leave us, is the purpose of the link - and very easy to do. It is no more complicated than that.

billbenson
09-08-2008, 02:10 AM
Fredierck, IMO you want one way content links from sites that are in no way reciprical.Google is a registrar and can figure out if if they are recips even if they come from different sites. Private registration helps in this regard.

Any other link may be a wash, hurt you, or rarely help you from a SEO standpoint. As mentioned, a forum post may get you business. It's not form G though.

That's my opinion in any case.

vangogh
09-08-2008, 02:48 AM
Frederick you're intention isn't the issue. Bill and I are just mentioning how search engines may see the links.

A link from A to B, then one from B to C, and finally from C back to A is considered 3 way linking and search engines are going to see it the same way they see 1:1 reciprocal links. It's a little bit harder to detect, but not that much harder.

Of course it's ok to link out to pages you think will be valuable to your visitors. All I'm saying is if you link out and ask the people you're linking out to link back to one of your sites then it eventually forms a network of links that exist for the links. I don't think a search engine would look kindly on that.

the goat
09-08-2008, 04:14 AM
A link from A to B, then one from B to C, and finally from C back to A is considered 3 way linking and search engines are going to see it the same way they see 1:1 reciprocal links. It's a little bit harder to detect, but not that much harder.

Is that finite, or do you think that if you have enough sites that you will beat that? For instance I use my oldest site as a link. Whenever I build a new site I put a link to it on my "money" site because google loves it. I use it a as a way to get indexed. In your opinion google will figure this out and eventually penalize me?

billbenson
09-08-2008, 08:01 AM
As a single link from a site that gets crawled a lot, thats a good way to get your site indexed quickly and what most webmasters do. A link from this forum does the same.

I know webmasters that register sites under different whois and use very sophisticated interlinking strategies including different hosts as well. That works, but is starts getting pretty complicated quickly. Domains by proxy help as well.

vangogh
09-08-2008, 02:54 PM
It depends. I think it's often less clear cut how Google will view links. In your case it doesn't sound like you link back from the new site so there really isn't a network. It's more one site linking out to a bunch of sites.

In the worst case scenario I would think the link helps the new site get indexed, but the link itself probably doesn't carry a lot of weight to help the new site rank. That depends too based on the authority of the older site and how relevant the link is.

When it comes to something like a penalty you really have to be doing some of this in large numbers. I don't think what Frederick has suggested is really going to hurt anyone. It's more that it probably won't help.

Google collects a lot of info and can determine a lot. I'd imagine they could tell all those sites belong to you, but that doesn't mean what you're doing is necessarily bad. I've linked from my blog to this forum. I have both listed under the same account in Analytics and Webmaster Central, etc. Google clearly knows both are associated with each other. I'm not worried about linking from one to the other though.

On the other hand if I had a dozen sites lacking authority of any kind and maybe 2 of those sites leaned toward the shady side of search, I probably wouldn't want my cleaner sites associated with the shady sites. The company you keep says a lot about you.

billbenson
09-08-2008, 03:27 PM
I agree VG. I have seen some pretty elaborate hubing schemes using various names and hosts though.

Spider
09-08-2008, 04:15 PM
This is getting too complicated. People are clearly not reading what I wrote and inferring all sorts of other things. I am done with the subject.

The links I have posted will remain, though, and I will probably add others to my Resource pages in due course, always on the criterion that the sites to which I link are relevant to my departing visitors.

If any member of SBF feels that any of my sites relate to the interests of their visitors when they are ready to leave, feel free to link. I believe we will all benefit in the long run by linking on this basis. As Google states, I believe, hyperlinking is the basis of the world wide web, and Google ought to know!

vangogh
09-08-2008, 11:13 PM
Frederick we have read what you wrote and no one is inferring anything. All we're trying to do is explain how the links will look to search engines. Your intentions have nothing to do with how Google is likely to view things. Yes Google likes links, but they also dislike certain kind of linking practices. Whether it's your intention or not what you originally described could be seen in a bad light by Google.

Relicsusa
09-12-2008, 06:54 PM
I was just wondering if anyone had use Wikepedia as a link. I heard it was a good source, however, I think you have to participate in posting, etc.
To me it looked like a time consumer and I question the value, except for building ones' reputation.

vangogh
09-12-2008, 08:35 PM
You really can't just place links on Wikipedia for the purpose of building links back to your site. It's considered spam and more likely than not the link will be removed by an editor.

Also Wikipedia links to external sources now all have a rel="nofollow" added making their value useless when it comes to Google.

Once upon a time people did create pages at Wikipedia just to get links, and some likely still do. It's not something you should really look to do, though now that the links aren't so valuable and the practice is considered spam.

billbenson
09-12-2008, 09:43 PM
So, hypothetically, VG, if a link with nofollow on wikipedia goes to your really good content page. Don't you think G will take a look at it and use it for indexing purposes. Particularly if it is linked to from other sites that aren't nofollows.

I doubt they will index a nofollow cia.gov page; but follow or no follow, I bet they use the link in most cases and stick it in their algo.

vangogh
09-12-2008, 10:56 PM
Technically they shouldn't be following the link, but I've seen how they do. Still indexing and ranking are two completely different things. Google will still find your site if it's linked in your forum signature.

You'd probably get more traffic from the Wikipedia, but again it's not likely any link you ad to yourself is going to last long. The reason Wikipedia added nofollows in the first place (at least the official reason) was to keep people from spamming the place.

billbenson
09-13-2008, 04:52 PM
Ya, I wasn't just referring to wikipedia, but nofollow links in general although wikipedia should have a high level of credibility.

Have you ever seen studies or posts indicating G follows or doesn't follow "nofollow". My money goes on they do. If that is the case, my money would also be on the they use it in their algo as well.

theGypsy
09-14-2008, 09:54 AM
Ya, I wasn't just referring to wikipedia, but nofollow links in general although wikipedia should have a high level of credibility.

Have you ever seen studies or posts indicating G follows or doesn't follow "nofollow". My money goes on they do. If that is the case, my money would also be on the they use it in their algo as well.

My guess is that they DO follow them.... simply don't weight them into the ranking process. Considering PR is a random walk along the link path, I'd expect them to maintain that, simply not counting them for ranking purposes....

vangogh
09-14-2008, 01:40 PM
Dave I've noticed they do get followed, but like you I suspect they aren't being weighted in ranking. A couple of times though, I've seen pages ranking for specific phrases that were only used in anchor text on nofollowed links. I have a hunch nofollow is one of those things where what Google says they do and what they actually do, don't match up quite as well as they want us to believe.

Business Attorney
09-15-2008, 11:40 AM
"Nofollow" is really a misnomer. As far as I know, Google has never said they don't follow the link to find and index pages.

From day one, their statement was:


"From now on, when Google sees the attribute (rel="nofollow") on hyperlinks, those links won't get any credit when we rank websites in our search results." (Official Google Blog, "Preventing Comment Spam (http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/01/preventing-comment-spam.html)," January 18, 2005).

I have also seen some people say that "nofollow" links don't affect PageRank. I would guess that is true, but I have never seen Google make that statement. PageRank is by no means the only factor, or even necessarily a major factor, in determining the order of the search results.

vangogh
09-15-2008, 04:51 PM
"nofollow" links don't affect PageRank

Google has said that exactly on a number of occasions. Originally nofollow was creating in combination with blog application developers as a way to say I don't know who left this comment and can't vouch for the link. Its use has evolved to saying I don't want to pass page rank to the page on the other side of this link.

Google's view on nofollow has changed a bit from their initial statements. Originally it was only meant to be used to fight comment spam, but it's certainly evolved beyond that.

I think Google has made claims to not following the link, though even if they never did it's a poorly named attribute. Anyone reading the word nofollow would naturally assume it means the link won't be followed.

billbenson
09-15-2008, 05:51 PM
I have never really seen any use for PR other than other webmasters using it to evaluate linking. Because of its public inaccuracy, webmasters I know rarely use it as a guage anymore. The recip link days are gone anyway. I bet I haven't even looked at pr in 2 years. Well maybe once or twice.

I do know webmasters who have had better luck with dup content issues by iframes or htaccess redirects. No follow didn't work for this. An example would be an ecommerce site using manufacturer content. 1000 pages out there with the same content. Put the dup content in an iframe and some unique content on your page. The iframe explains the content and the add to the shopping cart. The unique content helps with seo.

When I said the nofollow didn't work, it wasn't an A/B test. They just found they had better results hiding the dup content than using nofollow.

vangogh
09-15-2008, 06:13 PM
Bill the PR you're referring to is the PR you see in a toolbar. Yes it's mostly useless, but Google still has uses a real PR behind the scenes. The PR getting passed on not through links is the real PR.

billbenson
09-15-2008, 08:03 PM
Bill the PR you're referring to is the PR you see in a toolbar. Yes it's mostly useless, but Google still has uses a real PR behind the scenes. The PR getting passed on not through links is the real PR.

Which is kind of a misnomer to call it Page Rank? Whatever factors go into how your page ranks in the serps, is there something internal to G that is actually "Page Rank"? Seems to me that it is just an algo that also spits out something called "page rank" pubically that at one time had some value. Internally, they just use the results from their algo of the day for serps placement?

vangogh
09-15-2008, 09:38 PM
Yes, internally Google uses something called PageRank which is a measure of how pages link to one another and the importance of a given page based on that linking. I believe the Page part is named for Larry Page and now web page, which probably causes some confusion.

What you see in the toolbar (TBPR) is supposed to be a representation of what a given web page's internal PageRank is. However, as Google updates internal PageRank all the time and only updates the toolbar every few months the TBPR isn't really a true reflection of your internal PageRank. Internally it's unlikely a scale between 1-10 is used and over the years Google has increasingly shown a tendency to manually change the TBPR across a site to send a message to the site owner.

Part of the confusion about PageRank is that you have to understand it a little to realize which one someone is talking about. PageRank you see in the toolbar is mostly useless. It might still serve as a very quick and dirty approximation of how Google viewed the authority of a site whenever they last updated TBPR. It's not necessarily a measure of how well a page will rank for a given query.

Internally PageRank is still used. Matt Cutts has mentioned a few times that the more PR your site has, the more often and the deeper your site will get crawled. I'm sure it's also part of the algorithm when determining ranking, though not as much a part as it once might have been.

To futher confuse things there could be a topical PageRank, where a site might been seen as having great authority on a given topic, while having little to no authority on another topic. If you're site gets a link from a site on the same topic as your you might see a topical boost.

There's also the concept of general PageRank. Think of a site like whitehouse.gov. If whitehouse.gov links to you it's a good thing regardless of whether or not your site has anything to do with politics.

vangogh
09-17-2008, 03:55 PM
Just came across a good post on nofollow 101 (http://www.searchenginepeople.com/blog/nofollow-101-%E2%80%93-understanding-the-nofollow-tag-for-beginners.html). Since we were talking about it I thought it might add something to the discussion here.

theGypsy
09-24-2008, 04:38 PM
whew.... though it was going to be about sculpting... he he....

vangogh
09-25-2008, 05:29 PM
Nope, just the basics of what nofollow is and how it came about.

I can see how PR sculpting can be useful for a few things, but I'm not sure it's worth becoming a slave to it like some people seem to be.

theGypsy
09-26-2008, 10:40 AM
Nope, just the basics of what nofollow is and how it came about.

I can see how PR sculpting can be useful for a few things, but I'm not sure it's worth becoming a slave to it like some people seem to be.

Well jeez.... back in the day understanding how to use internal linking (and site structure) to show which pages one wanted to be more prominent was an SEO skill... now using WMT and nofollow are lazy excuses for doing it the right way.

Call me an old dog, but my methods haven't changed and I don't really need either to control the flow of juice in a site.... ;0)

vangogh
09-26-2008, 12:21 PM
The majority of the things I do haven't changed either. Early on I knew not to chase the latest trick of the day and focus on getting the basics right. Amazing how many times I see other people crying on forums about their traffic tanking after some recent change, while my sites still rank just where they had been.

lena7
10-07-2008, 01:04 PM
this was a lot of great ideas on how to get links to your website. thanks guys. I have done a lot of article writing and submitted them as well as social bookmarking. it seems the hours i spend doing the internet promotion definitely pays off though.

vangogh
10-08-2008, 12:24 AM
Glad we could help with some ideas Lena. I know we've probably talked about a lot of different things so always feel free to ask more questions if and when you have them.