2012年7月1日 (日) 01:04 における HigginsVaughan12305 による編集

HigginsVaughan12305 — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 01:04:07 GMT

←前の版		2012年7月1日 (日) 01:04の版
1 行		1 行
-	This is a ~~topic~~ that ~~everybody~~ seems to be arguing about at the moment. Everyone attempting to second-guess Google's actions - which they will ~~Never ever~~ do - and ~~asking yourself~~ whether ~~or not~~ reciprocal linking is dead, dying or if it is a thing worth carrying on.<br><br>'Nuff of the speculation. Here's the proof.<br><br>Google do not like reciprocal link directories and they can sniff 1 out a mile off. There was (notice the use of the past tense here) a link directory on my ~~internet site till~~ recently, but I have now removed it, because it had grow to be ~~[http://howtobacklink.tumblr.com/ blog network]~~ as ~~beneficial~~ as a chocolate teapot.<br><br>~~While~~ the ~~major~~ front page of the ~~web~~ site has retained it is Google PageRank of PR5, in 1 of their last updates, Google relegated that directory, which had also previously had a PR5, to a PR .<br><br>Meanwhile, I had ~~[http://contextualbacklink.com/ contextual backlinks]~~ not altered my linking structure that pointed to it. I had not altered my policies either: I did not link TO any PR0 ~~web sites~~, kept the number of links per page down to a minimum and there ~~had been~~ even text descriptions for each ~~and every~~ entry listed.<br><br>Google could tell what it was and acted as they saw fit.<br><br>There is no point ~~wondering~~ or whining about it. They can and they are ~~undertaking~~ so in order to provide better ~~outcomes~~ to searchers. You can like it or lump it, but if you want them to give you decent listings, ranks or send you any ~~targeted traffic~~, their ~~rules~~ count.<br><br>My ~~advice~~: forget artificial reciprocal linking ~~completely~~. The time taken to ~~maintain~~ the directory, approve/disaprove submissions (~~largely~~ the latter, ~~since~~ the only ~~folks nevertheless~~ asking for links are crappy PR0 ~~internet~~ sites and spammers) can be significantly ~~greater~~ spent.<br><br>When you want to exchange links with other ~~websites~~, make ~~certain~~ you do so in a natural way, by which I mean write about the other site in some way and spot ~~all-~~natural links ~~within~~ the ~~body~~ text.<br><br>And take into account just giving to get. By which I mean, link out to ~~beneficial things~~ for the edification or entertainment of your visitors giving no consideration to the instant usefulness of that link to you.<br><br>What goes around will come ~~about~~. ~~Once~~ you are ~~observed~~ as useful, other ~~individuals~~ will link to you. You do then get your ~~[http://howtobacklink.tumblr.com/ link building seo]~~ links "reciprocated", but it ~~may~~ not be from the ~~identical men and women~~ to whom you linked.<br><br>That is the ~~all-~~natural way of linking that Google wants to see.<br><br>Do not, ~~under~~ any circumstances, ~~maintain anything~~ (other than internal navigation) that could ~~appear~~ like merely a list of links / link farm, because Google will ~~locate~~ it, won't like it and will penalize it.<br><br>Reciprocal linking, in the form of lists or directories merely ~~designed~~ for that quite ~~purpose can't~~ do anything to ~~aid~~ you with Google (very the opposite, in ~~truth~~) and ~~consequently~~, est mortuus. [RIP]	+	This is a subject that absolutely everyone seems to be arguing about at the moment. Everyone attempting to second-guess Google's actions - which they will In no way do - and questioning whether reciprocal linking is dead, dying or if it is a thing worth carrying on.<br><br>'Nuff of the speculation. Here's the proof.<br><br>Google do not like reciprocal link directories and they can sniff one out a mile off. There was (notice the use of the past tense right here) a link directory on my website until recently, but I have now removed it, simply because it had grow to be as helpful as a chocolate teapot.<br><br>Whilst the primary front page of the site has retained it is Google PageRank of PR5, in a single of their last updates, Google relegated that directory, which had also previously had a PR5, to a PR .<br><br>Meanwhile, I had not altered my linking structure that pointed to it. I had not altered my policies either: I did not link TO any PR0 websites, kept the number of links per page down to a minimum and there were even text descriptions for each entry [http://contextualbacklink.com/ link building packages] listed.<br><br>Google could tell what it was and acted as they saw fit.<br><br>There is no [http://contextualbacklink.com/ contextual homepage backlinks] point asking yourself or whining about it. They can and they are carrying out so in order to provide better results to searchers. You can like it or lump it, but if you want them to give you decent listings, ranks or send you any site visitors, their guidelines count.<br><br>My suggestions: forget artificial reciprocal linking fully. The time taken to keep the directory, approve/disaprove submissions (mostly the latter, simply because the only people nonetheless asking for links are crappy PR0 web sites and spammers) can be significantly better spent.<br><br>When you want to exchange links with other internet sites, make confident [http://contextualbacklink.com/ cheap link building] you do so in a all-natural way, by which I mean write about the other web site in some way and spot natural links inside the physique text.<br><br>And take into account just giving to get. By which I mean, link out to helpful items for the edification or entertainment of your visitors giving no consideration to the instant usefulness of that link to you.<br><br>What goes around will come around. When you are noticed as useful, other people will link to you. You do then get your links "reciprocated", but it could not be from the very same people to whom you linked.<br><br>That is the natural way of linking that Google wants to see.<br><br>Do not, beneath any circumstances, preserve something (other than internal navigation) that could look like merely a list of links / link farm, simply because Google will discover it, won't like it and will penalize it.<br><br>Reciprocal linking, in the form of lists or directories merely developed for that quite objective cannot do anything to help you with Google (very the opposite, in fact) and as a result, est mortuus. [RIP]

JosepheMoriarty7563: 新しいページ: 'This is a topic that everybody seems to be arguing about at the moment. Everyone attempting to second-guess Google's actions - which they will Never ever do - and asking yourse...'

JosepheMoriarty7563 — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 00:56:57 GMT

新しいページ: 'This is a topic that everybody seems to be arguing about at the moment. Everyone attempting to second-guess Google's actions - which they will Never ever do - and asking yourse...'

新規ページ

This is a topic that everybody seems to be arguing about at the moment. Everyone attempting to second-guess Google's actions - which they will Never ever do - and asking yourself whether or not reciprocal linking is dead, dying or if it is a thing worth carrying on. 'Nuff of the speculation. Here's the proof. Google do not like reciprocal link directories and they can sniff 1 out a mile off. There was (notice the use of the past tense here) a link directory on my internet site till recently, but I have now removed it, because it had grow to be [http://howtobacklink.tumblr.com/ blog network] as beneficial as a chocolate teapot. While the major front page of the web site has retained it is Google PageRank of PR5, in 1 of their last updates, Google relegated that directory, which had also previously had a PR5, to a PR . Meanwhile, I had [http://contextualbacklink.com/ contextual backlinks] not altered my linking structure that pointed to it. I had not altered my policies either: I did not link TO any PR0 web sites, kept the number of links per page down to a minimum and there had been even text descriptions for each and every entry listed. Google could tell what it was and acted as they saw fit. There is no point wondering or whining about it. They can and they are undertaking so in order to provide better outcomes to searchers. You can like it or lump it, but if you want them to give you decent listings, ranks or send you any targeted traffic, their rules count. My advice: forget *artificial* reciprocal linking completely. The time taken to maintain the directory, approve/disaprove submissions (largely the latter, since the only folks nevertheless asking for links are crappy PR0 internet sites and spammers) can be significantly greater spent. When you want to exchange links with other websites, make certain you do so in a natural way, by which I mean write about the other site in some way and spot all-natural links within the body text. And take into account just giving to get. By which I mean, link out to beneficial things for the edification or entertainment of your visitors giving no consideration to the instant usefulness of that link to you. What goes around will come about. Once you are observed as useful, other individuals will link to you. You do then get your [http://howtobacklink.tumblr.com/ link building seo] links "reciprocated", but it may not be from the identical men and women to whom you linked. That is the all-natural way of linking that Google wants to see. Do not, under any circumstances, maintain anything (other than internal navigation) that could appear like merely a list of links / link farm, because Google will locate it, won't like it and will penalize it. Reciprocal linking, in the form of lists or directories merely designed for that quite purpose can't do anything to aid you with Google (very the opposite, in truth) and consequently, est mortuus. [RIP]

Google frowns on reciprocal linking - 変更履歴

2012年7月1日 (日) 01:04 における HigginsVaughan12305 による編集

JosepheMoriarty7563: 新しいページ: 'This is a topic that everybody seems to be arguing about at the moment. Everyone attempting to second-guess Google's actions - which they will Never ever do - and asking yourse...'