Backlinking and smartlinks.

[kgun]

1. It is difficult to reject reciprocal linking, especially sites with high pagerank, when you know how important it is for visibility on the net.

2. Personally 90 % of requsts are deleted.
- Requests that use content in the description or other metatags is not answered.
- Request from webmasteres with sites with bad contact information is not answered.
- Request from unrealted sites is not answered.

"Fair enough. So what's the point? Well, it was Tim Berners-Lee's desire to improve this system that led him to create the World Wide Web. And it was Larry Page and Sergey Brin's attempts to reverse engineer Berners-Lee's World Wide Web that led to Google. The needle that threads these efforts together is citation - the practice of pointing to other people's work in order to build up your own".
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.08/battelle.html

3 Expert links are about outgoing links.
"It proved a productive course of study. Page noticed that while it was trivial to follow links from one page to another, it was nontrivial to discover links back".
Se: source above.

Is it easier to spam backlinks than forward links? Should we give room for Teoma http://searchenginewatch.com/serepor...le.php/2163991, one searchengine that place emphasis on expert links?

"These web pages, created by topic experts around the world, contain a list of site links on related general subjects. In addition, they often categorize and provide editorial comments on the web links they list, serving as information resource pages for the related subjects".
http://www.searchengineyearbook.com/teoma.shtml

4. So a smoothing of results from back and expert links is another possibility among the infinite number av votiong systems that may be used in ranking.

Related sites:
http://www.teoma.com/
http://www.dougbedell.com/teoma.html
http://www.wisenut.com/

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik

[greeneagle]

Why on earth are you pointing us to 3-1/2 year old articles that didn't come close to their predictions, as something to review:

"Teoma challenges Google by pointing to expert sites"

Ken

[kgun]

that it may be important in the future, and who knows?. My own site has what I personally call "expert links" in finance at least. But I do not have access to the intranet of Merill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Standard & Poors etc.

So if I should be more precise, It contains "expert links" to sites on the net that are open to the public.

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik

[minstrel]

And you think that by including links to "expert sites" on your web page that you are going to enhance the PR or SE ranking of that page?

[dburdon]

Am I wrong in assuming that selective use of outbound links within content has some PR/Serps impact? For example, including the text "financial journal" and pointing to www.ft.com would enhance Kgun's positioning for financial news. However, I accept a page of outbound links pointing to old documentary sites about unrelated material would do effectively nothing.

[minstrel]

Originally Posted by dburdon

Am I wrong in assuming that selective use of outbound links within content has some PR/Serps impact? For example, including the text "financial journal" and pointing to www.ft.com would enhance Kgun's positioning for financial news. However, I accept a page of outbound links pointing to old documentary sites about unrelated material would do effectively nothing.

That's another Google myth, one of many.

Having such a link on your page may well enhance its credibility for visitors and for that reason may be well worth doing, but it isn't going to have any direct effect on PR or SE ranking.

[greeneagle]

minstrel, dburdon, kgun,

This is a good topic for discussion, because there is a growing belief that within the intricate and expanding GOOGLE Relevancy algs... during the updates this year that OBLs are starting to be Relevancy Rated at their source.

One of the factors that seemed to point that direction, (without enough meaningful data) were reports of "hits" by high ranking sites (6+) selling irrelevanttextural textural links.

Sure it's speculation, but very reasonable. It makes great sense to glean and rate OBLs - Get it at it's source! - IMO

That isn't the demonstrated GOOGLE mentality or the expressed quest of all the major SE's is it?

On the other hand, Science fiction has led the way for Science in our human history, hasn't it David?

LOL

We might all have some fun here!

Anyone want to go on a fact finding mission?

Ken

[minstrel]

Even if your speculation is true, Ken, it seems very unlikely that it would be used to increase the PR/ranking of the page generating the outgoing link -- more likely that it would be used to discount the value of the link to the receiving page.

[dburdon]

Minstrel, Ken

I think its time for some trial and error.

I know its the current fashion the Google is all off-page. And I've seen the various write ups to demonstrate this. The proponents of the theory normally quote the Bush/Blair "complete idiot/liar" type material.

However I have examples, admittedly in low intensity competition areas - so's the Bush/Blair stuff - where an outbound link has had some impact.

Now, I'm not suggesting the Kgun approach. Check out his links. But rather, selective and subtle placing of OBLs within relevant content.

[minstrel]

I'm all for experimentation and I have no doubt that Google looks at all factors that conceivably might improve SE rankings and filter out crap. However, just think about it: If outgoing links were to be a factor in evaluating PR and/or SE rankings, it would be so obviously easy to manipulate it -- what webmaster would NOT suddenly add links to authority sites on all pages in a site? You'd be crazy not to do so, but how would that add anything whatsoever to the value or relevancy of your pages to a searcher?

[dburdon]

Minstrel,

what webmaster would NOT suddenly add links to authority sites on all pages in a site?

I agree with the main thrust of your argument. Hence my remarks about limited and selective application. I'm sure the Google algorithm could detect if you were spamming by piling in lots of links.

[greeneagle]

Here are my opinions:

"Landslide" protection is in place.
"Relevancy limits" are already corralled.
“On Page text is caged”
IMO – A lot more than we know.
Technology has it’s limits but has to be “slapped back” once in a while (CSS SPAM).
Why wouldn't these issues already be addressed? There’s no more “wild west”.
GOOGLE is the undeniable leader.
These constraints are elementary issues within guided restraints. Many of these “Quality Checks” are easier to implement in the algs than some think.

My vision of the "Relevancy Algs" is simply, that they are the Quality Manual Guidelines for the Manufacturing and Services Departments of the SEs. .

Quality Assurance goes a long way for everyone!
One of our clients has established such a strong quality history with one of the largest Oil Field Service Industry Giants that they don't even require "incoming inspection" any more for them.

That saves “Real Money” on the bottom line.

Isn't that what the public has done with the GOOG?

Ken

[SEOforGoogle]

Not that I have any proof, I think it would make sense to link to important sites that are related to yours.

By doing so, you are helping Google categorize what your site is about.

[shameless plug alert]

wrote an article about this:

http://seoarticles.seoforgoogle.com/...ound-Links.cfm

[end of shameless plug alert]

[greeneagle]

Thanks Paul,

Nice article, I enjoyed reading it.

You say you don't have any proof, but you sure didn't come to the table empty handed!

On the other hand let's try not to promote a myth here!

I know there are several other first hand experiences that can contribute, one way or the other.

Ken

[dburdon]

Ken,

you'taken "quality theory" and applied it to the need to have externally assessed outputs and processes. This overcomes the tendency of organisations (or sites) to fall into the self reference criterion error. That is our output (or site) is great (and relevant) because we all think it is. Google obviously subscribes to the primacy of the external measure - or voting - in the form of IBLs.

However as Paul (SEOforGoogle) points out, Google needs a network. That network needs transmitters as well as receivers to function properly. Just applying some logic here, it would seem odd 1. That a network would be absolutely biased to just the receiver and 2. Now that IBLs are being spammed Google wouldn't shift from the "only IBLs count" position.

The IBL is king, but I suspect (myth) that limited and selective use of relevant outbound links has some value.

[greeneagle]

There is quite a bit of "old" information out there on OBL value. Many promote PR leakage models etc...

I am having dificulty finding any more recent studies incorporating the last alg updates.

Anyone know of any?

Ken

[kgun]

With regard to links, it would appear that links with staying power among various webpages are thought to be more valuable and/or relevant. In other words, if a website changes its style or content, but certain outbound links are static, then those links aid that page’s relevance and ranking.
http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=50123

[greeneagle]

kgun,

What do you suppose that means? I also read it in the original article looking for more insight, and didn't find it there either.

I would think that up to date, high ranking links would have plenty of "staying power", but if content changes then the links may no longer be relevant.

Ken

[kgun]

Once I read the following books:

Janice Reynolds (2004) : "The complete E-commerce book. Design, Build & Maintain a Successful Web-based business." CMPBooks

Jim Caroll & Rick Broadhead (2001) : "Selling Online. How to become a Successful E-Commerce Merchant." Dearborn Trade.

I think I read in one of them, that you should never be afraid of linking to a large competitior, since that may improve the ranking of your site. The above cite, indicates that that is correct (or at least not wrong), especially if you keep the links stable.

My own view, the internet is a collection of nodes, and URL's between the nodes. Stable crosslinks may be important, but in the end it depends on the algorithm. I read SEOforGoogle's article and that gave an additional argument. Very well written.

http://www.strongestlinks.com/

http://www.strongestlinks.com/directories.php

Perhaps a good starting (reference) point for a crawler. See anohter post of me http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic...057&highlight=

I have a view of (opinion about) what are (some of) the most important sites in finance.

I collect and rank the links, and try to keep them stable as a professional with 20 years experience from the researchdepartment of the Central Bank of Norway. Hopefully information for the global surfer.

Time will show if it is a good strategy.

Conclusion: Theory, link to your largest competitiors and keep the links stable.

A man with a grey hat would use invisible links (same color as the background). I do not use such techniques, and in the end that may be penalized, so I do not reccomend it.

"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts."
Albert Einstein

[mike]

Originally Posted by greeneagle

kgun,

What do you suppose that means? I also read it in the original article looking for more insight, and didn't find it there either.

I would think that up to date, high ranking links would have plenty of "staying power", but if content changes then the links may no longer be relevant.

Ken

What it's referring to Ken is a situation where you have a dynamic site that changes frequently. It's been suggested that on these types of sites - where you have constantly changing content; links that remain on the page are (or will be) rated as more important.

The rationale being, despite all of the changes and updates THIS link is important or relevent enough to remain on the page.

[dburdon]

All,

I think I'm with Minstrel. Although OBLs may have some value - and indeed I've argued that they do - their significance pales when compared to IBLs.

Anybody can generate an OBL. As a minumum an IBL at least requires a reciprocal trade. Generating a spontaneous natural link - if such a thing can ever be genuinely determined - would take so much more than a spontaneous OBL.

[kgun]

Ideal SURFER'S world:

Two identical sites aside for one (two) link(s):

Site 1:
This outgoing link
http://www.fsforum.org/home/home.html

Site 2:
This outgoing link .
http://www.athand.com/

Search KW's "financial stability"

Most relevant site is?

But if you have a(n) (competitive) internet business, the answer may be quite different.

Neverthless you are probably right. If we (and most SE's probably do) delete the outgoing links, the two sites are identical. I do not. Should we give room for Teoma?

In theory, theory and practice is the same, but that is in theory.


Kjell

[greeneagle]

kgun,

The second link doesn't work for me.
Also, I don't understand your repeated plugs for Teoma.

Ken

[kgun]

"I'm all for experimentation and I have no doubt that Google looks at all factors that conceivably might improve SE rankings and filter out crap. However, just think about it: If outgoing links were to be a factor in evaluating PR and/or SE rankings, it would be so obviously easy to manipulate it -- what webmaster would NOT suddenly add links to authority sites on all pages in a site? You'd be crazy not to do so, but how would that add anything whatsoever to the value or relevancy of your pages to a searcher"?

By advanced scanning techniques.

1. Wich type of site? Ecommerce, news, magazine, portal, directory and archive. For the last three it must be possible to scan against a relvance index. How relevant are the outgoing links? But then you need a reference point, see link in post above. Is there a reference point of strongest links in my business?

2. Page content. Are the outgoing links relevant to page content? E.g. Google Ad Sense fits to the content of the page, so it is possible for a SE to scan for page content.

3. Spam indicator. Is it possible to construct a spam indicator for the business?

4. Copy a good site? http://www.copyscape.com/ is one tool to find that out. A SE should have more advanced algorithms to find that out. Copying should (and does) penalize a site. For that reason, submitting your sitemap to the 20 largest SE's should be very important, when a new site is established on WWW.

5. Spamming by backlinking, I have seen enough of sites where it seems obvious, that most of the webmaster's working day is used on submitting, linkexchange and link brokerage. And it is automated. Bots scans for email addresses, catch the description or another tag, make a link to your site with the tag description in the anchor and send an automated email: "We looked at your site, we found it interesting and has already linked to your site here: ***** If you link to our site, it will gain both of us and increase our and your pagerank". I wonder how many sites have increased their pagerank by 2 - 5 points by this automatic method? Does that favour deep linking? Does that favour content?

6. If you read the long thread about dmoz http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=29005 some experienced editors participated there. One obvious message that I could read from that discussion: "As editors at dmoz, we would prefer to find the relevant links ourselves, and submitting a site should not be allowed. So many bad sites, so much resubmitting and so many spam sites. We find more relevant threads by searching an hour, than by 100 (??) submissions".

7. If 6 is correct, It becomes increasingly important to have a SE like Teoma, that emphasizes "expert links", since the other SE's overweights (only weights) inbound links (votes that may be spam). It is possible to fool all the people some time, and some people all the time, but not all the people all the time."

<digression>
"He said the only thing that did not lie was mathematics, simply because it could not."
Edwin Leefevre: "Reminicences of a Stock Operator" A 1923 year classic, that is the favourite book of many traders. See
Jack D. Schwager: "The new market wizards. Conversations with America's top traders." Many of the persons that Schwager interviewed cited that as their favourite "trading book."

From the back cover of the last issue:
"Although Reminiscences ... was first published 70 years ago, its take on crowd psychology and market timing is as timely as last summer's frency on the foreign exchange markets."
Worth magazine.
</digression>

You would not agree, I know. You may know more about masspsychology than me. It is extremely interesting.

Kjell Gunnar Bleivik

[greeneagle]

kgun,

Mathematics may not lie but application therein does quite frequently. Sometimes on purpose such as in stat skewing, sometimes in misguided appropriation…. And many of the Sites still rank very highly:
http://pr.efactory.de/e-outbound-links.shtml (OBL PageRank Leakage Theory)

Even Google’s own PageRank explanation Page is years and multiple alg updates out of date.

Ken

[kgun]

yes, it is well known that "statistics lie":

1. Correlation is used to uncover cause / effect relationships. Correlation measures linear (co)variation. The correlogram of a parabola, may show zero correlation, even if there is an exact functional form. Correlation is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for a causal relationship. If the data lie in a circular disc, no correlation. By getting one point far from the disc, the correlation is no longer zero. If you remove that point, the correlation is still zero.

2. Spurious correlation. The two variables may vary together with a third variable, eg. the price of one share varies with the price of another share, but both varies with a common trend, the trend in the overall market or the businesstrend. You have to remove the common trend to get a better measure of correlation.

3. Statistics can only say that something has probability between 0 and 1, but can not prove anything. Under a given significance level, it can reject a hypothesis, but there is still a possibility that you rejected a hypothesis that should not be rejected. If it is not rejected, that is no prof. Is the corn green or brown? If you have rejected that it is brown, that does not prove that it is green. It may be yellow, if you apply fuzzy logic, it may be both brown, yellow and green.

4. Statistichs is applied mathematics on the unit interval. A stochastic variable is a measurable function from a space onto the real line (unit interval).

5. Statistical and mathematical methods are used in ranking, and there is a constant race to improve the algorithms.

6. I remember my professor in mathematics: He once said the following:

"You economists are experts in handling many variables at the same time, but I am not sure about your methods. If you need a method, we make it for you."

I am an economist.

<added>
The article you site seems interesting, I shall study it in more detail, but my first intuitive answer is this:

The result depends on the model you use and on the assumptions you make.

Science evolves by finding models that encompasses other models. By encompassing, I mean a model that can explain the result of your model and something more.

If you use model A and I model B and both models give IDENTICAL results, we use the simplest.
</added>



Kgun

[greeneagle]

The link I previously posted became more than supposition, for many.

It became "mainstream" thinking about OBLs just 2-3 years ago.

What's changed? Different thinking along alg revisions?

With an historical trend analysis, I bet we could project concurrence with surfacing ideas that OBLs are gaining in value, if enough data were available. (pure conjecture)

Ken

[greeneagle]

Everyone,

Make sure and read Stithmeister's article reporting on linking strategies from the SES:

http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=50226

Ken

[kgun]

related link here:

http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum30/30645.htm

Heading:

Should Google Penalize Resources Pages with lots of Outbound links?

Question:
How shal we define a resource page? Should we modify the pagerank algorithm? Alternatively, should we increase the complexity of the model and introduce another concept, resource rank, expert rank or weighted vote?

Problem:

1.
PR(A) = (1-d) + d (PR(T1)/C(T1) + ... + PR(Tn)/C(Tn))

Is this an alternative weighting

PR(A) = (1-d) + (d1*(PR(T1)/C(T1)) + ... + dn*(PR(Tn))/C(Tn))

where d1+d2+ ... + dn = d?

2.
Other modifications?


Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

[kgun]

Found this

http://dbpubs.stanford.edu:8090/pub/...f&compression=

interesting document about trustrank from March 1, 2004.

And this

http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2...tation_and.htm

article is quite new.

"What's your passion? Want to let the World know about your favorite internet spots? Provide ratings and opinions on a myriad of websites? Help build a quality directory? Hone up on your writing skills?"
http://www.illumirate.com/

And here

http://advogato.org/trust-metric.html

is a reference to a "trust metric."

Some common ideas that TrustRank is based upon:

"Good pages rarely link to bad ones. Bad pages often link to good ones in an attempt to improve hub scores.

The care with which people add links to a page is often inversely proportional to the number of links on the page.

Trust score is attenuated as it passes from site to site".

http://www.seobook.com/archives/000661.shtml

Google Toolbar:
define:pagerank some hits
define:trust rank no hit august 2005


Kjell Gunnar Bleivik
http://www.multifinanceit.com/
http://www.blognorway.com/

[kgun]

Time to refresh this thread one year later. The topic is still relevant and fresh.

Start here: Put this term in the Google Search box.
define:google pagerank

What Google says about PageRank.

Wikipedia about PageRank.

Rlated links:

Outbound Link Optimization

Google Sandbox

About:
Googles respect for clean, well aged domains

More Pagerank discussion.

About:
Bleeding off pagerank through OBL's.

How is PR count?

Matt Cutts answer on duplicate detection

WPW members and pagerank

Why WPW Should Not Discuss Google Toolbar PR Anymore

Note the definition of an economist.

A person that is able to tell why what he said yesterday was wrong.

[Webnauts]

Great post Kgun.

[kgun]

Here is a fresh article about SEO Outbound Link Relevance written by Joel Walsh that writes on UpmarketSEO, a site that claims to provide Ethical SEO.

[kgun]

1. Poodle Predictor.

2. Search Engine Spider Simulator

[xuchunfeng1984]

good post, my friend.

[kgun]

Thank you.

I think that I would have written some sections otherwise today.

And the discussion continues: Using outbound links to increase page relevance

[shruchi nagar]

I would like to appreciate you for a Nice post. Thanks for sharing.

[kgun]

Did you note this

Links::: Life or death of your eBusiness.

newer thread?