relevant outbound link WITHOUT inbound link

[mannequin-lady]

I bought a book on Amazon, "Web Marketing For Dummies" by Jan Zimmerman, published Dec 2008.

On Page 173, Chapter 7 Mastering the secrets of search engines it says:

"Outbound links to other high-ranked, relevant sites - that is, sites that share at least one other search term - generate extra value."

If I create a relevant outbound link WITHOUT that site also linking to my site, does the above statement mean this would be good for my site? :confused:

What I mean to say is, if I link to a high ranked dress form site, but they do not link to me, is that good for me? I usually only do reciprocal, relevant links.

Thanks,
Steph

[crankydave]

Anytime you link to a resource that is of value to your visitors, your page becomes more valuable to them. You just need to take care who you link to and why.

That being said, I don't suggest you link to a site that provides the same things you do. It's an "invitation" for your visitors to leave and potentially not come back.

Dave

[mannequin-lady]

Anytime you link to a resource that is of value to your visitors, your page becomes more valuable to them. You just need to take care who you link to and why.

That being said, I don't suggest you link to a site that provides the same things you do. It's an "invitation" for your visitors to leave and potentially not come back.

Dave

I'm thinking of linking to manufacturers of life sized dress forms so that my customers can see various styles and hopefully come back and ask me if I can get it for them.

The reason behind this is that I just don't have the time to put hundreds of these dress forms on my site and the wholesalers are constantly asking (pleading sometimes) me to sell their products.

Does this make sense, or not, Dave?

[crankydave]

Sure it makes sense. As long as the Mfg is a B2B and doesn't sell directly to the consumer.

Personally, I'd prefer them on my own site but in the absence of that, letting your visitors know what's available via special order etc. isn't a bad thing.

ETA... If you wish to be considered an "authority" (or more of one) for your niche, do consider providing the info first hand when and where appropriate. That's not to say don't link to valuable sources/resources, just to provide it yourself when you can.

Dave

[ctabuk]

I have been linking out for years and years - my main site is Right to Buy from Council Tenants Advice Bureau (UK) Ltd (http://www.counciltenantsmortgages.co.uk) it has a massive link out system. All related topics though - but not to competitors sites!!! That's a no no.

[mannequin-lady]

Sure it makes sense. As long as the Mfg is a B2B and doesn't sell directly to the consumer.

Personally, I'd prefer them on my own site but in the absence of that, letting your visitors know what's available via special order etc. isn't a bad thing.

ETA... If you wish to be considered an "authority" (or more of one) for your niche, do consider providing the info first hand when and where appropriate. That's not to say don't link to valuable sources/resources, just to provide it yourself when you can.

Dave

Most, if not all, of these B2B's have already set up eBay accounts and they sell to the public. I'll rethink this entire linking out without getting one back.

I've come to the conclusion that I'll eventually HAVE to put all those products on my site, but first things first:

I'm updating all my PayPal cart buttons to make direct credit cards and google checkout available also. Some people don't want to use PayPal - they write asking me to take their credit card info over the phone. I only accept orders in writing.

The main reason I started this conversation, I believe, is because I see all these highly ranked sites that have banners and ads to sites like CNN, MSNBC, fashion mags, etc. I know they don't have a link back because I've checked! :)

[mannequin-lady]

I have been linking out for years and years - my main site is Right to Buy from Council Tenants Advice Bureau (UK) Ltd (http://www.counciltenantsmortgages.co.uk) it has a massive link out system. All related topics though - but not to competitors sites!!! That's a no no.

I was thinking along the lines of linking to sites that have very high rankings and also are relevant, because it seems like Google pays a lot of attention to sites that have these big ads on them to sites with a lot of well known companies.

I have an entire link directory of relevant sites and some that I happen to like, for one reason or another.

I wonder what would happen if I put a link to google on my home page! :D

[kevsta]

lol, we do, and it doesnt seem to be hurting things :)



I wonder what would happen if I put a link to google on my home page! :D

[deepsand]

Anything that complements your site, i.e provides your visitors with additional information relevant to the goods and/or services offered on-site, and does not lead your visitors to your competition, is worthy of consideration for an OBL, without regard for whether or not a reciprocal link is obtained.

The question to ask is whether or not you would include such information on your site itself if practical. If so, then by all means link to it. Then, if you find a substantial portion of your visitors using such, and the content is sufficiently static, so as to not require frequent maintenance, give consideration to incorporating it into your site.

[aleksandarr]

I use sometimes that as a one of SEO techniques and it mainly works.

[crankydave]

I use sometimes that as a one of SEO techniques and it mainly works.

Use what and works how?

Dave

[briguy]

What I mean to say is, if I link to a high ranked dress form site, but they do not link to me, is that good for me? I usually only do reciprocal, relevant links.

Thanks,
Steph

Was just wondering would the "target="_blank" code work in case like this...<a href="http://Outboundlink(dot)com" target="_blank">Out bound link </a>

[deepsand]

Was just wondering would the "target="_blank" code work in case like this...<a href="http://Outboundlink(dot)com" target="_blank">Out bound link </a>
Whether or not would "work" depends on the desired goal.

If you're thinking of using such with regards to PR flow, no; for that, use "nofollow."

[confettiguru]

This seems contradictary to what we've been told.

Don't you pass your "link juice"if you have outbound links?

I thought this meant that if you link to another site without a reciprocal link they drain some of the benefit of your page rank.

I hope I'm wrong. It would be nice to link just for the benefit of my site user.

[crankydave]

This seems contradictary to what we've been told.

Don't you pass your "link juice"if you have outbound links?

I thought this meant that if you link to another site without a reciprocal link they drain some of the benefit of your page rank.

I hope I'm wrong. It would be nice to link just for the benefit of my site user.

Since I pretty much know the prolonged discussion that always ensues when I answer this question, I'll just say this...

Any link that Google "counts" passes PR to the target page. If this is a concern for you, use the nofollow attribute.

Dave

[claybutler]

If you could "lose your link juice" then search engines and directories would have a PR of zero. Google links out to billions of web pages. Yahoo as well. Look at Dmoz, nothing but outbound links. Look a Yahoo's news pages. Links out everywhere.

You're thinking way to hard about his. Link to what's useful, don't link to things that aren't. Simple.

Before everyone started bowing to the Google god I think we all made more logical, clear headed choices.

[Web Res]

Hi Guys,

I agree that for users thoughtful outbound links to relevant websites is good for them, but I think the question was does having one-way outbound links help your page rank? In fact, it was stated whether outbound links to 'highly' ranked websites was good for the website.

I would guess that one-way outbound links would not help page rank, and also they would not hurt.... unless perhaps the links were to the wrong kind of website. But then that means Google measures outbound links.

I'm confused. Assuming the value to visitors is good, what about the page rank?

[deepsand]

If you could "lose your link juice" then search engines and directories would have a PR of zero. Google links out to billions of web pages. Yahoo as well. Look at Dmoz, nothing but outbound links. Look a Yahoo's news pages. Links out everywhere.
There's difference between "losing" & "passing."

Think of "passing" PR as casting a vote. the only thing "lost" by doing so is the opportunity to differently cast that vote.

[claybutler]

"Think of "passing" PR as casting a vote. the only thing "lost" by doing so is the opportunity to differently cast that vote."

Correct.

I was refering to the link juice theory implied in the question. Many think the page in question will actually deplete or enhance its PR based on the number of outbound links.

[xuchunfeng1984]

i think outbound links to relative sites can promote your website keywords position but not link to competor which will lost your customer.

[deepsand]

Assuming the value to visitors is good, what about the page rank?
No direct effect on page(s) bearing such links; may indirectly help if anchor text of links serves to increase page relevance with respect to certain keywords.

[ctabuk]

If you could "lose your link juice" then search engines and directories would have a PR of zero. Google links out to billions of web pages. Yahoo as well. Look at Dmoz, nothing but outbound links. Look a Yahoo's news pages. Links out everywhere.

You're thinking way to hard about his. Link to what's useful, don't link to things that aren't. Simple.

Before everyone started bowing to the Google god I think we all made more logical, clear headed choices.

Rep Point awarded for common sense.

Linking out without having incoming, cannot be done anyway. Sites will find yours and place a link just as you have.

[mannequin-lady]

lol, we do, and it doesnt seem to be hurting things :)

Did you happen to add it after your website got ranked? Did it make any difference? Those in the know want to know! lol

[crankydave]

Did you happen to add it after your website got ranked? Did it make any difference? Those in the know want to know! lol

You don't really think it's that easy do you? ;-)

Dave

[mannequin-lady]

I just wanted it to be that easy!

[mannequin-lady]

I seem to have missed getting the updates to a lot of these comments. Sorry. I wasn't ignoring anybody. I'll go back and check my settings.

Steph

[weegillis]

crankydave makes the best point, be the authority. Notwithstanding you are the authority, be at least forthcoming with information that will help customers use your product, whether it is on your domain, or another. Do you sell scissors? No. Do they need scissors? Yes. This sort of thing could mean some affiliations, perhaps?

The organic links need no attribution (target or rel), as ctabuk demonstrates those links won't hurt your site a bit, especially if you keep the back button in play.

Outbound links from conversion pages would be something of a no-no, whereas from pages that merely inform they would be a plus. Do you let your visitor stray, or keep their attention? Some pages, yes, others, no.

[mannequin-lady]

crankydave makes the best point, be the authority. Notwithstanding you are the authority, be at least forthcoming with information that will help customers use your product, whether it is on your domain, or another. Do you sell scissors? No. Do they need scissors? Yes. This sort of thing could mean some affiliations, perhaps?

The organic links need no attribution (target or rel), as ctabuk demonstrates those links won't hurt your site a bit, especially if you keep the back button in play.

Outbound links from conversion pages would be something of a no-no, whereas from pages that merely inform they would be a plus. Do you let your visitor stray, or keep their attention? Some pages, yes, others, no.

Hello, WeeGillis,

I have a link directory that states the following and those links open in a new page.

"Our Link Directory is Fully searchable by website title, partial title and by product. If we don't have the item you're looking for, please search our collectibles, fine gifts, jewelry, clothing and fashion directory and buy from our link partners!"

http://www.alldressforms.com/links/index.html (http://www.alldressforms.com/links/index.html)

So, I don't have links to other sites on my products pages. The exception is for any webrings I may belong to, and those are only a few.

[mannequin-lady]

Rep Point awarded for common sense.

Linking out without having incoming, cannot be done anyway. Sites will find yours and place a link just as you have.

I've seen sites link to me that I never heard of, but how would sites know I link to them if I don't mention it to them?

[mannequin-lady]

i think outbound links to relative sites can promote your website keywords position but not link to competor which will lost your customer.

This is interesting. I didn't think about the keyword position being increased. I was only thinking about the pagerank. Thank you for bringing this to my attention! :)

[mannequin-lady]

This seems contradictary to what we've been told.

It would be nice to link just for the benefit of my site user.

Confettiguru, do you have a separate links page? I just looked at your site and not only is it very nice, in my opinion, it may benefit us both if we exchange links. I sell some party favors and several of my miniatures have been used as wedding favors, etc.

Back to the topic! :)

You don't even have to respond to this. No obligation.

Steph

[mannequin-lady]

Anything that complements your site, i.e provides your visitors with additional information relevant to the goods and/or services offered on-site, and does not lead your visitors to your competition, is worthy of consideration for an OBL, without regard for whether or not a reciprocal link is obtained.

The question to ask is whether or not you would include such information on your site itself if practical. If so, then by all means link to it. Then, if you find a substantial portion of your visitors using such, and the content is sufficiently static, so as to not require frequent maintenance, give consideration to incorporating it into your site.

With all of the above in mind, I don't have links on separate pages; only in my link directory, however, the essence of this topic is my wanting to display some eye catching relevant sites on my home page or main product pages.

Certain pages are constantly updated as inventory goes in and out of stock, but I wouldn't want to put a link on those pages unless the company doesn't sell any miniature dress forms. So, they wouldn't require any more maintenance than I already do.

Now I'm in a quandary!

[mannequin-lady]

You're thinking way to hard about this. Link to what's useful, don't link to things that aren't. Simple.

Before everyone started bowing to the Google god I think we all made more logical, clear headed choices.

You make several great points, Clay. Thank you.

And yes, before I got tangled up in the google pagerank spiderweb, I was thinking more clearly.

My main objective is to present my retail customers with a wide variety of choices, however, if I don't do any linking I end up at the bottom of the search engine barrel, so I have to spend time linking.

Steph

[mannequin-lady]

Whether or not would "work" depends on the desired goal.

If you're thinking of using such with regards to PR flow, no; for that, use "nofollow."

deepsand, Are you saying that using the target=_blank with outbound links does NOT give your own site better PageRank?

If that's the case, I have to remove all of those from my links directory. I also use that on some of my product pages so they come back to where they were in the first place.

[crankydave]

deepsand, Are you saying that using the target=_blank with outbound links does NOT give your own site better PageRank?

If that's the case, I have to remove all of those from my links directory. I also use that on some of my product pages so they come back to where they were in the first place.

No it does not.

PR is strictly a function of IBL's... links that point to a page not away from it.



Originally Posted by xuchunfeng1984
i think outbound links to relative sites can promote your website keywords position but not link to competor which will lost your customer.

This is interesting. I didn't think about the keyword position being increased. I was only thinking about the pagerank. Thank you for bringing this to my attention!

Be careful what you put stock in. ;)

Dave

[deepsand]

... , before I got tangled up in the google pagerank spiderweb, I was thinking more clearly.

My main objective is to present my retail customers with a wide variety of choices, however, if I don't do any linking I end up at the bottom of the search engine barrel, so I have to spend time linking.
PR is a fickle lover; and, will never spend a dime on anyone. Design for the users.


deepsand, Are you saying that using the target=_blank with outbound links does NOT give your own site better PageRank?

If that's the case, I have to remove all of those from my links directory. I also use that on some of my product pages so they come back to where they were in the first place.
How you link out determines where & how the target content is displayed.

Have you considered using the JavaScript "window.open" function? This will allow for opening a new window/tab, with your page remaining displayed, with attributes of your own choice; e.g., the new window/tab can be specified as not having an Address Bar, so that your visitor cannot use the new window/tab to navigate away from your site.

See Using the window.open method (http://www.javascript-coder.com/window-popup/javascript-window-open.phtml) .

[mannequin-lady]

No it does not.

PR is strictly a function of IBL's... links that point to a page not away from it.


I got tangled up for a second there. I'm keeping my target_blank code so that my site visitors have my page open when they visit one of my partners' links.



Be careful what you put stock in. ;)
Dave

Enough said! :D

Steph

[mannequin-lady]

PR is a fickle lover; and, will never spend a dime on anyone. Design for the users.

How you link out determines where & how the target content is displayed.

Have you considered using the JavaScript "window.open" function? This will allow for opening a new window/tab, with your page remaining displayed, with attributes of your own choice; e.g., the new window/tab can be specified as not having an Address Bar, so that your visitor cannot use the new window/tab to navigate away from your site.

See Using the window.open method (http://www.javascript-coder.com/window-popup/javascript-window-open.phtml) .

My site is geared toward the users who say it's easy to navigate around. Once I get up to it, I want to improve the left navigation bar, but that's going to be awhile.

I looked at the window open method and, for now, I think I'll stay with the target=_blank method.

Thank you for the suggestion, though, since I never knew what that was called. I just know that I don't enjoy it on sites I visit.

Steph

[deepsand]

I just know that I don't enjoy it on sites I visit.
What, specifically, do you dislike?

The suggested JS function is highly useful; and, in a manner that is more mindful of users' needs than is target="_blank."

For example, suppose that you have an ancillary page, one that supplements the content of another. Rather than have the user be forced to toggle back and forth between the two views, open the 2nd via window.open, with its size initially set to an appropriate reduced size, and being re-sizable.

Like target="_blank," it opens a new window; but, unlike it, the new window does not wholly obscure the 1st, and it can be re-sized independent of the 1st.

[SteveGerencser]

I don't like any site that feels the need to control my browser.. This includes opening new instances, resizing it for me to fit "their" design, or any other manipulation.. Its my browser, if you can't design without trying to force me to fit you, then you need to redo your design..

[deepsand]

Every rendered file, whether downloaded or from a local resource, "controls" the browser.

And, how is this relevant to the choice between the various methods of opening new pages or tabs?

[mannequin-lady]

What, specifically, do you dislike?

The suggested JS function is highly useful; and, in a manner that is more mindful of users' needs than is target="_blank."

For example, suppose that you have an ancillary page, one that supplements the content of another. Rather than have the user be forced to toggle back and forth between the two views, open the 2nd via window.open, with its size initially set to an appropriate reduced size, and being re-sizable.

Like target="_blank," it opens a new window; but, unlike it, the new window does not wholly obscure the 1st, and it can be re-sized independent of the 1st.

I don't like pages that open with no menus at the top of the browser window and / or don't even have an address bar.

That's what I believe this script does. More than that, I hate popups, pop-unders and anything else like that. I do like poptarts! :)

[deepsand]

Firstly, what is the difference between a "pop-up," etc., and a new window/tab? From a functional stand=point, there is none. Using the target= function, regardless of its attributes, produces a "pop-up."

Secondly, the referenced script allows you to independently control all of the following browser elements & elements :


status The status bar at the bottom of the window.

toolbar The standard browser toolbar, with buttons such as Back and Forward.

location The Location entry field where you enter the URL.

menubar The menu bar of the window

directories The standard browser directory buttons, such as What's New and What's Cool

resizable Allow/Disallow the user to resize the window.

scrollbars Enable the scrollbars if the document is bigger than the window

height Specifies the height of the window in pixels. (example: height='350')

width Specifies the width of the window in pixels.


Thus, the new window can be a fully featured one, if that's what you want.

[deepsand]

sigh
You know who you are.

Care to explain; or, do you just like to lurk, and take pot shots from the dark?

[mannequin-lady]

Firstly, what is the difference between a "pop-up," etc., and a new window/tab? From a functional stand=point, there is none. Using the target= function, regardless of its attributes, produces a "pop-up."

Popups, like the one I got just now alerting me to a private message, are sometimes blocked by the popup blockers and other settings the user may have. I don't know of anyone blocking a new window from opening.



Secondly, the referenced script allows you to independently control all of the following browser elements & elements :


status The status bar at the bottom of the window.

toolbar The standard browser toolbar, with buttons such as Back and Forward.

location The Location entry field where you enter the URL.

menubar The menu bar of the window

directories The standard browser directory buttons, such as What's New and What's Cool

resizable Allow/Disallow the user to resize the window.

scrollbars Enable the scrollbars if the document is bigger than the window

height Specifies the height of the window in pixels. (example: height='350')

width Specifies the width of the window in pixels.
Thus, the new window can be a fully featured one, if that's what you want.

I saw all the features without scrutinizing the details. I think that script is too much for me to deal with at this time.

I like target=_blank. It's a personal choice, that's all. :)

[mannequin-lady]

You know who you are.

Care to explain; or, do you just like to lurk, and take pot shots from the dark?

eek and wow! I know that wasn't meant for me. I was worried about possibly posting too much.

[deepsand]

Popups, like the one I got just now alerting me to a private message, are sometimes blocked by the popup blockers and other settings the user may have. I don't know of anyone blocking a new window from. opening
It's not that some things are blocked because they are "pop-ups," while others are because they are not "pop-ups," but because of the underlying & different mechanisms used to generate such. For example, if one is using a browser that is set to block scripting, then a whole lot of things, not just "pop-ups," are blocked.

However, all this is very easily circumvented by using the noscript tag; see HTML noscript tag (http://www.w3schools.com/TAGS/tag_noscript.asp) .

Thus, you can use a script, and still provide an alternate for those cases where the script won't be allowed to run.


I like target=_blank. It's a personal choice, that's all. :)
So long as you understand that you are providing a visitor with an easy way to navigate away from your site, and are comfortable with that, then that's fine.

[deepsand]

eek and wow! I know that wasn't meant for me. I was worried about possibly posting too much.
No, not at you; but, at someone who hasn't got the balls to confront me face-to-face, either in this open forum or via PM, preferring instead to use the "Reputation" feature to "red flag" me with no comment beyond that quoted.

Sigh. :rolleyes:

[SteveGerencser]

Every rendered file, whether downloaded or from a local resource, "controls" the browser.

And, how is this relevant to the choice between the various methods of opening new pages or tabs?

Do you deliberately try to make things difficult??

Opening new browsers, windows, tabs (diet soda and browser kinds), popups, popunders, etc are all worthless abuses by the developer aimed at taking control away from the viewer..

I don't like them..

[deepsand]

Do you deliberately try to make things difficult?
How is it that the OP clearly has no problem understanding that which you claim to find so difficult?


Opening new browsers, windows, tabs (diet soda and browser kinds), popups, popunders, etc are all worthless abuses by the developer aimed at taking control away from the viewer.
In your opinion.

And, the fact that these capabilities exist, in standardized forms, and are so widely used serves to demonstrate that very many do not share that opinion.


I don't like them..
Which neither negates the fact that "Every rendered file, whether downloaded or from a local resource, "controls" the browser, nor addresses the question as to "how is this relevant to the choice between the various methods of opening new pages or tabs?"

[williamc]

So long as you understand that you are providing a visitor with an easy way to navigate away from your site, and are comfortable with that, then that's fine.

What exactly is the difference between using the JS function window.open() and using _blank, in as far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site? They both open new instances of the browser, thus, either can lead to the user closing the first instance of the browser. Are you trying to be obtuse here or are you really this naive?

[williamc]

Rep Point awarded for common sense.


agreed, I also repped him.

[mannequin-lady]

However, all this is very easily circumvented by using the noscript tag; see HTML noscript tag (http://www.w3schools.com/TAGS/tag_noscript.asp) .

Thus, you can use a script, and still provide an alternate for those cases where the script won't be allowed to run.


So long as you understand that you are providing a visitor with an easy way to navigate away from your site, and are comfortable with that, then that's fine.

I'm not providing them with an easy way to navigate away from my site, AFAIK.

For example, This page (http://www.alldressforms.com/all-collectible-ducks-duckeys-duckies-duckys-duck-central.html) has an image with the title, "Miniature Costumed Rubber Duckies", that when clicked on, opens in a new window or a new tab, depending upon the users settings.

I'm using IE and I can clearly see the names of the websites (and their favicons) on my tabs. If the user saw what they wanted on my site, they'd move the mouse over and click on the tab. Or they can use the keyboard shortcut, CTRL-Tab. Or go to the previously opened window after closing the second window.

That's how mine works, anyway. I don't know if it works differently for others.

Steph

[williamc]

I'm not providing them with an easy way to navigate away from my site, AFAIK.

Don't worry about gibberish. He either made a mistake in what he said, or he simply does not realize that both _blank as a target in the html standard, and the javascript open() functions do the exact same thing and open a new instance of the browser.

[mannequin-lady]

No, not at you; but, at someone who hasn't got the balls to confront me face-to-face, either in this open forum or via PM, preferring instead to use the "Reputation" feature to "red flag" me with no comment beyond that quoted.

Sigh. :rolleyes:

Well, I knew it wasn't me, but I had to be 100% certain anyway. I can't believe someone would "red flag" you. You don't need to worry and you know that.

I gotta go see what these red flags are all about! :) (Just trying to lighten up the situation.)

[deepsand]

Umm what exactly is the difference between using the JS function window.open() and using _blank, in as far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site? They both open new instances of the browser, thus, either can lead to the user closing the first instance of the browser. Are you trying to be obtuse here or are you really this naive?
Said script provides for the suppression of the various function bars, such that they cannot easily use the newly created window to venture outside of the target site. Therefore, they are more likely to close said window when finished there, thus returning to the window containing your site.

Additionally, said script allows for re-sizing the new window, such that the visitor can simultaneously view both the originating & target pages. This is quite useful when the target page contains content that complements that of the originating page, and it is not practical that the originating page should itself contain such content.

An example of such is the use of this feature on ticketing sites, where there is one-to-many relationship between a venue and the productions taking place there. Here, having the venue seating chart/map be accessed via a "pop-up" panel, of the type producible by the window.open script serves nicely, allowing for both the chart/map being stored but once, and the viewer being able to see, on such chart/map, where the Section/Row of a given set of seats is withing the venue.

[SteveGerencser]

Actually, that's exactly the kind of use that a LOT of people don't like..

I know the Deepsand seems to think I'm "rude" whenever I disagree with him, as seen by the random red rep he just gave me, but there are a lot of things that you 'can' do because they are in the code standards.. But whether you should do them or not is something that you need to seriously consider before doing..

Why do you feel it necessary to open a new window while navigating around on your website??

[mannequin-lady]

Don't worry about gibberish. He either made a mistake in what he said, or he simply does not realize that both _blank as a target in the html standard, and the javascript open() functions do the exact same thing and open a new instance of the browser.

Thank you. I don't want to get confused with something I thought I knew! :)

[deepsand]

I'm not providing them with an easy way to navigate away from my site, AFAIK.

For example, This page (http://www.alldressforms.com/all-collectible-ducks-duckeys-duckies-duckys-duck-central.html) has an image with the title, "Miniature Costumed Rubber Duckies", that when clicked on, opens in a new window or a new tab, depending upon the users settings.

I'm using IE and I can clearly see the names of the websites (and their favicons) on my tabs. If the user saw what they wanted on my site, they'd move the mouse over and click on the tab. Or they can use the keyboard shortcut, CTRL-Tab. Or go to the previously opened window after closing the second window.

That's how mine works, anyway. I don't know if it works differently for others.
Not everyone uses a browser that supports tabs; and, of those that do, whether the result will be a new tab or a new window depends on the browser & its settings. Thus, you cannot be certain what the visitor will actually experience.

But, as noted at http://www.webproworld.com/search-engine-optimization-forum/83552-relevant-outbound-link-without-inbound-link-2.html#post435813 , you can control what they see via the window.open function.

[deepsand]

Don't worry about gibberish. He either made a mistake in what he said, or he simply does not realize that both _blank as a target in the html standard, and the javascript open() functions do the exact same thing and open a new instance of the browser.
No, they do not do exactly the "same thing."

Said script provides for control of the new window that target="_blank" does not.

[deepsand]

Why do you feel it necessary to open a new window while navigating around on your website??
Guess you didn't bother to read the post above yours.

BTW, are you saying that you only ever have a single window open at any given moment? If that's the case, you're not really using "windows."

[deepsand]

Why do you feel it necessary to open a new window while navigating around on your website??
Guess you didn't bother to read the post above yours.

And, are you saying that you only ever have a single window open at any given moment? If that's the case, you're not really using "windows."

BTW, if someone just "repped" you here, it means that someone else thinks that you're just being argumentative.

[mannequin-lady]

Not everyone uses a browser that supports tabs; and, of those that do, whether the result will be a new tab or a new window depends on the browser & its settings. Thus, you cannot be certain what the visitor will actually experience.

But, as noted at http://www.webproworld.com/search-engine-optimization-forum/83552-relevant-outbound-link-without-inbound-link-2.html#post435813 , you can control what they see via the window.open function.

I'm only a control freak at home (well, and in the car, etc); not with my website visitors. If I lose someone, they'll find me again if I had what they were looking for. If not, that's the breaks. Someone else will find my site.

I'm throwing in the towel here, because I mainly wanted to discuss putting links on my site without reciprocation. After the discussions and advice, I feel confident in doing so, at some point, however, my current project as of today is adding Google Adsense ads to my site.

I have them on one page and like the way they look, so I'm devoting some time to that for a while.

This isn't a "kiss-off" if that's the expression; I just think people are beginning to get to wrapped up and emotional in all this. (This remark coming from a woman yet!)

I have another topic I want to start and will do so tonight or tomorrow. I appreciate everybody's input.

Sincerely,
Steph

[mannequin-lady]

I just have to say that now I'm confused between the two threads. Sorry if I referred to the wrong one or whatever.

[SteveGerencser]

And, are you saying that you only ever have a single window open at any given moment? If that's the case, you're not really using "windows."

Windows that I open are fine.. But I don't care for sites that feel the need to open them for me.. I tend to never return.. Call it personal preference..

ML - glad you got something out of the discussion.. I'm pretty sure only one person here is emotional.. :)

[deepsand]

Windows that I open are fine.. But I don't care for sites that feel the need to open them for me.. I tend to never return.. Call it personal preference.
Presumably, then, you've a equal dislike for target=_"blank".

[SteveGerencser]

Yup.. Haven't used it on purpose in years..

[loosapphire]

I don't think outbound links to other high-ranked would benefit you on Pageranking. But links to external sites do have extra value. As an essential part of a linking strategy, you should provide links the will be of real benefit to your users. The logic is that if you provide valuable links, you establish your site as a valuable resource and users will be more likely to bookmark it and return.

[deepsand]

Yup.. Haven't used it on purpose in years..
Not asking re. your usage; but, that of others. Do you avoid all of the myriad sites that use it?

[deepsand]

The logic is that if you provide valuable links, you establish your site as a valuable resource and users will be more likely to bookmark it and return.
Well said; that's a message that bears repeating.

[williamc]

No, they do not do exactly the "same thing."

Said script provides for control of the new window that target="_blank" does not.

Actually, my reply was that they do the same exact thing as in that they open a new browser instance, after your misguided post about the open() not allowing people to leave your site as easily as a target=_blank, which was total rubbish.

I take it then from your reply that you are indeed simply naive, or ignorant?

Quite simply, the question the original poster asked was one of links and their values, and had absolutely nothing at all to do with extended abilities of window control available with the JS function open(). Try to stay on topic here just a little hmmmm?

The original question was quite simply: If I create a relevant outbound link WITHOUT that site also linking to my site, does the above statement mean this would be good for my site?

CrankyDave answered it succinctly, and correctly, IMO, in the very next post. Any replies that had nothing to do with that question, such as all of deepsands remarks, only serve to cloud the issue and confuse the original poster.

Deepsand: You can red me all you like with "tard points" as the comment, but the fact is, you are not even in my league when it comes to debating. It is not my fault that you were ignorant or incorrect and misinformed a poster, which happens to be my pet peeve, ask ctabuk or crankydave :)

[SteveGerencser]

Not asking re. your usage; but, that of others. Do you avoid all of the myriad sites that use it?

I rarely bookmark them, and all things being equal between two sites, I go to the one that doesn't force new windows on me..

[deepsand]

Actually, my reply was that they do the same exact thing as in that they open a new browser instance, after your post about the open() not allowing people to leave your site as easily as a target=_blank, which was total rubbish.Well, then, you should have no trouble demonstrating how target="_blank" can replicate all the functionality of window.open.

[deepsand]

I rarely bookmark them, and all things being equal between two sites, I go to the one that doesn't force new windows on me..
Didn't ask re. bookmarking, or "all things being equal."

Do you or do you not avoid sites that employ multiple windows, even if such provide necessary functionality, such as the example given re. seating charts?

[williamc]

Well, then, you should have no trouble demonstrating how target="_blank" can replicate all the functionality of window.open.

What I shall have no problem demonstrating is the fact that you simply need more schooling as you clearly can not read.

Which part of


What exactly is the difference between using the JS function window.open() and using _blank, in as far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site?

"in so far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site"

exactly are you having problems comprehending? It is, after all, very simple english....

See, I tend to try to stay within the boundaries of the OP's question, which simply involved links and their values. The OP never asked for ways to control a window, so to answer Stephanies question with gibberish about doing so, is showing an ignorance in very basic reading skills.

[deepsand]

Which part of

What exactly is the difference between using the JS function window.open() and using _blank, in as far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site?
"in so far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site" ...
Asked & answered.


The OP never asked for ways to control a window, ...
Guess you missed the OP's mention of target="_blank". And, where is it written that a thread must follow so narrow a path as you here would have it follow, that additional information that may be of value should never be volunteered, but given only if & when requested? How many real face to face conversations are so constrained?

And, do you really believe that repeated ad hominem attacks serve you well?

[williamc]

Asked & answered.

Actually no, you did not answer that question. You went on again to spout off about the abilities of JS to control a windows properties.

How exactly did I attack you when I simply pointed out that you have a hard time reading, and ignorance of the written word was a flaw? If anything that is the exact opposite of ad hominem arguementation. I was showing facts in my own, and flaws in your, arguements. perhaps you should go back to the dictionary site you used and read the definition of the phrase again. You might find that only your banter actually qualifies. :)

Possibly only non-state schools teach proper usage of english these days. :p

It was NOT the original poster who mentioned target=_blank first, sorry to burst your bubble and show your ignorance of the written word yet again, it was briguy, after which you started your tirade on target=_blank.

Possibly you need to look up the word ignorant, and naive, as they both fit the situation of several posts you made. They were not meant as attacks, merely factual reporting of your inept attempt at debating.

I have to ask tho, why you feel the need to have redirected links in your sig that go to the same place. Now, I realize that your penstatetickets domain has been dinged, and that would be a reason for the redirection, but signatures that contain redirected links to the same place that are strictly created to make sure you get credit for numerous inbound links seems to be gross manipulation, and probably against this forums rules as well :)

Just asking is all.... I mean you could be my new best friend as I am kinda bored, and GreenEagle finally dropped from the planet. :)

[deepsand]

Actually no, you did not answer that question. You went on again to spout off about the abilities of JS to control a windows properties.
It is those very properties which describe a window; stop trying to evade by way of semantics. Sophomoric sophistry might work with others, but not here.


How exactly did I attack you when I simply pointed out that you have a hard time reading, and ignorance of the written word was a flaw? If anything that is the exact opposite of ad hominem arguementation. I was showing facts in my own, and flaws in your, arguements. perhaps you should go back to the dictionary site you used and read the definition of the phrase again. You might find that only your banter actually qualifies.
Yet another feeble attempt at sophistry. I did not say argumentum ad hominem, but rather ad hominem attack.

That's a distinction with a difference; look it up.


It was NOT the original poster who mentioned target=_blank first, sorry to burst your bubble and show your ignorance of the written word yet again, it was briguy, after which you started your tirade on target=_blank.
Read carefully.

I did not say the the 1st mention was by the OP, but rather "Guess you missed the OP's mention of" it. And, it was only then that I discussed it with the OP.


I have to ask tho, why you feel the need to have redirected links in your sig that go to the same place. Now, I realize that your penstatetickets domain has been dinged, and that would be a reason for the redirection, but signatures that contain redirected links to the same place that are strictly created to make sure you get credit for numerous inbound links seems to be gross manipulation, and probably against this forums rules as well
Re. the various brand names, perhaps you'd like to ask the site's owner. Though, I do guarantee that he'll be much less civil with you than am I.

And, if you believe that the sig links here carry any usable PR, you're not nearly so bright as you would have us believe..

Lastly, the only thing here that violates the site's TOS is your persistent ad hominem attacks.

PS : Nice job of evading the question of "And, where is it written that a thread must follow so narrow a path as you here would have it follow, that additional information that may be of value should never be volunteered, but given only if & when requested? How many real face to face conversations are so constrained?" Yet one more example of sophistry at work.

[williamc]

It is those very properties which describe a window; stop trying to evade by way of semantics. Sophomoric sophistry might work with others, but not here.

Lastly, the only thing here that violates the site's TOS is your persistent ad hominem attacks.

PS : Nice job of evading the question of "And, where is it written that a thread must follow so narrow a path as you here would have it follow, that additional information that may be of value should never be volunteered, but given only if & when requested? How many real face to face conversations are so constrained?" Yet one more example of sophistry at work.

Nobody asked about those properties, and they had nothing to do with the conversation. No, the actual question was quite simply:


What exactly is the difference between using the JS function window.open() and using _blank, in as far as giving anyone an easy way to leave your site?

You may think javascript properties somehow answer that, but if so then you are definately not the brightest tool in the shed. I will elaborate so simple minded people can understand it plainly. as far as what was asked, how is using the js open() func. over the target=_blank giving users less of a chance to leave a site when they both open new browser instances? How the window is controlled after being opened, does not matter in the least, only the ability to leave the site. None of the major browsers allow javascript to lose the [x], so there is always the same way of closing the browser, so lets not deal with petty things such as that.

There, read it three times, make sure you finally get it. Look above your head for a small lightbulb coming on, thats an indicator :)

Oh, and I did not evade the question of "where is it written a thread must always follow...", I simply do not debate statements that I agree with, only rubbish such as most of your gibberish. The fact alone that YOU regurgitated something many others, including myself, have said in the past, does not make it less agreeable.

As for the links carrying any usable PR, who said anything about PageRank? Or are you one of those simple minded monkeys who think PageRank matters all that much anymore? I said simply, the fact is, due to them being redirected links to a single website and yet being advertised in a signature as seperate links, they are an attempt at manipulation. Pretty simple yet again, sad that you can not seem to read still, but hey, you surely do like using large words to try to cover it up :)

As for the definition, wikipedia and merriam webster carry no differentiating factor. They both use the term attack in the form argumentum ad hominem. quite clearly:


An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the person") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the source making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim.

You somehow thought the javascript properties that allowed a window to show differently in browsers had something to do with making its core use of opening a new browser instance different than target=_blank insofar as the original question. Your statement was incorrect and I simply showed it was wrong. If the original question had not simply been about opening a basic window, then it may have mattered, however it was not. It is not my fault that simple minds that think they are larger than life seem to detest being proven incorrect.

Your debating skills are weak my friend.

[coolguy27]

By linking out authority sites it can help since you help visitors find more answers to their question if you put relevant outbound links. i may say that even it has no inbound links it can help also. :D

[weegillis]

Reciprocal links need not be considered a vote for your site if they are given as a sort of handshake. The links coming in are only of value if they originate on a page that has some bearing on yours, and to which your page gives added value.

Outbound, though, is something to consider carefully:
1) Does the page you link to add value to yours?
2) Is the link to a site your would recommend under normal circumstances, or are you link fishing (gold digging: propping up your site with information you are not willing to provide through your own research and investigative writing.)
3) Do you want your visitor to have the ability to return immediately or shortly thereafter, once they've absorbed the new information?

In the case of #3, using target= or open() will effectively break the tie, as both begin with a clear history slate; that is, the Back button, and javascript.history:back(); have nowhere to return.

Of all the navigation tools at the user's disposal, Back is the most commonly used, especially by less experienced users. Most browsers even provide a brief history of pages visited in the current browser session (since the browser window was opened). Opera even lets you 'Rewind to the beginning.'

Back is the preferred method, in my humble view, even in the case of OBLs. This does not rule out, or even cringe at, opening new windows. It is not as clear-cut as all that. Care and consideration should go into the decision to create one on a the case by case basis for each and every link.

[kgun]

I rarely bookmark them, and all things being equal between two sites, I go to the one that doesn't force new windows on me..
And I personally link to the site with (semantic) content. Outbound links are (not always good) content (http://www.webproworld.com/search-engine-optimization-forum/74277-links-life-death-your-ebusiness.html#post403724).

There is a big difference between a paper document and a digital (web based) document, the way of referencing and citing. (http://www.webproworld.com/google-discussion-forum/63125-ignore-misunderstandings-have-produced-present-world.html#post339093)

Still in 2009 it is difficult to use XLink, XPointer and similar technologies (http://www.webproworld.com/search-engine-optimization-forum/70607-advanced-semantic-linking-transclusion.html#post384523) to link to a part / section of a web article / document.

One of the biggest advantages of the WWW of interlinked documents is still not used.

The need for opening a new window in either way will be reduced.
The web and its documents will be more semantic, focused and minimalistic.I still await a browser that support the XML family of technologies and transclusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transclusion) in a better way.

[williamc]

I still await a browser that support the XML family of technologies and transclusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transclusion) in a better way.

You and I both Kgun. I have to agree with this part.

[deepsand]

Your debating skills are weak my friend.
This, from a sophist?


http://i201.photobucket.com/albums/aa12/sharewhat2/Emoticons/love0030.gif

Thilly wabbit.

[williamc]

I take it by your latest posts, that you do not even have a clue what sophism is, in either of its derivitives. Why am I not surprised in the least??

Come on now, this is first year philosophy....

Just to school you some more, all of my posts were factual, hardly illogical in the first derivitive. In the second (ancient) derivitive, I school nobody in either philosophy or rhetoric, hence would not qualify there either.

Sorry to burst your bubble again, but you really should look up these words before trying to use them in a debate, or against any decent debator.

Once again, your skills are waning grasshopper....

[deepsand]

You know what I meant - you are just being anal to avoid legitemate discussions on things you don't really understand.. And I can keep this up far longer than you.. Until I get bored.. Feydakin
You've studiously avoided a direct answer, so that, no, I do not know what you truly meant.

And, your use of the "rep" function to continue your evasiveness is reprehensible.

If you'd like me to presume your answer, based on the totality of your posts, along with the reluctance to provide a direct answer, then I'd say that the answer is "no."

[SteveGerencser]

And, your use of the "rep" function to continue your evasiveness is reprehensible.

You mean like your red rep challenging my ethics?? Just behaving as you expect me to.. After all, you are always right and I would hate to disappoint..

Rep is here to be used as the posters here see fit.. I give out plenty of green and red.. And I'm sure I have given you green in the past when I agree with you.. Just as I will continue to give you red (or green) when the need arises.. You may call it reprehensible, but passing yourself off as an SEO of some sort here is equally so..

[deepsand]

You mean like your red rep challenging my ethics?? Just behaving as you expect me to.
:confused:

Assumes facts not in evidence.


And I'm sure I have given you green in the past when I agree with you.
Only if done anonymously.


Rep is here to be used as the posters here see fit.
I doubt that it's intended as an channel for that which properly belongs in a thread.


... passing yourself off as an SEO of some ...
:confused:

Citation required.

Now, since you've made no mention of the question not directly answered, am I to take it that the stated presumption is correct?

[SteveGerencser]

:confused:
Assumes facts not in evidence.

Now if I provided proof to you, you would know more about me than I want you to know.. And where is the fun in that?? But yes, you have red repped me for my ethics in one of the many blackhat threads..


Only if done anonymously.

I do a lot of things anonymously..


I doubt that it's intended as an channel for that which properly belongs in a thread.

In your opinion.. Whether that is in response to rep's intent or whether what you said belongs in that thread is up to you..



Citation required.
Now, since you've made no mention of the question not directly answered, am I to take it that the stated presumption is correct?

Approximately 2700 posts in a webmaster forum, many of those in SEO threads should be enough Citation for anyone that you think you are an SEO.. Your sig links show that you aren't..

And no, I have no intention of answering any more of your questions in this thread.. You can assume that its because you are right (most likely) or you can assume that its because I have grown bored again..

Apologies to everyone else following the "drama" and either bored with it and happy to see it end, I apologize for wasting your time, or enjoying it and hoping to see it continue, I apologize for being bored and deciding to move on..

[deepsand]

Now if I provided proof to you, you would know more about me than I want you to know.. And where is the fun in that?? But yes, you have red repped me for my ethics in one of the many blackhat threads..
Translation : you're speculating.

I do a lot of things anonymously.
Hm-mm; you identify yourself when giving negative rep., but remain anonymous when giving green. Most peculiar, to the point of stretching credibility.


Approximately 2700 posts in a webmaster forum, many of those in SEO threads should be enough Citation for anyone that you think you are an SEO.. Your sig links show that you aren't..
Thank you for admitting that your statement that I was "passing [myself] off as an SEO of some sort" is a misrepresentation.


And no, I have no intention of answering any more of your questions in this thread.. You can assume that its because you are right (most likely) or you can assume that its because I have grown bored again..
And, thank you for admitting that you willfully chose to avoid giving a direct answer to a straightforward question re. your categorical statement, choosing instead to obfuscate and evade.

[williamc]

Hm-mm; you identify yourself when giving negative rep., but remain anonymous when giving green. Most peculiar, to the point of stretching credibility.


I often give rep with merely a comment of why I agree/disagree with them, I often do not sign them unless I know the person fairly well already, and feel that is a sure sign of someone trying to get repped back for nothing more than giving it. The reputational system was put in place to grant those posts that merit it, a vote of confidence, not to abuse by repping someone merely to try to get some back in return for doing nothing of merit. I take it from your post, this portrayal is of you?

[ctabuk]

Hey guys, please stay a little on topic. To all of you I simply repeat, that if you set out to do nothing but outbounds to relative sites, you can bet your bottom dollar that someone will link to you on the same basis. All you have to hope for is that the site shares content. Now, oddly enough I am using this exact tactic on one of my weblogs pages, I'm not using directories, I have simply linked out to a couple of decent related sites. I'll be doing, maybe one or perhaps 2 more next month.
‘Captain Blood’s Pirates’ by ‘David Castle’ New Historical Fiction Books: The Adventures of Michael Fane (http://www.newhistoricalfictionbooks.co.uk/captain-bloods-pirates-by-david-castle/)

The books not out yet, but I'll take orders :D :D

How many outbounds would you suggest I add?

[deepsand]

Can we get a sneak preview? :D

[ctabuk]

LOL - maybe!! From an SEO point of view that page is 'crap' - I'm experimenting. So please NO -God David that page is awful - I know! - I'm trying a theory - when the actual novel gets released in July/August then I'll do the tags and fix the favicom link. I merely want to see if I can topple 'Captain Blood' as a search term by pure out linking. I'll also get flack for duplicate content - but frankly that is a 'no risk' in my books. How can you avoid duplicate content if you outlink!
The theory worked on 'Judge George Jeffreys' - I even beat wiki!

[kgun]

So please NO -God David that page is awful - I know!
If you talk about your blog (above link) I disagree. I personally like the design;).

[ctabuk]

Hi Kgell, I hope you had a great holiday. Thank's - but I'm talking 'technically' bad, but deliberately so.

[kgun]

Hi Kgell, I hope you had a great holiday. Thank's - but I'm talking 'technically' bad, but deliberately so.
Technically bad, but content is King and refactoring Queen:rolleyes:.

I had a great holiday in Italy. Nice weather, food and wine. I was in Rome and joined a public audience with the Pope. No joke. I stumbled upon it. I have 1 1/2 hour video recording of the event.

So now, I ought to be a better human being since the pope has blessed me. He drove about 20 m from where I stood in an open car.

Now I hope ManU beat Barcelona in Rome the 27th of may. You know that ManU has been my favorite team since most of the off topic posters here were born.

Was this post off topic?:confused:

[ctabuk]

Good, I am pleased. I too think Man U will win.

Back to topic - yes the content is pretty cool. In the outbounds the text is based purely on 'Topics' relating to the page. I've also placed an instant pingback to this forums thread. That came in within seconds of my posting the link. I approved it in my admin section.

[ctabuk]

Deepsand asked for a preview, so I'm going a little 'off topic' - but relative to Kgun's post on being blessed by the Pope. My novel is about the Protestant against Catholic war in 1687 so I hope this excerpt gives my view on it.
“No Michael, I will not touch blades with you, if I had to then it would be on the field of battle, and neither of us would wish that. Simon is your tutor, as I was his, and I begin tutoring Will on our return, one teacher, one pupil – I would never interfere with Simon’s teachings. It is all about hearts Michael. That is why we have had our talk. Forget religion in conflict, look at the heart of the King, and if he be Catholic or Protestant – then it matters not to me. If he is cruel and unjust – I will not fight for him –if he is pure of heart with good intentions – my sword is his. I leave religion out of War. Now look, we approach those two Horse Chestnut trees, follow me.”

[williamc]

How many outbounds would you suggest I add?

Whats the competition level?

Gaining inbounds by strictly linking out has worked for me in the past at a ratio of about 9:1 when I kept the outbounds tightly themed. That test was with over 500 outbounds so is a fairly accurate ratio. Figure what you need to rank across the board and go from there...

[ctabuk]

Hi William, I hope you are well. It's actually fierce, which is surprising for an obscure search term. Warner Bros movies, Sabatini (Authors) links swarm the searches - plus a famous gaming station called Captain Blood

[williamc]

In that case you are going to have your work cut out for you trying to get enough inbounds from outbounds. Best get cracking now mate.

I do find it remotely funny tho that you started your posts in this thread about not going off-topic, then proceeded to take the thread off-topic. Classic. :)

Good luck with the book :)

[kgun]

<off topic>
williamc

Is it intentionally that the link in your signature gives a

403 Forbidden error?

</off topic>

[williamc]

Kgun: Thanks, I let the new owner know about it. I am corporate now and sold off that site along with some others.

[ctabuk]

Well the page got listed in 2nd place for this search term

Captain Blood, Thomas Blood, Irish adventurer

Not bad!

[ericajoieake]

one way linking is good, especially when it is related to your website and has a better pr than yours.

[kgun]

Kgun: Thanks, I let the new owner know about it. I am corporate now and sold off that site along with some others.
But you are still an expert SEO. The link functions now.

[kgun]

Just asking is all.... I mean you could be my new best friend as I am kinda bored, and GreenEagle finally dropped from the planet. :)
I at least think Ken understood the concept of a significant statistical analysis.

He has also contributed with this:

http://www.webproworld.com/search-engine-optimization-forum/12730-list-high-ranking-directories-indices.html#post80354

5 star thread.

William, you are very close to being ignored by me.:cool:

Private screendump.

[williamc]

I at least think Ken understood the concept of a significant statistical analysis.


One does not need statistical analysis when one controls all the aspects of a given site.

[williamc]

Kgun: you can red rep me all you like with "BUT you did not control all aspects", but at least your rep message admitted that my statement above was correct. :)

It won't change the fact that in the first test done, I did in fact control ALL aspects of both the linked to site, and the linking site. As the linked to site was setup in that test specifically FOR that test, I DID know every link, every ranking, and all other measures that could have accounted for the drops.

The other tests on sites in which I did not control everything, were simply done to prove to others beyond a shadow of doubt that it was in fact real.

The fact that you do not like those facts, does not matter in the least, but it does show an ongoing pattern lately which I have not seen you display before. Maybe I was incorrect in assuming that you do not simply argue because of an insecurity.

[kgun]

I have not talked about the childish rep point system. Using the forum ignore function implies that you are more invisible to me than ken are to you.

[williamc]

If it was not you, and I am leaning towards that way now, who red repped me with the message: "but, you did NOT controll all aspects; and, you had no control set." Then I apologize and should not be surprised to see it was unsigned.

As for using the ignore function tho, I take it you don't want to debate anymore threads where you may come across in a different light than you had hoped? :)

That would be a bummer, as you are quite seriously one of the very few people that give me a decent challenge at times. Deepsand tries, but just does not cut it.

[SteveGerencser]

one way linking is good, especially when it is related to your website and has a better pr than yours.

I like reading posts from people that don't read the threads..

[williamc]

I don't agree. deepsand is the person in this forum that gives me personally the greatest challenges.

I will take that as gospel. You both like tossing out not much else but unproven theory that never seems to come to pass as fact in histories eyes. So to you, I can see him being a challenge to you. To me, only facts and truths matter. Every once in a while you make me rethink what has been proven to work in the past and retest, that was the basis of my remark about being one of the few challenges I have here. Deepsand does nothing but bore me with relentless repititions of the same theoreticals over and over, I suppose hoping that sooner or later someone will start to believe it.

At times, you actually make me think the old known facts could be wrong and retest, he just does not have that ability.

[kgun]

To me, only facts and truths matter. Every once in a while you make me rethink what has been proven to work in the past and retest, that was the basis of my remark about being one of the few challenges I have here.
Are you religious William? What is a fact today is false history tomorrow. News are reported history.

[deepsand]

I will take that as gospel. You both like tossing out not much else but unproven theory that never seems to come to pass as fact in histories eyes. So to you, I can see him being a challenge to you. To me, only facts and truths matter. Every once in a while you make me rethink what has been proven to work in the past and retest, that was the basis of my remark about being one of the few challenges I have here. Deepsand does nothing but bore me with relentless repititions of the same theoreticals over and over, I suppose hoping that sooner or later someone will start to believe it.

At times, you actually make me think the old known facts could be wrong and retest, he just does not have that ability.
You confuse conjecture with Theory. (Note the uppercase "T.")

You mistake correlation for cause and effect.

You fail to differentiate between data, information, knowledge, and understanding.

[williamc]

You fail to differentiate between data, information, knowledge, and understanding.

Not at all. I simply stick to what is known, and proven in direct testing, rather than spit out baseless conjecture or theory that I do not fully intend to test, which neither of you will ever do. When you contemplate how something may work, and actually test it, then I will give you some credibility no matter what the outcome, simply because you put forth the effort.

<this line wasn't neccessary, please play nice CD>

[briguy]

Was just wondering would the "target="_blank" code work in case like this...<a href="http://Outboundlink(dot)com" target="_blank">Out bound link </a>


Whether or not would "work" depends on the desired goal.

If you're thinking of using such with regards to PR flow, no; for that, use "nofollow." Sorry I just posted my first response just to give a example of what I do when I want to link to another site and yet have my visitors return. I usually do this for definitions or wikipedia! No way am I a coding expert..I get my knowledge from this forum!

Should have stated that I usually code my outbound links like this ...<a href="http://Outboundlink(dot)com" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Out bound link </a>





Have you considered using the JavaScript "window.open" function? This will allow for opening a new window/tab, with your page remaining displayed, with attributes of your own choice; e.g., the new window/tab can be specified as not having an Address Bar, so that your visitor cannot use the new window/tab to navigate away from your site.

See Using the window.open method (http://www.javascript-coder.com/window-popup/javascript-window-open.phtml) .
Thanks for the link! Now I have to figure out what are the advantages and disadvantage of me using javascript or html (which I am more comfortable with)

Sorry for posting so late..just finally had my computer working properly!

[weegillis]

Is there not a way to give the user an option (besides right-click, Open in...) to have a link open in the active window or a new tab/window?

[janeth]

one way linking is good, especially when it is related to your website and has a better pr than yours.

Why does the pr need to be better than yours and what does pr have to do with linking out?

[janeth]

Is there not a way to give the user an option (besides right-click, Open in...) to have a link open in the active window or a new tab/window?

Giving the user an option would confuses him even more as well as disrupt the flow of the site.

[janeth]

I bought a book on Amazon, "Web Marketing For Dummies" by Jan Zimmerman, published Dec 2008.

On Page 173, Chapter 7 Mastering the secrets of search engines it says:

"Outbound links to other high-ranked, relevant sites - that is, sites that share at least one other search term - generate extra value."

If I create a relevant outbound link WITHOUT that site also linking to my site, does the above statement mean this would be good for my site? :confused:

What I mean to say is, if I link to a high ranked dress form site, but they do not link to me, is that good for me? I usually only do reciprocal, relevant links.

Thanks,
Steph

The original posters question wasn’t really answered.

Seeing how she posted in the SEO forum it seems to me that the questions should have been answered from an SEO perspective.

Or maybe I am wrong.

Was the question does linking out have a negative effect on your site in anyway?

If that was the question then the answer should have been yes it does.

When you link out and allow that link to pass pr, you leak pr that could have been used in your site.

Your are passing ranking power to someone else’s site that causes you to pass less in your own site.

[deepsand]

Under the published PR algorithm, each document/page is presumed to be independent of all others; thus, in the absence of OBLs, any PR which might have been passed to another page or pages simply vanishes for the moment, and is redistributed on a pro-rata basis at the end of an iterative cycle during normalization.

No mention is made of what happens to PR that is passed between documents/pages which are part of a greater whole, such as a domain or sub-domain. Thus was borne the concept of "PR sculpting," the "art" of hoarding passable PR within the site itself.

While there has been considerable debate as to whether or not such works, to my knowledge no definitive answer has been forthcoming. If it does not, then passing PR along with OBLs costs nothings; and, not so passing PR gains nothing.

In attempting to reach a conclusion re. this issue, bear in mind that, should Google allow sites to hoard their passable PR without restriction, then the underlying concept embodied in the algorithm is rendered ineffective. Therefore, if Google does allow PR hoarding, it is reasonable to assume that the value of such re-distributed within a site via internal links may be discounted from the value that would otherwise be passed via OBLs.

[janeth]

While there has been considerable debate as to whether or not such works, to my knowledge no definitive answer has been forthcoming.

Matt Cutts, (Google's Head Engineer) said that page sculpting does have an affect.

For it to have an affect PR would have to be leaking.


Page sculpting, do you need to bother with it?


Matt says in most cases you do not, so long as your architecture is set up correctly. It is a better use of time to work to get good links than trying to control flow of internal PageRank. It does not create a red flag if you do.

[deepsand]

I am aware of Matt's cited remarks; however, I am unaware of his being sufficiently specific with regards to the issues relating to the PR algorithm that I raised so as to conclude that the amount of PR internally passed is the equal of that available for being passed via OBLs.

As for his position/title at Google, when he introduced himself, at www.mattcutts.com (http://www.dullest.com/) , he stated that he was then "head of Google's Webspam team." As of Jun 23, 2008, per Matt Cutts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Cutts) , he "works for the Search Quality group," prior to which he "worked at the ads engineering group, and the SafeSearch capabilities."

Regardless of his position/title, he is well known for making statements that are both vague and at times contradictory, such that relying on any single remark of his based solely on his perceived authority is unwise.

[Dr Britt Borden MD]

Check out the site OpenSourceHelpDeskList. This site ranks first for the very competitive search term "Open Source Help Desk". It does this with a web site that is only one page; this site only has about a dozen incoming links.

[williamc]

That term is really not that competitive Dr.

Oh, and they have 1,161 inbounds, not a dozen...

http://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com/search?p=http%3A%2F%2Fopensourcehelpdesklist.com&bwm=i&bwmf=s&bwmo=&fr=yfp-t-501&fr2=seo-rd-se

[janeth]

Regardless of his position/title, he is well known for making statements that are both vague and at times contradictory, such that relying on any single remark of his based solely on his perceived authority is unwise.

Okay we can ignore Google and pretend that they don't know how their on algo works, works for me.

But lots of us have known about the flow of link juice way before page sculpting became such a hot topic.

Pagerank Explained. Google's PageRank and how to make the most of it. (http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank.html)

And now their are articles all over the place by SEO experts some of whom have even tested it.

Advanced wordpress SEO: Page Rank Sculpting (http://www.prelovac.com/vladimir/seo-for-wordpress-page-sculpting)

SEOmoz | Sculpting with Nofollow Works Pretty Darn Well (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/sculpting-with-nofollow-works-pretty-darn-well)

Sculpting Your PageRank For Maximum SEO Impact (http://searchengineland.com/sculpting-your-pagerank-for-maximum-seo-impact-12982)

Submitedge - Search Engine Optimization Blog SEO: Linking, Page Sculpting, Black Hat Tactics; Where Are the Lines Drawn? (http://www.submitedge.com/blog/seo-linking-page-sculpting-black-hat-tactics-where-are-the-lines-drawn/)

But what the heck, lets ignore all those as well as common sense and link to Google and see if that causes us to rank higher. (-:

[crankydave]

I am aware of Matt's cited remarks; however, I am unaware of his being sufficiently specific with regards to the issues relating to the PR algorithm that I raised so as to conclude that the amount of PR internally passed is the equal of that available for being passed via OBLs.

Are you trying to say that a page with 'X' amount of available PR to pass (vote), can pass (vote) 'X' to internal pages and at the same time pass (vote) 'X' to external pages?

Dave

[deepsand]

Okay we can ignore Google and pretend that they don't know how their on algo works, works for me.
Made no suggestion re. ignoring Google; only that Google doesn't divulge everything that we'd like to know or think that we know. And, that Matt is not all of Google. Do you deny that his statements are frequently vague? Or, that they are sometimes contradictory?

As for the PR algorithm, do you take issue with any specific point that I've raised?

[deepsand]

Are you trying to say that a page with 'X' amount of available PR to pass (vote), can pass (vote) 'X' to internal pages and at the same time pass (vote) 'X' to external pages?
Not at all.

Rather, I am saying, given that the PR algorithm as published does not address the issue of PR hoarding amongst a group of related documents/pages, and that there is no reason for Google to be compelled to strictly implement such as published, we've no way of knowing to what extent internal links and OBLs are treated equally/differently with respect to the division of passable PR.

[weegillis]

Giving the user an option would confuses (sic) him even more...I guess she would be okay with it, though, yes? JK--Gender bias not implied.

...as well as disrupt the flow of the site.By flow meaning Back button, yes, I agree. One the other hand, the new window can be closed or Alt-Tabbed away from, and quite possibly made smaller so the user can be aware of the inactive open window. If applied to only OBLs, what flow is really broken?

Now if you refer to the interruption of the document interface, then again, I have to agree. But we're adding an optional behavior, not replacing an existing one, so no harm is really done to the original interface.

Without going to any more length commandeering this thread, here is an interesting discussion from way back in 2004 that was gleaned through Search within for 'external.js' on the main search phrase, 'rel="external" out of many discussions in the results:

Link: need alternative or enhancement to rel="external" method for new window links [Archive] - CodingForums.com (http://www.codingforums.com/archive/index.php/t-35711.html)

Thanks for your invaluable input, Janeth.

[Dubbya]

I like reading posts from people that don't read the threads..

I bought a vacuum on Saturday. It's one of those popular inexpensive "As seen on TV" upright models. It looks very nice but doesn't work well at all. Guess you get what you pay for.

How'd I do there Feydakin?

[crankydave]

Not at all.

Rather, I am saying, given that the PR algorithm as published does not address the issue of PR hoarding amongst a group of related documents/pages, and that there is no reason for Google to be compelled to strictly implement such as published, we've no way of knowing to what extent internal links and OBLs are treated equally/differently with respect to the division of passable PR.

hmmmmmmmm...

Well the original equation divides PR equally between all links that leave a page, after normalization, without respect to whether or not that page is internal or external. That's not a factor in the published equation. Nor is there any reason to assume that links are treated differently based upon internal or external just because they can if they want to.

Dave

[deepsand]

The published PR algorithm was based on the realm of physical academic publications, with each publication being treated as an independent document. "Links" are references within a document, such as those found in a Bibliography and/or Footnotes, which cited other documents; i.e., they are references to external documents. Internal references, such as those contained within an Index and/or Table of Contents are excluded.

On the web, then, the question becomes one of whether a site is, in its entirety, treated as being the equivalent of a book or treatise, or if individual pages within the site are so treated. Given that the published algorithm does not treat pages within a document as being independent entities, and does not therefore count intra-document references as contributing to PR, to assume that the application of that algorithm to web sites & their internal pages grants each such page the status of being an independent document is not merely unwarranted, but antithetical to the concept embodied in the algorithm as published.

While Matt has addressed the issue of using nofollow on internal links to signal ones own evaluation of the importance of a site's internal pages relative to each other, I am unaware of his having made any public statement to the effect that using such on OBLs will serve to increase the overall PR accruing to the site.

[SteveGerencser]

I bought a vacuum on Saturday. It's one of those popular inexpensive "As seen on TV" upright models. It looks very nice but doesn't work well at all. Guess you get what you pay for.

How'd I do there Feydakin?

That was freaking awesome!! Is it one of those cyclone models??

[janeth]

That was freaking awesome!! Is it one of those cyclone models??

No one really does carpet here, everything is tile.

Although I do have a clone not a cyclone just a clone of a want to be vacum for my truck.

Does that count?

[SteveGerencser]

Only if it leaks PR when you are using it..

[williamc]

Only if it leaks PR when you are using it..

Ok dang it all, that was a perfectly good cup of coffee....

[janeth]

Only if it leaks PR when you are using it..

And it does and very much like Google it only has a limited amount it can leak and has to be divided amoungst all the holes.

If I plug one whole it will increase the amount of leakage between the remaining holes.

[ctabuk]

In that case you are going to have your work cut out for you trying to get enough inbounds from outbounds. Best get cracking now mate.

I do find it remotely funny tho that you started your posts in this thread about not going off-topic, then proceeded to take the thread off-topic. Classic. :)

Good luck with the book :)

Well, my theory worked - for 'Captain Blood' my page ‘Captain Blood’s Pirates’ by ‘David Castle’ New Historical Fiction Books: The Adventures of Michael Fane (http://www.newhistoricalfictionbooks.co.uk/captain-bloods-pirates-by-david-castle/)
just made page 2. No inbounds, other than natural attachments. Purely out linking

[williamc]

ctabuk: Excellant, now to hit front page. From a slightly longer look, it would appear only the top 8 listings are actually competing in a meaningful way, so it will be interesting to see future results.

Of all the IBL's to that site, I see 99.9% of them from this forum, seors, webworkshop, etc. forum signatures. A few blogrolls that look 'manually inspired', and a sitereportcard link. The forum links, sitereportcard, and your internal linking is more than enough to take page 2 for that term easily. Let's work on page 1, pref top 5.

[SteveGerencser]

And the obvious navigation links..

I would think that the navigation links alone are enough to make page 2 based on the competitiveness of the phrase.. I'll be interested to see how it climbs up the rankings on it's own..

[ctabuk]

My sincere thanks and rep points to both of you. I must admit I'm rather chuffed!

[SteveGerencser]

No need to be chuffed at all.. Its amazing how we all forget about certain kinds of links as being part of the over all link profile of a page..

[kevsta]

Did you happen to add it after your website got ranked? Did it make any difference? Those in the know want to know! lol

lol no, they go in from the begining when the page / content is first written.

[watto]

Linking out to other useful, related sites (not competitors) only adds value to your site for user experience, and not for SEO purposes.

watto