26 replies to this topic

[Michael Martinez]

I'm not sure what you mean about typing www.mydomain.com into google search.  When I do that, I only get the home page.  The only other thing I see there, is the sites that link to my site and that gives me 129 sites.  I will definitely look into my referral traffic from Google only, that's a good idea.

The quotes and the slash are necessary in the query. I'll demonstrate with "highrankings.com".

If you search on the URL for this domain, Google offers you several options, including "Find Web pages that contain the term 'www.highrankings.com/'". If you click on that link, you will find that the query string looks like this:

"www.highrankings.com/"

This is a method I've been recommending people use for over a year. Google has recently begun advising people to use it, too (I doubt they have been much influenced by me, but it does tell you a lot about how your Web site is being mentioned on the Web).

The results can be modified. For example, if we want to exclude all of highrankings.com's internal references, we can use the site: command to exclude it. The query string looks like this:

"www.highrankings.com/" -site:www.highrankings.com

You usually get more than links with this report, but you at least have a fairly accurate upper bound report on actual links that Google has in its index. No guessing on the basis of what other search engines know.

Now compare those searches to a link search for highrankings.com and you'll see that you're getting far fewer results than before. The results from the link search are not anywhere near the actual number of links Google knows about.

[Jill]

The only problem with that method, Michael, is that Google also shows in it's results pages that simply have the URL on the page, but not in a clickable, followable link. I truly doubt those count towards link popularity.

They also show PPC ad links in those results, which they also don't count towards link popularity.

It's a good way to see some additional stuff that you may not otherwise see, but it's not a very accurate way of counting backwards links, if you're attempting to do that. I personally prefer to look at the backward links in Yahoo and if I care to know if Google has the same links, I just do a view cache with the toolbar on the links.

Of course, I rarely go looking to see what backward links I or my clients have, because it really doesn't matter anyway. They are what they are, regardless of whether I do a backward link check or not!

[Michael Martinez]

I'm sure a few people like Brett Tabke have figured out how to extract the links. Most people don't invest the time and resources into deep-searchng Google the way he and a few others do.

And I agree with you wholeheartedly. I don't track backlinks, either. There is no reliable method for getting them, but people still want to know.

If Google tells you that you have at least a hundred links, unless you're competing for "real estate", "pizza", or "search engine optimization", that's about all you need to know in most cases.

[Jill]

Well I'm kinda competing for "search engine optimization" but I still don't really care what number any engine says my backlinks are. I just don't get what I would do with that information!

:frog:

[Rajesh]

So you're saying that most of your links are all from your own network of sites?

Hi Jill

Are there any differences if you have link from own network or from others. As per know it will benefits for your site if you have link from different IPs.

Thanks

[Jill]

Are there any differences if you have link from own network or from others.

Well, only if you're somehow trying to artificially inflate your link popularity by having those links. (Meaning, they really don't make sense to be there.)

[Rajesh]

Well, only if you're somehow trying to artificially inflate your link popularity by having those links.  (Meaning, they really don't make sense to be there.)

Ok Jill i agree with your points but let suppose if you have link from good product related site from same network and in other ways if you have link from different IPs So my doubt is there any difference if we are concerns over ranking in Google.

[chompy]

I just laughed so hard when I read this line, that I had to reprint it here:
"Instead of coming to the conclusion that the change didn't cause the ranking issue, they instead believe they've angered the search engine gods and head to the forums to find out how to beg forgiveness." 

But all that aside, here's one that really works... stand up, jump on one foot three times and yell, "Google Google Google."

Yup, these lines are really funny. Scotty sure writes a lot of interesting things.

[Jill]

suppose if you have link from good product related site from same network and in other ways if you have link from different IPs

IPs have nothing to do with it. If you have a link from your network or someone else's network that makes sense to be there from your visitor's perspective, then it's a good link. 'Nuff said.

:frog:

[renken]

Michael, thanks for that clarification. Very interesting stuff that it pulled up.

Well I'm kinda competing for "search engine optimization" but I still don't really care what number any engine says my backlinks are.  I just don't get what I would do with that information!

I'm also not exactly sure what you can do with just the number of backlinks, but numbers for different variables can be helpful to watch trends.

[Michael Martinez]

Ok Jill i agree with your points but let suppose if you have link from good product related site from same network and in other ways if you have link from different IPs So my doubt is there any difference if we are concerns over ranking in Google.

There is no documented penalty imposed for internal linkage. As Jill said, if it makes sense to have links in place, they work just fine.

Think of all the sites that embed links to their home pages and site maps on every page. Those links don't cause anyone to lose listings in the search results.

Some people suspect the links might be filtered out, but I seriously doubt that is the case. However, if we assume for the sake of discussion that Google does filter them, then at best you're only getting a minor boost and at worst you're not hurting yourself.

In reality, I've watched many sites build strong search results listings through internal linkage. Some second-tier (or maybe third-tier) news sites have hundreds of thousands of internal links built through their networks. These sites maintain solid positioning through virtually all the Google redesigns. I'm talking about the worst-case scenarios where some of my own link-popular sites will drop out of the listings. Strong internal linkage can keep a site afloat. Most of the sites with that kind of stability add content pages every day and they have been adding content pages every day for years.

They have solid, strong track records and, yes, they have many inbound links, but their internal links make up 60% or more of their links.

I've only seen a few professional spammers match that kind of content. And they work hard to maintain their listings. Those are the guys who don't spend their days helping other people in the forums. The vast majority of large content sites have to get that content through natural construction. It takes time.

But when you reach that point, your positioning is pretty darn solid. I can only think of a couple of these mega sites that have lost rankings during Google upheavals, and those losses (if I recall correctly) coincided with other, internal factors, like site redesigns.

[Rajesh]

Nice reply by Jill and Michael

Thanks to both