34 replies to this topic

[wowdezign]

I always here people say, "don't link to bad neighborhoods". I agree with that thinking. Is the reverse true?

If I link to several authoritative sites, and/or sites that naturally relate to my topic, can that add to my credibilty as far as search engines go? For example, when you write a research paper, doesn't your choice of references add weight to your work?

Just a thought, any feedback would be appreciated along with any other comments.

[qwerty]

It's about six years old, but the bowtie theory certainly supports that idea. On top of that, it just makes sense. Linking out to useful, authoritative sites makes your site more useful.

[Randy]

I would have to say that the theory probably does hold some merit, though I don't believe the advantageous effects of outbound linkage are quite as powerful as inbound linkage.

In its purest form the link analysis all of the major engines have written into their algorithms is trying to determine and assign reputation from linkage. If a trusted site or two links to you they are conferring some of their trusted reputation along to your site. One would think that at some level the reverse is true if you have kept your nose clean, but your site has just not been around long enough to gain any sort of trust or reputation.

In other words, I don't think linking out to good quality, authority sites will make any quick, drastic difference in your rankings. It may be used as some sort of tie-breaker, but early on I don't see it making a lot of ranking difference. However it is certainly a step in the right direction to prove to the engines that you're an authority on a subject and to start building your site's good reputation. Even if that process may take years to ultimately accomplish, it's certainly worth the effort.

Beyond all of that, it's just the right thing to do. For your visitors. Who make decisions about your reputation a lot more quickly than the engines ever will.

[Scottie]

I think outbound links do have an impact on your relevance, although I have no evidence to back that up. Just observations over the past few years. The Florida update (Nov 2004) seemed to really "like" themed outbound links (hence we saw tons of directories in the SERP's) and that got corrected, but I believe it is still there to a certain extent.

[Debra]

It makes sense if you think about it from the co-citation standpoint and where the link popularity/Google boys started.

You need to be able to cite out to authoratitive sources as well as have them cite you to build credibility and trust in your content.

[wowdezign]

Debra, let me see if I understand this correctly. You cite (quote, link, or both) authorities relative to your topic(s) to initiate (or propose) credibility. And, if you receive reference (or recognition) back from the same (or other) authorities, it strengthens your authority and credibility?

Is that somewhat correct?

Incidentally, is there a difference between authority and credibility? I mean, just because someone has authority doesn't necessarily make them credible does it?

[Michael Martinez]

Outbound linkage has helped with Google and Ask for years. MSN also seems to reward it. Most SEOs have been unaware of the value of outbound linkage because of the community's obsession with inbound links. Until recently, there just haven't been many voices questioning the collective wisdom.

Your outbound anchor text is scored a little more highly because it is outbound link anchor text. And the links show which content your page intends to be relevant to.

Relevance has been hijacked by SEOs and undervalued by them. They go looking for relevant inbound links, but they don't give thought to relevant outbound links. If you write a news article about dog nappers, you'll probably link to other stories about dog napping and related crimes. Those outbound links associate your article with those topics.

Spammers have used this principle to usurp listings in the search engines for a couple of years. Google has done a pretty good job of filtering out the spam, but there are occasional reports of people losing their listings to spam pages. The spam pages are deemed more relevant by the algorithms in part because they are linking out to similar content.

Think of it this way, a search engine wants to point its visitors to pages that are not only deemed important by the rest of the community, but which also consider themselves to be part of the community which confers importance upon them.

Everyone and their brother links to Google or Yahoo!. But do all those links really help them get better rankings? Of course not. And yet, you often see their directory categories in search results. It isn't because those category pages have a lot of links to them. It's because they are algorithmically more relevant to queries than other content.

Their on-page content, their inbound links, and their outbound links are all taken into consideration in determining relevance.

Matt Cutts of Google says that Google is now looking more closely at your outbound links. I don't think he means they count more. Google has claimed to use 100+ factors in determining rankings, so outbound links have always been just one of many factors. Now they claim to look at 200+ "signals", and a recent news report suggests they are looking at 300+ "mechanisms".

However many things Google is looking at, it's important to understand that you should use outbound linkage in a natural way. If your content derives value from linking to 15 other sites, then do that. If it doesn't derive value from linking to those sites, then don't link to them.

[Jill]

Outbound linkage has helped with Google and Ask for years.

And you know this how?

[Michael Martinez]

And you know this how?

I did give examples and references, Jill.

[projectphp]

Um, no references. The only one was

Matt Cutts of Google says..

Says where to the first quote?

[Michael Martinez]

Um, no references. The only one was
Says where to the first quote?

Actually, three in that one paragraph which you only partially quoted:

Matt Cutts of Google says that Google is now looking more closely at your outbound links. I don't think he means they count more. Google has claimed to use 100+ factors in determining rankings, so outbound links have always been just one of many factors. Now they claim to look at 200+ "signals", and a recent news report suggests they are looking at 300+ "mechanisms".

I have linked to and referred to these sources (here on the HighRankings Forum) so often in recent weeks, I see no point in linking to them once again.

[wowdezign]

If Matt Cutts did say "more closely", that would imply that they already looked at them, right?

And, in the big picture - to me anyway - it would make sense, especially since we can now use nofollow to express our intentions.

[projectphp]

Actually, three in that one paragraph which you only partially quoted:

Lets be clear here, lest you think I am being unfair. You lead off with, and Jill asked about, this specific quote:

Outbound linkage has helped with Google and Ask for years.

Where is the reference for the view that for years Google and Ask have done this? Matt Cutts blog has existed for year (notice the bad grammar and the intention lack of an s), and he doesn't work for Ask.

So, where are your sources pre-Matt Cutts under two year old blog, to support the statement that Ask and Google have counted outbound links in the past?

I have linked to and referred to these sources (here on the HighRankings Forum) so often in recent weeks, I see no point in linking to them once again.

Michael, the problem is that you state everything with such authority as if it is a fact, and means you have to justify your opinion. I doubt I have ever read, from yourself, an "IMHO", or even the word "opinion" in anything you write. That is fine, but it also means, as you claim fact, that have to support it.

A quick recap: opinion, no sources or facts required. Fact: requires evidence and / or sources.

So, I ask you, is that statement that lead off your post a fact that you can support with evidence, especially the Ask bit as I can't remember seeing you cite an Ask source before, or is it an opinion?

[Michael Martinez]

Lets be clear here, lest you think I am being unfair. You lead off with, and Jill asked about, this specific quote:

Outbound linkage has helped with Google and Ask for years.

Where is the reference...

You're asking for citations (links), not references. Jill said, "And you know this how?"

How I know it is that I take the time to read the Webmaster guidelines pages and the technical literature, and I've cited (linked to) numerous of these pages throughout many discussions here at HighRankings.

Now, if you've got something contrary to the facts as stipulated by the search engines, share it. I'd love to take a look at it.

Michael, the problem is that you state everything with such authority as if it is a fact,

Actually, the problem is that I provide link after link and am constantly rechallenged to provide link after link.

The facts haven't changed since the last time I posted the links. Just because you don't like the facts doesn't make them my opinion.

I doubt I have ever read, from yourself, an "IMHO", or even the word "opinion" in anything you write.

Then you obviously haven't read much of what I write, which explains why you keep asking for the same links over and over again.

What are you going to do about what, in my opinion, should be your three top priorities?

In my opinion, a reinclusion request can only hurt you if you have sneaky stuff on your site that has avoided detection and you're not penalized.

If we assume for the sake of discussion that Google probably knows about as much of the Web as Yahoo! (and in my opinion Google probably knows more),

In my opinion, there is no such thing as a "quality reciprocal link" page (or program).

In my opinion, all of these sites offer unique, legitimate content.

Suggestion: This thread should, in my opinion, be made sticky and restricted to postings which provide citations from and links to reliable Google sources, like Matt Cutts' blog.

For a disjointed expression like the one you suggest, Torka actually offered the best approaches (in my opinion).

I don't state my opinions as fact. But I'm not going to endlessly cite the same papers and Web guides over and over again just in case someone wants to restate the facts as my opinion.

If you don't agree with what I say, it's sufficient for you to say, "I don't agree with what Michael says".

Your humble apology is accepted.

[RPS Inc.]

Ok,

So if you were going to create outbound links to authoritative and relative sites, where would you put the links? In a links page or would you stick it directly on the page you feel is the most relevant to the content?