Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Google Search Operators
Posted 17 October 2006 - 01:58 PM
And it seems that they alternate as to which returns the higher total sites found. I often find myself having to use both to ensure I don't miss anything.
Thanks in advance!
Posted 17 October 2006 - 02:24 PM
Notice that they don't even mention inanchor or allinanchor in their operators help page. All of that said, it's my understanding that the in and allin are very similar to the descriptions for allinurl/inurl and allintitle and intitle.
allin is supposed to show anything with both words in whatever element you're looking into. in shows pages where the first word has to be in the element and the 2nd word can be anywhere in the page.
So in theory, allinachor:blue widgets would return pages where both blue and widgets in the anchor text. Whereas inanchor:blue widgets would return pages where blue is in the anchor text and widgets is anywhere is also somewhere in the page.
Grain of salt though. I don't trust the numbers returned by either one of 'em much given how much Google has been messing with their operators the last several months.
Posted 17 October 2006 - 02:35 PM
That explanation helps. I agree with your point that the operator might be a moving target, but at least now I can "proceed with caution".
Posted 17 October 2006 - 03:09 PM
One more thing...I noticed too that when I use the "allinanchor" G does not highlight the text in the title the way it does when I use the "inanchor" operator.
You know I never really noticed that before. Not that it matters.
Posted 18 October 2006 - 08:23 AM
If I had to guess, Google must not be running the allinanchor through their keyword highlighter before delivering the page. They've said before that the highlighter happens after the fact and has nothing to do with their ranking algorithm.
Maybe the guys who set up the highlighter don't know the operator exists, since it's not on their Operators page.
Posted 06 November 2006 - 05:10 PM
If nothing else you can use the site: operand and then pay particular attention to which pages have the Cached link and which don't.
Posted 06 November 2006 - 11:17 PM
So just wanted to know if they broke it on purpose, he he.
Posted 07 November 2006 - 08:12 AM
The rare times I run a site: type search I usually check both with and without the www. Lately the non-www seems to pull data more reliably, but this seems to change every now and then, so I always check both ways.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users