Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo
- - - - -

Value Of Links From Pages Of Another Language


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 tyggis

tyggis

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 169 posts

Posted 30 January 2010 - 04:45 AM

I got an question in my own forum that I really cant answer. Its a question about links from foreign languages and related languages.

If i got a link from a german web page witch is related to my norwegian web page. Would Google see that as a useful link because the content on the pages are related ? Would that link count less than a link from a norwegian related page? The german and the norwegian language are not related enough so that we can understand each other.
But danish and norwegian are closely related, we can understand each other and many words are the same. Would then a link from the danish site count more than the link from the german site?

Of course Google ideal want to act as a human and treat link relevance like a human, but Google cant really do that perfect by now. So thats why I ask the questions above.

Thanks, have a veeeeery nice saturday smile.gif

#2 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,966 posts

Posted 30 January 2010 - 09:45 AM

I really don't think they've figured out relevance all that well yet. It's more about the popularity of the page that links to yours than whether it's relevant since relevancy is very subjective.

#3 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,130 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 01 February 2010 - 01:56 PM

While I agree with Jill about interlanguage relevance (the translation tools are still pretty bad), I believe that if both pages use similar terms (as in technical jargon or industry jargon) that some minimal relevance will be established. I see this in highly specialized niches.

Otherwise, I think you just need to think in terms of how popular and trustworthy a site is. After all, news sites link out to all sorts of "irrelevant" content and their links (when allowed to pass value) seem to work just fine.


#4 PatrickGer

PatrickGer

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts

Posted 04 February 2010 - 09:52 AM

Interesting topic. I remember wondering something like that myself (being in/from Germany, and being passionate about languages in general).

I remember an SEO who I respect (comes off as a critical thinker not someone who guesses a ton) who (I think) mentioned something along the lines that search engines weren't able to translate content 'on the fly', yet.

I could remember this completely wrong and am not trying to misquote anyone....but it seems to be in line with what Michael Martinez/you say(s).

@Jill:

I would assume that it's not much of a stretch to believe that search engines can tell if there are the same / related keywords on one page linking to another?

Like my example in that other thread..if I have a site on basketball and get links from other websites on which it reads 'basketball' - or related terms such as 'hoops', 'jordan', 'free throw', then I would assume Google & co have a very easy time establishing relevance? (in a similar way that they can establish relevance between a search query and the web pages they list in their results).

I assume when you say you believe they havent figured the relevancy part out too well yet, then you mean mostly that they probably don't really give penalties or devalue links significantly b/c of a lack of relevancy, yet?

(just curious)

#5 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,130 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 04 February 2010 - 04:22 PM

Google claims to score relevance across languages now (they introduced that last year). The idea is that if they cannot find sufficient relevant content in one language, it may be available in another language -- OR they may decide (algorithmically) that a foreign-language document is highly relevant despite a plethora of native-language documents.

I had the impression that this should (most of the time) work for content-poor languages more than content-rich languages like English, French, and German.

Nonetheless, they seem to believe they can determine some minimal level of relevance. However I don't think it's worth agonizing over for link building. The most helpful links in other languages will come from relevant sites because people will be more likely to stay on your site and try to figure out what it says if it seems relevant to their interests.

Search engines want to approximate that kind of match but they still have an uphill challenge in doing that within a single language.

#6 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,966 posts

Posted 04 February 2010 - 11:31 PM

QUOTE
I would assume that it's not much of a stretch to believe that search engines can tell if there are the same / related keywords on one page linking to another?


Of course. But the lack of those wouldn't necessarily mean NON relevance. Which is why it's difficult to judge this.

QUOTE
I assume when you say you believe they havent figured the relevancy part out too well yet, then you mean mostly that they probably don't really give penalties or devalue links significantly b/c of a lack of relevancy, yet?


Nope. I just don't see how they know where one target audience is related to another.

Let's say i'm a basketball fan, I might also like football. But the basketball page doesn't say football on it, because it's about basketball. Would a link to a football site on the basketball site be irrelevant?

Perhaps if you only looked at the words. But not if you understood target audiences.

Now in that example, the search engines could probably figure out that there's a common theme...sports.

But what about target audiences where there isn't a theme.

Wouldn't sports fans also drive cars? So wouldn't it be okay to advertise a car site on a sports site? Of course.

TV advertisers have known this for years. I believe Google knows this too, which is why links that on the surface may seem irrelevant are given all the link juice of any other link. (IMO)

#7 PatrickGer

PatrickGer

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts

Posted 05 February 2010 - 01:10 PM

very interesting - thanks (esp. the part that you believe that a non-relevant link will bring the same amount of link juice (today) as a relevant link...hope I understood this correctly and am not putting words in your mouth :-))

I think we basically meant the same thing, though (sorry if I didnt make my point clear enough):

that in some cases the SEs can determine relevancy (if there are related keywords - or themes such as sport)....but that in other cases they can't tell if one site is relevant to another (and thus wont give penalties or devalue links from such sites..in comparison to sites where they can tell relevancy b/c of similar keywords).

Did we mean basically the same thing? It seems to me like we did, but I'm a bit confused now hehe.

EDIT: I think the only difference was that..I was thinking that links where they can tell that the two websites are relevant to one another (b/c of similar keywords) might still have more value than links from websites where they cannot tell (whereas you said you think it doesn't make any difference (right now)) ...if I understood everything correctly, that is (which I might have not :-))!

#8 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,966 posts

Posted 05 February 2010 - 08:30 PM

QUOTE
I think the only difference was that..I was thinking that links where they can tell that the two websites are relevant to one another (b/c of similar keywords) might still have more value than links from websites where they cannot tell


One would think so, but I haven't seen evidence of it. I've seen what appear to be totally irrelevant links to the human eye seem to help sites rank for their keywords in a BIG way.

While Google might say that relevancy is key, I just don't think it actually is. (Could be wrong, like I said, I haven't studied it extensively.)

#9 Husein

Husein

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Location:Bulgaria

Posted 06 February 2010 - 02:14 AM

I get many links from English websites relevant to my Bulgarian website but really can't see much value. But when i got link from wordpress.org even irrelevant to my website that boost my PR, i can see the real value of that link.

So i think as other guys said it's more about popularity and trustworthy of the site that links to you.

#10 PatrickGer

PatrickGer

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts

Posted 06 February 2010 - 06:41 AM

QUOTE(Jill @ Feb 6 2010, 02:30 AM) View Post
One would think so, but I haven't seen evidence of it. I've seen what appear to be totally irrelevant links to the human eye seem to help sites rank for their keywords in a BIG way.

While Google might say that relevancy is key, I just don't think it actually is. (Could be wrong, like I said, I haven't studied it extensively.)


I didnt mean to insist on that point hehe - it was really just a guess of mine (that links that are clearly relevant would help more). I would most likely take your experience over my pure guess, though.

Another idea I had heard before is that G might be able to compare a site's backlink profile to other websites in the niche...and expect a certain percentage of links to be (clearly) relevant based on ...eh what do you call it - a probability distribution. In that case a c learly non-relevant link might help just as much as a similar, but clearly relevant link....as long as the website's backlink profile doesnt go below a minimum of 'clearly relevant' links. (As in my basketball site might be expected to have at least 5% of its links from other websites where relevance could easily be established...and other than that it doesn't matter). - pure speculation on my part, though...and not really trying to say that's the way it is, but just that it might be..

Anyway, I assume overall your approach (most of the time) would still be to focus on mostly relevant links...b/c of keeping an eye on the future? (just curious)

#11 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 6,956 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 07 February 2010 - 04:40 AM

Been a while since I wrote this

http://www.highranki...mp;#entry200793

I don't see that anything has changed

(the original post is at webmaster-talk.com/the-google-forum/24602-does-good-pr-alone-add-worth-2.html#post233085 )

#12 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,966 posts

Posted 07 February 2010 - 11:52 AM

QUOTE
Anyway, I assume overall your approach (most of the time) would still be to focus on mostly relevant links...b/c of keeping an eye on the future? (just curious)


My approach has always been, and always will be, focusing on links that will bring targeted traffic to the site. If they don't do that, I don't want 'em or need 'em.


#13 PatrickGer

PatrickGer

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts

Posted 09 February 2010 - 07:05 AM

QUOTE(Jill @ Feb 7 2010, 05:52 PM) View Post
My approach has always been, and always will be, focusing on links that will bring targeted traffic to the site. If they don't do that, I don't want 'em or need 'em.


Just out of curiosity - is that your approach, because you're big on 'link traffic' and diversifying risk, too (as Randy and myself :-))?

I was gonna say, that if you believe those links count more (as mentioned in the other thread), than it wouldnt really have to be "targeted" traffic (if G still has such a hard time telling if its targeted or not). But... I just had another thought - isn't it very likely that Google will be able to tell whether a link sends relevant traffic based on user data? if the bounce rate is incredibly high..or if a ridiculously low percentage of the visitors checks out other parts of the page, chances are that the link is from a non-relevant website (I would say).

Then again the question is can Google tell that kind of thing already...



#14 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,966 posts

Posted 09 February 2010 - 09:06 AM

QUOTE
But... I just had another thought - isn't it very likely that Google will be able to tell whether a link sends relevant traffic based on user data? if the bounce rate is incredibly high..or if a ridiculously low percentage of the visitors checks out other parts of the page, chances are that the link is from a non-relevant website (I would say).


If they have access to that data. Not everyone uses Google Analytics though. (Yet)

#15 PatrickGer

PatrickGer

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 285 posts

Posted 09 February 2010 - 12:31 PM

QUOTE(Jill @ Feb 9 2010, 03:06 PM) View Post
If they have access to that data. Not everyone uses Google Analytics though. (Yet)


I must admit this isnt something Im overyl knowledgeable about (Can Microsoft not collect data from IE, for example?!), but I was kind of thinking of this post when typing that:
http://www.seobook.c...es/002272.shtml

I dont really have an idea how much data they have at G, but maybe they already have a ton of data, through not only g analytics, but g toolbar for example, too? (A lot of my friends here in Germany are using G toolbar - then again g's market share here is more like 101% wink1.gif, definitely more than in the US).

Plus in order to make it a quality signal, my guess is that a big enough sample size of website visitors might be enough.

But I do understand that its probably a bit more complicated than that..I know there has been quite a bit of a discussion whether user data is already used or not..heavily or hardly...(including people who probbaly know more about that than myself)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

SPAM FREE FORUM!
 
If you are just registering to spam,
don't bother. You will be wasting your
time as your spam will never see the
light of day!