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
- - - - -

How To Do It Right ?


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#31 reseo

reseo

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 01 June 2014 - 09:36 PM

I basically wanted to make sure that the topic "internal linking" covers actually two topics:
a) the importance of internal link structures for spiders and crawling
b) the importance of internal link structures for link-juice


@VIDEO_001+ VIDEO_002: Spiders
somehow ... I get the impression that the moz article is a bit over the top... I mean.. regarding the spiders... I think so, because we also have the sitemap we can use to identify pages for crawling... so basically saying, I think the link network seems to be not as important for crawling but more important for link juice....

However.. would be great to know what you think about the 3 Link Options I pointed out in my videos 1+2.

@VIDEO_003: Link-Juice
not sure if someone had already a chance to see what I mentioned in video 3:
I am talking about LINK-JUICE only plus the possibilities of an ideal internal CIRCLE-FLOW - or call it link juice optimization !

I would be really curious to know what you all think about a "good" way to setup an internal link structure - especially considering the setup of an internal link structure to optimize and control link power. Focusing on a VIP (Very Important Page), or call it Landing Page.

Edited by reseo, 01 June 2014 - 09:49 PM.


#32 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,099 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 02 June 2014 - 06:51 AM

 

or call it link juice optimization

 

No, no let's call it what it really is, .... fanciful bull poo.gif!

 

YOU cannot decide how "link value" is going to flow. if search engines decide that you are deliberately manipulating it, your "link value" is HISTORY.

 

Disclaimer:

This is either going to be patronising or ranting; I REALLY do NOT care how you take it, so.

 

 

 

For **CK'S sake GIVE up your stupid and pointless obsession with control over SE crawlers.

 

They DO NOT follow your navigation along your  "well thought out" path they go WHERE THEY want and how they want.

If they decide to start crawling your site in what you consider the "middle", they will!

 

If they decide to start at the END and work backwards they WILL!

 

 

Just get the damned site BUILT instead of prevaricating around with all this meaningless "scientic" GARBAGE.

 

PEOPLE buy things. search engines DON'T.

 

PEOPLE don't give a TOSS about pyramids, circles or linear navigation. ALL they care about is "How do it get to what I want NOW!

 

Search engine "rankings" or referrals are NOT YOUR CONCERN; EVER

 

They will just happen after you create for PEOPLE and market to PEOPLE.

 

Take off those ****ing MoZ branded blinkers and take a good long look at the REAL WORLD of Search.


Edited by chrishirst, 02 June 2014 - 06:53 AM.


#33 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,157 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 02 June 2014 - 08:59 AM

While that's true, Michael, they won't give very much (if any) weight to pages that aren't linked to very well. So it would be foolhardy to expect search engine traffic to them. 

 

I'm just answering the technical questions.


Search engines do not 'know' when a domain is registered unless the registrar posts a link in a "recently registered" page, so they cannot "immediately" go try to fetch the root URL content.

 

We can argue about angels dancing on the heads of pins all day and we can speculate on how search engines find out about newly registered domains but they show up very quickly when I am setting up new domains.  I've seen that behavior in the server logs for years and it's consistent and that's all that need be said on the matter.



#34 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 7,099 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 02 June 2014 - 10:33 AM

 

 I've seen that behavior in the server logs for years and it's consistent and that's all that need be said on the matter.

Not really, it is anecdotal not evedential, so should not be presented as fact. Because we all know  that the flimsiest of anecdotal "evidence" today, is next months "expert" tip and a proven fact in six months time.



#35 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 33,003 posts

Posted 02 June 2014 - 10:36 AM

There is no doubt that Google indexes URLs regardless of whether there are links pointing them or not. And they have been for a very, very, long time.



#36 reseo

reseo

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 188 posts

Posted 02 June 2014 - 12:15 PM

Hello Hello,

 

holly molly..  haha.. I am sitting here with a big smiley face and yeah..  I take your input very very good... I am usually a very funny guy and you know... rankings, seo, and lot's of other stuff in live... I am just digging to learn a bit more... so nooo worries at all, I take your comments really with humor. Plus I am getting lot's of "understanding" out of it - so please no worries. In general I wanted to say something: I realized in some other forums that people start to fight about things...  and I always think... wow.. really ? Why ? 

 

You know.. it's like with ice cream.. some prefer vanilla, some chocolate...  but if someone prefers vanilla.. I will not blame him and ask him ? What ? just vanilla ? That means, if you don't like chocolate, you are my enemy, because you don't like chocolate... haha

 

holly cow.. I've seen these ridiculous arguments all the time.. not just on forums, also in real life.. and you now what...  I think people take it to serious...  from my perspective.. you can have different preferences, for some it works better, for some not.

but so be it.

 

And yes.. regarding the spiders... actually I am not trying to manipulate anything... my goal is to understand a bit more the technical background.. that's all.

And combined with some over the top articles from moz, and just pulling portions out of the cake... it's getting pretty easy .. yeah.. I would say overwhelming ...

 

@chris:

soo.. yeah.. even if I don't know you.. I pictured your nice avatar face .. how you sit in front of your desktop and typing your comments...  thinking about: this guy is just nuts, what does he not get ? hahah....

no worries, I appreciate having these conversations.. and I am really stoked about it having people spread out all over the world but having the same interests !!!

 

 

@Jill:

yes.. thx.. see .. I guess this is what I meant..  the crawling happens anyways..  and my conclusion regarding the moz article... yeah, it makes somehow sense what they wanted to point out.. but quite frankly, after digging into that topic a bit more I realize it's just over the top.. what I mean is.. they are pointing out a possible issue, that 99% of the time doesn't really exist..  I mean, the crawling issue they showed... spiders and crawling is sooo good these days..  you also have the sitemap etc.. I would say, in my experience, all my pages have been always indexed, except the ones I excluded from the robots.txt file.

 

So to close the spider and crawling chapter...  this is what learned.

 

 

 

@Link-Juice:

Soo.. this still might be worth a second look.. like I pointed out in my video.. there are many people out there claiming you can control and optimize your internal link-juice.

Somehow it makes sense... however, till today.. I was never able to see a practical example .. someone who laid out a super simple graph with two pages and a few posts to demonstrate his idea and vision about a good functional internal link structure.

 

I am more a visual guy.. so I thought.. if I can just illustrate one example (which can not be taken as a blueprint, because that one and only perfect solution simple doesn't exist) but .. can taken as ONE EXAMPLE that poeple agree on and say:

you know what..  we all agree on it, this would be a good internal link structure.. that might work very well for users, and you will not run into technical issues .... Boom.. 

 

that's actually it.. so that was my whole idea behind, my whole intention.... to get one example laid out how the anchor links are connected...  you know... 

and I still love the idea to work out one simple graph.. or one simple illustration.. you name it, you pick the topic.. doesn't matter if the root domain is about cherries or cookies... lol;

 

sooo that being said, I hope this all makes sense now from my perspective.

 

However.. I really appreciate having you all around here....

 

well then.. happy "highrankings" to everyone,

let's keep rocking ...  :hatwhite:  :victory:  :hi:


Edited by reseo, 02 June 2014 - 12:20 PM.


#37 Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez

    HR 10

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,157 posts
  • Location:Georgia

Posted 02 June 2014 - 02:20 PM

Not really, it is anecdotal not evedential, so should not be presented as fact. Because we all know  that the flimsiest of anecdotal "evidence" today, is next months "expert" tip and a proven fact in six months time.

 

Well, it's a fact I have documented on many Websites (both my own and many others).  It's an indisputable fact that it doesn't take much effort to get content indexed, too.

 

As for any semantic arguments you want to raise, sorry, I have no time for fun and games today.

 

Search engines are very good at finding new Websites.  I'll leave it at that.


Edited by Michael Martinez, 02 June 2014 - 02:22 PM.

  • Jill likes this




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!