Google Counts "no Follow" Links for Ranking
- Thread starter richcookies
- Start date
I have shiploads of unique, hand-written comment links posted to relevant sites/articles and 100's of pages of unique content on my own website and my rankings still suck (except for some low traffic KWs). The sites that rank better than me tend to have many do-follow links.
I was implying that the way Google treats "no follow" has changed a bit in the last year. Not just citations. I starting using citations when you were still popping zits on your funny face and jerking off with the lingerie section of the sears catalog. Don't you try to tell me Julian!
I would have thought by now that Google's machine learning bots would decide for themselves whether a link should pass value instead of listening to what the webmaster of the linking site thinks.
There were many webmasters who would nofollow all the links, including article body links in order to hoard pagerank for themselves.
There were many webmasters who would nofollow all the links, including article body links in order to hoard pagerank for themselves.
Another observation, article length is now relevant. I see lots of sites with lengthy keyword rich articles ranking in the top ten.
You have to mimic the structure of the content in the top position to have any chance.
If you outsource your content, you'll be lucky to find a writer to deliver solid stuff. Take for instance a review article:
Brief history of the product
Benefits for using the product
Notable features of the product
Pros and cons based on customers feedback
Your final thought
More relevant sub-headings seems to do fine in ranking.
Start with easy to rank keywords to build credibility. My published articles usually start out from page 4, 5, or 6, and then it will start climbing the serps as the LSI keywords gets noticed by the Algorithms. Mind you, the initial rank might not show up for 5 or 7 days, depending on topic.
In my opinion most of your articles should contain more than 1000 words to have a chance. Unless you have an established domain with credibility.
Just saw your post. Thanks for the shoutout! And yeah, I agree that one should test for themselves before listening to so called "gurus".
LMAO, not a single post in this topic is right.
Nofollow doesn't pass link juice.
Nofollow doesn't pass anchor text.
Citations/implied links don't pass any kind of signal.
There are so many reasons why it's absolutely retarded to believe otherwise, but I guess rational thinking, and more importantly testing, isn't done anymore these days.
Strong first post, I know.
Nofollow doesn't pass link juice.
Nofollow doesn't pass anchor text.
Citations/implied links don't pass any kind of signal.
There are so many reasons why it's absolutely retarded to believe otherwise, but I guess rational thinking, and more importantly testing, isn't done anymore these days.
Strong first post, I know.
You really need to stop analyzing SEO from a pre-maching-learning perspective. At this point the Google ranking algorithm takes in a bunch of variables, builds a bunch of graphs, makes some comparisons, and decides how to rank.
If the algorithm detects some attribute of a page as an outlier (e.g. % nofollow links) compared to some population, it can compare it to other pages that are also outliers, and cluster them all together. Within the cluster, each page can be labeled spam/not-spam, by a combination of manual labeling and machine learning. If a cluster of N pages exists, where every page is an outlier based on the same attribute, then most likely, any page with that attribute is spam.
I'm sure there are manual tweaks to the algorithm, but I would assume that for the most part, the machine learning algorithms decide what to consider important for ranking, based on context of the search. That might include percent nofollow links, it might include bounce rate, it might include percent of american users who click the link. Who the fuck knows. It doesn't matter.
If you want to avoid the spam algorithm, minimize outlier attributes that would cluster you with other spam pages.
If the algorithm detects some attribute of a page as an outlier (e.g. % nofollow links) compared to some population, it can compare it to other pages that are also outliers, and cluster them all together. Within the cluster, each page can be labeled spam/not-spam, by a combination of manual labeling and machine learning. If a cluster of N pages exists, where every page is an outlier based on the same attribute, then most likely, any page with that attribute is spam.
I'm sure there are manual tweaks to the algorithm, but I would assume that for the most part, the machine learning algorithms decide what to consider important for ranking, based on context of the search. That might include percent nofollow links, it might include bounce rate, it might include percent of american users who click the link. Who the fuck knows. It doesn't matter.
If you want to avoid the spam algorithm, minimize outlier attributes that would cluster you with other spam pages.
You know how I know you never do any thinking or testing
Explain me how I've been having great success SER blasting the shit out of Codecademy tier 1's until they nofollowed the links and my money sites tanked?
Nofollow passing link juice and/or anchor text?! Anyone claiming this has absolutely no exerience and what would be the point of CNN ireport, Codecademy and many others nofollowing their outgoing links? It's absolutely retarded to believe otherwise.
I feel like you don't quite understand what some of the more experienced people are saying. We are not talking about No-Follow vs Do-Follow to the T.You know how I know you never do any thinking or testing
Explain me how I've been having great success SER blasting the shit out of Codecademy tier 1's until they nofollowed the links and my money sites tanked?
Nofollow passing link juice and/or anchor text?! Anyone claiming this has absolutely no exerience and what would be the point of CNN ireport, Codecademy and many others nofollowing their outgoing links? It's absolutely retarded to believe otherwise.
What is being said is that if you have a No-Follow link on a site that is in your niche and is extremely relevant to your site and has a ton of positive factors other than just being a "no-follow" link, you will see benefits from said link.
The sites you are mentioning are known spam sites (Yes even CNN iReport).
You know how I know you never do any thinking or testing
Explain me how I've been having great success SER blasting the shit out of Codecademy tier 1's until they nofollowed the links and my money sites tanked?
If you actually had a valuable no-follow link, you wouldn't shit all over it by "blasting the shit out of them with garbage links".
Yes agreed, CNN iReport is a known spam site now, but Codecademy is still pretty unknown and hasn't been used that much. Very easy to check with a site: operator + spammy keyword query. Obviously SerpWoo is a great tool to find these parasites, but because of the nature of the tool it's weeks to months behind. I've got my own custom method to pick them the minute someone's using a new parasite.
Anyway, I'm not even buying the "nofollow from real authority domains pass a shit ton of awesome signals'' argument. I've done numerous test with Wikipedia backlinks and never saw an effect at all. Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.
It still has to be relevant. Codecademy is a computer education website, is your site a computer education site? Do you both target the same keywords? It's not just about Authority.
I literally just did a Wikipedia test (exact keyword and same niche) with great results.
Say your keyword is "fat hoes" if you go to Google and type in "fat hoes" you will find websites related to your keyword. Any website ranking for my keyword in the top 100 should be a target for you to put a link on, do-follow, no-follow, brand mention, ect.
Authority is great if it is outside of your niche and do-follow. But there is no point grabbing no-follow links outside of your niche.