Does google detect all updated page with new links
-
as paid links?
Example: A PR 4 page updates the page a year later with new links. Does Google discredit these links as being fishy?
-
If you're worried about this then ask the site to do a larger content update on their page rather than just changing a link. Get them to add an editorial note that says when the update happened and why.
A lot of "keyword sponsorship" services only change phrases into links and don't actually update the content. Plus if ti comes down to a manual review you've almost got proof that it's not just some crappy links you've paid for.
-
There are two pieces of advice I can share:
1. As an SEO you should be intimately familiar with Google's Guidelines: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769
2. As long as you are following the guidelines in good faith, you should have nothing to worry about at all.
If you sincerely practice white hat SEO these are not things you need to worry about. On the other hand if you step into grey/black hat at times, then you have a good reason to be concerned.
-
yeah def. But what may seem like legitimate and white hat webmaster to webmaster outreach clearly also resembles paid links. Just hoping to not get penalized for something that represents something else. Which seems harder and harder with every algo update
-
does google detect all updated page with new links as paid links?
No.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to update an older page. For example, an article may have been written in 2010 on a given topic such as "Best Vacation Hideaways in Hawaii". In 2012, another author may write a similar article. The original article author may then offer a link to the newer article stating "for more ideas see [insert new article link].
The above is a legitimate example of why an older article may receive a new link.
With the above noted, almost any authentic technique can be transformed to a black hat tactic. Google has numerous methods for detecting pages which try to manipulate links.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Sitemap Indexed Pages, Google Glitch or Problem With Site?
Hello, I have a quick question about our Sitemap Web Pages Indexed status in Google Search Console. Because of the drastic drop I can't tell if this is a glitch or a serious issue. When you look at the attached image you can see that under Sitemaps Web Pages Indexed has dropped suddenly on 3/12/17 from 6029 to 540. Our Index status shows 7K+ indexed. Other than product updates/additions and homepage layout updates there have been no significant changes to this website. If it helps we are operating on the Volusion platform. Thanks for your help! -Ryan rou1zMs
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rrhansen0 -
Should I write a new page or a blog post?
I am trying to rank for a local SEO term on a website for a national company. Should I write an optimized blog post, or optimized site page? Does it make a difference? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aj6130 -
Pages are Indexed but not Cached by Google. Why?
Here's an example: I get a 404 error for this: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.qjamba.com/restaurants-coupons/ferguson/mo/all But a search for qjamba restaurant coupons gives a clear result as does this: site:http://www.qjamba.com/restaurants-coupons/ferguson/mo/all What is going on? How can this page be indexed but not in the Google cache? I should make clear that the page is not showing up with any kind of error in webmaster tools, and Google has been crawling pages just fine. This particular page was fetched by Google yesterday with no problems, and even crawled again twice today by Google Yet, no cache.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | friendoffood2 -
New website strategy concerning Google Spider
Hello, I have a question concerning a new website. What should I do, SEO wise? Should I place all my content on my pages at once? And thus let the spider crawl everything at once? Or should I place my content in different phases? So the spider could crawl my pages multiple times in some days/weeks time? Or do both ways come to the same result? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarikeP0 -
Google local pointing to Google plus page not homepage
Today my clients homepage dropped off the search results page (was #1 for months, in the top for years). I noticed in the places account everything is suddenly pointing at the Google plus page? The interior pages are still ranking. Any insight would be very helpful! Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | stevenob0 -
Google is displaying my pages path instead of URLS (Pages name)
Does anyone knows why Google is displaying my pages path instead of the URL in the search results, i discoverd that while am searching using a keyword of mine then i copied the link http://www.smarttouch.me/services-saudi/web-services/web-design and found all related results are the same, could anyone one tell me why is that and is it really differs? or the URL display is more important than the Path display for SEO!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ali8810 -
Links on Google Notebook
I have used OSE to look at links of a competitors site and notice they have dozens for links from Google Notebook pages eg http://www.google.pl/notebook/public/05275990022886032509/BDQExDQoQs8r3ls4j This page has a PA of 48 Is this a legitimate linking strategy?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seanmccauley0 -
Google, Links and Javascript
So today I was taking a look at http://www.seomoz.org/top500 page and saw that the AddThis page is currently at the position 19. I think the main reason for that is because their plugin create, through javascript, linkbacks to their page where their share buttons reside. So any page with AddThis installed would easily have 4/5 linbacks to their site, creating that huge amount of linkbacks they have. Ok, that pretty much shows that Google doesn´t care if the link is created in the HTML (on the backend) or through Javascript (frontend). But heres the catch. If someones create a free plugin for wordpress/drupal or any other huge cms platform out there with a feature that linkbacks to the page of the creator of the plugin (thats pretty common, I know) but instead of inserting the link in the plugin source code they put it somewhere else, wich then is loaded with a javascript code (exactly how AddThis works). This would allow the owner of the plugin to change the link showed at anytime he wants. The main reason for that would be, dont know, an URL address update for his blog or businness or something. However that could easily be used to link to whatever tha hell the owner of the plugin wants to. What your thoughts about this, I think this could be easily classified as White or Black hat depending on what the owners do. However, would google think the same way about it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bemcapaz0