Factors affecting google places citation indexing
-
I'm sure we have all been there; filling out yellowbook/yahoo/citysearch/merchant circle citations flawlessly, only to wait months and months for google to decide if they're worth 'attaching' to your places listing.
I still believe that the number one factor for getting them to stick is consistensy of information, however my question is what factors affect the speed of 'stickiness'.
I've implemented google alerts and rss feed/link pinging services to get citations from hotfrog and BOTW indexed almost the same day, however after examing the google places listing, I'm not showing them as listed as citations; which leads me to my next point; that google places could possibly have their own 'indexing rules and speed?'
I've heard several suggestions on how to accelerate indexing, and quite a few of them included building backlinks TO these citations to improve pagerank. Do mozzers have any 'foolproof' ways of getting these citations to 'stick' to google places listings within days, or weeks, instead of months?
-
I think he meant to say QDF. Quality Deserves Freshness.
See: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-friday-query-deserves-freshness
-
What is the DQF algorithm?
-
Thank you, i found this quite helpful.
-
I have experience the same as Darren. In my frustration I did a yahoo placement page for $10 a month, with excellent local search results. Well worth the money. Doing a free bing one now.
-
We have been watching this for a while. In our research we have tried linking to the citation sites, and have had little success. There is no doubt that the principles of places ranking are related to, but not the same as normal organic.
Reviews are very helpful, and next to the normal important areas (profile completeness, address and others) I would put reviews as top priority. Not only on Places, but Yahoo, Insider pages, city search, yelp, Angies, and even customer lobby. I am sure there are more. Recently Places started displaying reviews from the Places accounts owners web site. Seems if you use reviews or testimonial in the URL they may pick that up. This may be an attempt on Google's part, to slow down the number of duplicate reviews. (Those with ears , let them hear). <- not sure what I mean, but I have only had one cup of coffee so far.
Look at the simple fact, that you will rarely find a places account on the 2nd or 3rd page of results that have a significant amount of reviews.
We have stopped using the "usually suspects" for citations, as in the last 5 months they seem to have little value. What we do see working is citations on other "local" sites. Not directories, but related local sites. Much harder work, but Google likes it when we work hard for a citation or link... right?
PS- We are not all that large in SEO, just do local clients , so our research is very limited.
-
It would seem to follow logic that Google would count and attach citations from authoritative, trusted sources. It might help to build links to your citations, if that makes sense.
-
Hi Ilya,
It's a common misconception that the only citations that "count" (or stick) are the ones that Google lists on the Place Page. All the local SEOs I know, myself included, consider the citation listing in the Places page to be about as useless as Google's lame link: command. Google doesn't show you all the citations for your business. Doesn't have anything to do with them getting indexed or not.
Search for your business phone number plus the name of the directory in Google. If you see results, your citation is indexed, and you can move on to the rest of your citation building list.
-
Saibose
The authority sites are fairly established in most areas. They're the citygrid sites like merchant circle, citysearch, etc, also yelp, hotfrog, botw. Then there's the secondary yellow pages like superpages.com, yellowbook, angieslist, brownbook.
The question I'm asking is how to get those sources to STICK once you know what they are.
-
sadly, the Google places listing is one place where the DQF algorithm doesnt work. The things that are mainly considered 9when the user is logged in or personalized search is on is: Proximity of listing to the user or the user's query. No of reviews that are attached to the places listing. The amount of detail you have filled. The number of reliable sources where you have reviews for your entity. Now, the "authority" sources are a big question mark and differs based on the nature of listing you have.
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
-
Does paying a reviewer for an impartial review violate Google's guidelines?
When a company pays for an impartial review from a website, should these links be no-followed? I am confident that paid positive reviews are seen as a manipulation of search, but is paying for an impartial review okay?
Link Building | | RG_SEO0 -
Links Removed from Site but not Google Webmaster Tools
I have a new client who has been fighting to get past an unnatural links penalty. One of the biggest reasons behind it was that they paid to get a followed link/ad on a blog network, well this ad ended up being a site wide link which ended up giving them thousands of back links within a few days. After getting the owner of the blog network to remove the link i manually spot checked a handful of pages and used screaming frog to crawl looking for a link referencing their site. From what i can tell they are all gone. However they are still in Google Webmaster Tools as well as Google's index and it has been a couple months since they have been removed. Does anyone have any advice on getting them removed from Google's entities even though they are already off of the website? Thank you in advance,
Link Building | | kchandler
Kyle0 -
Why aren't my links being indexed
I am building backlinks from similar sources to 2 different domains. Domain A seems to get its linked indexed within a day or 2, while Domain B has virtually identical links that haven't indexed for over a month. Domain A is older and has more authority, and Domain B is hosted on a different server. Any insight into why this is happening? It's very frustrating.
Link Building | | insitegoogle0 -
Why are none of my incoming links showing up in SEOmoz or Google? How do I get good legit incoming links?
There are hundreds of sites that are linking to my website, but nobody is showing it. Google wont display any when using link:eugenecomputergeeks.com, and in webmaster tools it only shows 46 incoming links. SEOmoz shows only 3 links. This just isn't so. Why is this? I DESPERATELY need valid incoming links from well ranked websites , and having lots of trouble getting them. Nobody in town with a well ranked site seems to want to do a link exchange, and I've already made the mistake of buying my way into directories, which didn't do anything good for my rankings. Thanks!
Link Building | | eugenecomputergeeks0 -
Link Spamming or Not? Block Internal Search Results From Indexing?
We are looking at providing our customers with the best experience when performing a site search for a product. Would it be bad SEO practice to have our internal search results show results for all 4 Brands linking to different domains? This would mean multiple outgoing links to other owned sites from the same IP. Is it a best practice to block internal search results using robots.txt?
Link Building | | SEO-Team0 -
When is Google going to sort their act out?
I work with a couple of clients in the finance and debt area. I've been doing loads of work examining the link profiles of the commercial sites at the top of the rankings and 70% of the links I am seeing are low value directories and sites obviously built for links with multiple outgoing links to completely unrelated sources! When I examine the other links their isn't enough value in them to outweigh what looks to me like very obvious and spammy low quality link building. Why can't Google see what I'm seeing - it's so obvious? I know there are multiple factors at play but links like these should offer no value or get a site penalised (isn't that what Google tell us) but these sites still seem to be ranking because of them rather than despite them!
Link Building | | SearchEngineRescue0 -
Google penalizing sites because of press release pages?
Does anyone know of situations i can look up where Google penalized a site because of press release pages (hosted on a non owned major site like prweb or whatever), where the prweb page obtained back links from a group of sites that Google felt was part of a "farm"?
Link Building | | joemas990 -
How Google finds landing page?
whats would be some crucial numbers for mr. Google to chose Landing page over other pages? Your thoughts? Your experience?
Link Building | | DiamondJewelryEmpire0