"Links To Your Site" In Webmaster Tools
-
How often does Google update the "links to your site" data. It seems that it has been static for about a month now even though we have made a lot of changes
Does anyone have any idea?
If you have made changes to your links (i.e removed links, updated anchor text, etc.), do you have to wait for this information to be updated to measure the impact? Or is that whenever Google crawls those pages/sites and sees changes there is a adjustment.
Thanks
-
No. I don't know how often the OSE index is updated. Knowing my own backlinks, I know only a part of my links appear.
Google seems to be more thorough with the links, and it is coming from the search engine that is ranking your keywords.
-
It depends. I've seen mine updated with 24 hours and then sometimes it can takes weeks for any update to occur.
Even thought GWT might not be showing your changes, that doesn't mean Google spider and the actual search part of Google hasn't already seen and given you those additions. GWT doesn't seem to tap directly into the Google back end stuff but seems to have its own way of updating.
Have the links change when using Open Site Explorer here?
-
Webmaster tools is generally out of date and incomplete. As far as actual rankings go, they should have an impact when they're crawled by Google, not when they show up in GWT.
-
Mine is updated every few days. Like once a week.
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
-
Will editorial links with UTM parameters marked as utm_source=affiliate still pass link juice?
Occasionally some of our clients receive editorial mentions and links in which the author adds utm parameters to the outbound links on their blog. The links are always natural, never compensated, and followed. However, they are sometimes listed as utm_source=affiliate even thought we have no existing affiliate relationship with the author. My practice has been to ask the author to add a rel="norewrite" attribute to the link to remove any trace of the word affiliate. I have read that utm parameters do not affect link juice transfer, however, given the inaccurate "affiliate" source, I wouldn't want Google to misunderstand and think that we are compensating people for followed editorial links. Should I continue following this practice, or is it fine to leave these links as they are? Thanks!
Industry News | | Terakeet0 -
What Does Your "Campaign" Process Look Like?
Hey Moz Community!! Looking to get a broader view of your own "campaign" process after the initial audit and fixes/implementation of recommendations with a new client. What do you look for/target first? What type of actions/deliverable items do you take have to start optimizing? Hoping to add to and/or improve my own process and see how everyone else plans and implements a campaign! Thanks!! 🙂
Industry News | | paul-bold0 -
How Google could quickly fix the whole Links problem...
A Thursday morning brainstorm that hopefully an important Google manager will see... Google could quickly end all the problems of link buying, spammy links, and negative SEO with one easy step: Only count the 100 best follow links to any domain. Ignore all the nofollows and everything beyond the 100 best. They can choose what "best" means. Suddenly links would be all about quality. Quantity would not matter. Fiverr links, comment links, and all the other mass-produced spam links would literally be ignored. Unless that's all a domain had, and then they would surely be stomped by any domain with 100 decent natural links. Would it be an improvement over today's situation?
Industry News | | GregB1230 -
Sitelinks Disappeard For My Site
Hi Guys I noticed that all the sitelinks for my site has disappeared. Could it be because of recent changes that I made to the site or maybe because I submitted a new sitemap for my site? Should I ask the googlebot to fetch my site now again after I submitted my sitemap and also ask to re-index it? I also read somewhere else that Google could be re-indexing my site and thus still needs to determine what my sitelinks is going to be. If somebody could please give me some advice on this I would appreciate it. Thanks Dave
Industry News | | DavidZA10 -
When will Rand put out "Art of SEO 2nd Edition"? (ANSWER: IN ABOUT 2 WEEKS)
First edition was printed in the end of 2009. Great Book. Needs updating of course. I would buy the next edition if it was updated in an awesome way that I know Rand and the others would do.
Industry News | | stubby0 -
Is a canonical to itself a link juice leak
Duane Forrester from Bing said that you should not have a canonical pointing back to the same page as it confuses Bingbot,
Industry News | | AlanMosley
“A lot of websites have rel=canonicals in place as placeholders within their page code. Its best to leave them blank rather than point them at themselves. Pointing a rel=canonical at the page it is installed in essentially tells us “this page is a copy of itself. Please pass any value from itself to itself.” No need for that.” He also stated that a canonical is much like a 301 except that it does not physically move the user to the canonical page. This leads me to think that having such a tag may leak link juice. “Please pass any value from itself to itself”
Google has stated that GoogleBot can handle such a tag, but this still does not mean that it is not leaking link juice.0 -
Any pointers for my site would be greatly apprecieated and rewarded.
We just started changing all the meta data and adding relevant blog content. Anything I'm missing? Any advise or "after panda" link building strategies? inkfarm.com
Industry News | | ibex0 -
SEO sites were blasted by Panda
Just noticed that lots of SEO sites were blasted by Panda... http://trends.google.com/websites?q=webmasterworld.com&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0 http://trends.google.com/websites?q=seomoz.org&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0 http://trends.google.com/websites?q=digitalpoint.com&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0 http://trends.google.com/websites?q=forums.seochat.com&geo=all&date=2011&sort=0
Industry News | | EGOL3