SEO ranking factors
-
Hello I am reading SEO ranking factor (very good informations)
and I want to ask: what does it mean:
of linking C bloks to page
I think that: how many(#) links from the same server (C block) links to your
homepage or some pages of your web...
of linking IP adresses to page
how many web links are going to my web and every links are from another server.
if I understand it good, it is no different between, if you have links from
webpages in one server (one C block) or
from webpages on another servers as your web is, because both correlation is 0.25...
THX
Could anybody expalin me, what does it mean: # of External Links w/ Partial Match Anchor Text http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-5
The number of external links and all these external links contain partial match anchor text from my query:
(I am finding in Google "tennis" and see in SERP domain www.usta.com. # of External Links w/ Partial Match Anchor Text: tells me the number how many external links contain partial match anchor text "play tennis, tennis school, tennis info..."? )
-
Thank you very much for your opinion,
I understand the methodology of ranking factors
http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#methodology
, but with ilustration of ranking factors I have sometimes problem...
THX one more time
-
Thanks for the link - I read this before though.
Well, the correlation data is the result of a high amount of websites that have been analyzed and how their rankings were positely/negatively related to a certain dimension, in this case number of different c-blocks/IPs linking.
Even though I agree with you that a more diverse IP profile should have more impact than diversity in terms of c-blocks, it might just be that websites having a high diversity of IPs also have more websites from different c-blocks linking and vice versa.
Just my thoughts...
-
OK I understand, that this is bad when you have all links from on C-block, but why # of linking C bloks to page - have correlation 0.25 and: # of linking IP addresses to page - have correlation 0.25.
I think that correlation: # of linking C block should by less than correlation: # of linking IP addresses.
http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-5
-
http://www.seomoz.org/q/links-from-same-c-block
if I understand it good, it is no different between, if you have links from
webpages in one server (one C block) or
from webpages on another servers as your web is, because both correlation is 0.25
This is the big difference - if you have a vast majority of links from one C-Block or one IP address, both has a negative impact in the same amount. Links should come from a wide variety of different IPs on different c-blocks
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
-
Bad Dates in SERPs, YouTube & Rankings (Nov. 10-18)
We've seen a lot of reports, including Q&A questions, of sites showing bad dates in Google SERPs. I've verified this bug in the wild. There are also reports of bad dates being caused by YouTube embeds, with Google taking the video date instead of the page date. I can also confirm this is happening, although I don't know if it accounts for all of the bad dates. Some people are reporting that these bad dates showing up corresponded with ranking drops. Usually, I would treat that as a coincidence (Google could easily launch an update and have a glitch on the same day), but in some of the reported cases, removing YouTube embeds led to ranking recovery soon after. I can't verify this, but I can't disregard it. There seem to be multiple reports of this recovery. I'm in communication with a Google rep, and they are unaware of any direct connection between a bad date and ranking (such as some kind of QDF effect). I've passed along some data, and they are investigating, but there may have been multiple updates in play that are making for noisy data (even for Google). There did seem to be heavy algorithm flux on November 10th and 18th, with some people speculating the latter spike was a reversal of the former. I have no evidence to support this, but MozCast data and chatter do seem to support both spikes. If you've been affected by this problem and the ranking drops are severe, it's worth temporarily removing YouTube embeds (if feasible). Replace them with direct links (or maybe a linked thumbnail) and have Google re-fetch the page. I can't guarantee it will work, but the risks are low. It's easy to restore the embed. Update (11/22) - Gary Illyes is saying on Twitter that the date problems have been fixed. If you see the proper dates cached, but have not seen rankings recover, then these may be unrelated events.
Algorithm Updates | | Dr-Pete2 -
Less relevant/not optimized competitor sites ranking higher in SERPs?
Has anyone else noticed their rank positions falling to competitor sites that aren't optimized and are less relevant? I've noticed that we've lost some rankings or have dropped over the past few weeks and the competitor pages that have replaced us haven't been optimized, aren't as relevant, and it doesn't look like there has been any updates (looking through archived versions). For example, their main "shoes" gallery is ranking for more specific shoe types, like "sandals", and "sandals" isn't even mentioned in their metadata and they have no on-page copy. Their DA is slightly higher, but our sites have a denser link profile (although, yes, I do need to go through and see what kind of links, exactly, we've gained). Has anyone else seen this happen recently, or have any ideas of why or what we could do to get our rank positions back? My main initiatives have been to create and implement fresh on-page copy, metadata, and manage 404s/301 redirects, but I'm thinking this issue is beyond a quick copywriting tweak.
Algorithm Updates | | WWWSEO0 -
Ecommerce SEO help
Hi I'm having difficulty managing our product pages for optimisation, we have over 20,000 products. We do keyword research & optimise product titles/meta of new products - however there's a lot to clean up but we have done a lot. I find we rank/convert better on product pages so they would be great to focus on - however when an old product is discontinued, the page is removed & we lose authority by creating new pages for similar products - does anyone have any ideas for managing this? This is something done automatically on the dev side in France. I then have the issue of trying to rank category pages - these are highly competitive areas competing with big brands. I'm finding it tough to know where to focus, the site is vast and I am the only SEO. I've started looking into low hanging fruit - but these aren't necessarily the areas which bring in much revenue. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | BeckyKey0 -
Google Algorithm Update .. Author-rank finally kicking in ?
These few days I've been seeing great movement of my sites growing by 70-100% in traffic spikes. Some how I think this has something to do with AuthorRank maybe kicking in now as more of a factor in rankings? Anyone have an idea whats going on ?
Algorithm Updates | | NikolasNikolaou0 -
Increasing Brands/Products thus increasing pages - improve SEO?
We curently have 5 brands on our website and roughly 200 pages. Does increasing the number of products you stock and thus increasing the number of pages improve your SEO?
Algorithm Updates | | babski0 -
Whats next after I rank for many keywords?
I have a client who came to me wanting to know what's next for her as she already ranks in the top 5 for hundreds of keywords. She is right, her rankings for her niche are excellent and there are no relevant keywords for her to try and go after. What would be next to generate traffic? p.s She also has links from just about everyone in the industry that's relevant There has to be more "tricks" to seo besides keywords and link building
Algorithm Updates | | StreetwiseReports0 -
SEO for a starter
Hi I operate in a rather competitive market (IT and project management related training), and my focus is the UK market. I've recently started focussing on SEO. I have been creating content, albeit slowly. I have completed writing a book on my target subject, which is due to go out in a couple of weeks (I've received very positive feedback so far). And I have a decent PPC campaign. To get to decent ranking on Google etc., my plan is 1. Focussing on quality content and publishing on my site (I have about 15-20 articles in the pipeline). Reaching out for guess posts is next, but creating this much content is hard. 2. Get external SEO help for link building and off-page SEO. This is somewhat confusing for me, as I've got offers ranging from blog posts, BMR etc. I have some budget for this, but don't exactly know what to target. 3. Gradual focus on on-page optimisation. I haven't done anything on social front, on FB, Twritter. I do have a solid LinkedIn profile (personal). I have one full time resource available to help me out. What should I focus on? What am I missing? Cheers.
Algorithm Updates | | feneris0 -
What is the difference between Bing and Google ranking factors ?
I know basic SEO factors and i understand On Page SEO title/meta/content optimzation and Off Page backlinking factors. Yet we see different ranking on both SEs so I want to know what are those? Thanks.
Algorithm Updates | | NiceGuy1