You are probably right... Just don't want to get tripped up because I am looking at my feet instead of the road in front of me.
Thanks for the reply.
Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
You are probably right... Just don't want to get tripped up because I am looking at my feet instead of the road in front of me.
Thanks for the reply.
So it will be a mute point because the weight will be spread across so many factors.
So you think they will re-adjust the link factor to keep it from getting a bump?
Per Matt Cutts video "We will be turning that keyword in domain down."
So what will they be turning up?
Figured it wasn't weather based... just sticking with the theme.
How's that saying go... "The good thing about the internet is that you can always test it, the bad thing is that you are always testing."
Excellent point. The more unique the content the higher the value.
If you are running this on a single site then I would say per your example that you have enough unique variables that it wouldn't be considered duplicate content on your website. Giving each City, State, Weather, on a page should solve your problem. As long as the titles and headers of the pages are not all the same. But the only real way to know would be to test it. Validate it with webmaster tools, it will tell you if your pages are too similar.And if you do pull this off let me know. I am always interested in GEO specific content for our pest control service areas.
The problem I see you running into is creating enough unique content so that it's not duplicate content from other weather sites. Maybe run it against a copyscape.com query. That should let you know if the weather info is unique enough. I would test this on a small scale prior to launching the entire project. Just hand create 10 pages and run it against copyscape.
Now if you are trying to create a content generator for mulitple websites based on this same data set then you may run into duplicate content issues. ...But there may still be some value in this.
I agree. Being able to track links you've aquired and monitor links you may be working on is a big plus to Raven's tool belt.
Thanks. I didn't realize he had said this.
I am pretty sure that certain directories still carry authority. Directories are defined by who they let in and who they keep out. So directories with very little barrier to entrance and no quality control that are easy to submit to and/or free will have very little value. "You get what you pay for."
But don't throw out the article submission all together. Just be more selective in where and what you post.
On a side note... Here is a list that SEOmoz keeps of traditional directories that you could use to supplement your articles: http://www.seomoz.org/directories
Like I said.... Google doesn't validate their website... Of course, Danny answered this question for Matt, sooooo.... there is no official statement from Google on this one.
Wow... that is a lot of search traffic. I can see how algo updates can really take their toll.
Funny thing about search is that ~18% of my search is for Branded Keywords. CPC falls under my Search... but very low %. I was amazed at how low the search traffic was for SEOmoz and on how high their social media traffic is. Great diversification by SEOmoz. Really tapping into "the other internet".
Haha.. Nice. Don't give away my secret, but I love writting.
Do "my little ponies" count in your book?
Really?...
Start with the basics.
Comfortable leather seats.
Large Duel Screens
Frig and Microwave
Upgrades
Stocked Frig
Multiple Stall Bathroom
Posh
- Strategy Room - Wall of reference books, Board Games with game table, more of a quite feel.
But really... I am all about the duel monitors with right webmaster suite programs and I am happy... Phone would be optional.
I heard Danny in one of the Moz chats mention that they could move up a few spots in the rankings with a blog push, but it's a temporary gain.
Either way, I feel both are useful, and yes I think keeping a steady flow of links is your best bet for difficult rankings.
I believe you will find verbage about historical data in Google's patent. http://www.seomoz.org/article/google-historical-data-patent
You can also read the following from Google's Page Rank Patent 6285999
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the assigning includes:
identifying a weighting factor for each of the linking documents, the weighting factor being dependent on the URL, host, domain, author, institution, or last update time of the one or more linking documents, and
adjusting the score of each of the one or more linking documents based on the identified weighting factor."
It is not specific on if newer links are better or older links more valueable. Since Google does pay a lot of attention to trends and hot topics I think there could be an arguement for newer links being better, but perphaps only on a trendy base. Meaning new links = quick boost, but old links = authority.
I have come across a number of Twitter users that have 1000+ Followers, and they typically follow 1000+ people. I've noticed as of late that many of these people are found on fewer lists. I also know that many twitter users are selective about who they actually allow in their main twitter stream and therefore create lists to manage who they follow.
Any thoughts on if /how twitter lists contribute to a user's authority and/or influence from the SERP's perspective?
In order:
Secret #1 - Work + Time = Awesome SEO
Secret #2 - Core Group of SEOs to work and share with.
Secret #3 - Keeping secrets secret. ... Sorry had to add that one.
Actually I should probably add that I don't believe there are many true secrets to SEO. Time and work will get you the best long term results.
I don't validate my website... but neither does Google.
I agree "with age comes more links to page". I would also add that the page will have undergone more testing with time and therefore relevance becomes more clear.
The Caffeine udate was claimed to make instant updates to the Index. To me this suggests that as soon as the link is indexed it gives value. However, part of Google's patent suggests evaluation of links over time, so the history of a link could add value to that link. So like fine wine, links with age are worth more.So the value you are looking for may not be achieved until the link itself as aged and increased in value.
What you suggest is that in your findings the value of a link is not immediate for ranking. I believe that is heavily dependant on the difficulty of the desired ranking. I have seen a link or two provide imediate value on obscure rankings. Where as, competitive rankings need the added value of time and quantity.
Take an average for 10 5-star reviews. Not competitive. Easy to move the average by a few more reviews. Now consider average from 100 reviews. Much harder to move average. Take 10000 reviews and a new review is a drop in a bucket.
Very competitive rankings will not see immediate value.
Disclaimer, I am a pest control guy.
I agree with you on buing a .co when a competitor owns the .com.
But I think in time the .co will gain value as the public becomes less fixated with the .com's. But having a .com will always be preferred. Like having a 800 number vs a 888, 877, or 866 number. If I had to put them in order.