seo uk

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:51:18 +0100, "Stacey"
<Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

As for links yes, I feel that gaining that amount of links quickly and
looking like site wide can raise a flag. I said this earlier. But Bill told
me it was there for a while and those links came gradual as the site got
bigger and not all at once. So, then I looked at the big possibility that
his site is becoming linked with to much non related things and that site
with those links is also feeling the drop. Could be their is a problem with
it I don't know. But if you are linked with a site that is having some
problems sometimes it can drag you down also. Now this is a possibility and
not a fact. It may be one of those sites that the site that is linking to
Bill has linked out to is banned or penalized and thus making both sites
suffer. Because Bill becomes related to site "C" just because of the link
that is linked out from the site that links with Bill and Bill does link
back to also.

I was just looking at options to see how to help Bill.

You could knit me a rug! Cold here in the Google toilet.

Also Bill's site is
having way to much different things other than SEO...so becoming relevant
about other things.

One or two biographies which have always been there and a host of
poster sites which have grown gradually. But yes, they may well be a
part of it.
The posters need to be hived off but I'm still thinking of the best
way to do it.

Now if those sites that become associated and those sites that are just
associated by linking start becoming to far fetched in the theme department
you could start losing some SERPs as your site is becoming less related and
relevant. Google IMO puts a big part to links in ranking, and Google knows
that you can control you linking habits. If you link to a non related site
or something that doesn't need to be there put a "no follow" on it.

How much of any part of one day or all day does Google expect anyone
to spend checking who links to who links to whom...it's an impossible
task.

Essentially we're talking how many degrees of separation are there
before we become linked to Kevin Bacon? We simply cannot avoid being
associated with bad neighbourhoods by virtue of our being on the web.
Good Guy A might not link to Bad Dude B, Nice Guy B might not link to
Bad Guy C and so there may be no immediate association, but what about
when lots of Xes links to lots of Ys who link to lots of Zs and they
are villains all and A becomes party to this through a wholly
unintentional distant accumulated association?
I can't see that myself, no-one could link to anybody.

Don't know, but I do know that Dave has done some tests and there is a flag
done for to many links to quickly.

I'm not surprised. Google looks for links gained gradually over a
period of time, not gained because someone's gone on a buying spree.

BB
--
www.kruse.co.uk/ seo (AT) kruse (DOT) demon.co.uk
The buffalo have gone

"Big Bill" <kruse (AT) cityscape (DOT) co.uk> wrote

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 15:51:18 +0100, "Stacey"
Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote:

As for links yes, I feel that gaining that amount of links quickly and
looking like site wide can raise a flag. I said this earlier. But Bill
told
me it was there for a while and those links came gradual as the site got
bigger and not all at once. So, then I looked at the big possibility that
his site is becoming linked with to much non related things and that site
with those links is also feeling the drop. Could be their is a problem
with
it I don't know. But if you are linked with a site that is having some
problems sometimes it can drag you down also. Now this is a possibility
and
not a fact. It may be one of those sites that the site that is linking to
Bill has linked out to is banned or penalized and thus making both sites
suffer. Because Bill becomes related to site "C" just because of the link
that is linked out from the site that links with Bill and Bill does link
back to also.

I was just looking at options to see how to help Bill.

You could knit me a rug! Cold here in the Google toilet.

Sorry, I don't knit the rugs. Can't help you there.:-)

Also Bill's site is
having way to much different things other than SEO...so becoming relevant
about other things.

One or two biographies which have always been there and a host of
poster sites which have grown gradually. But yes, they may well be a
part of it.
The posters need to be hived off but I'm still thinking of the best
way to do it.

Yeah but those posters take up a large part really especially since you put
them one every header and footer.

Now if those sites that become associated and those sites that are just
associated by linking start becoming to far fetched in the theme
department
you could start losing some SERPs as your site is becoming less related
and
relevant. Google IMO puts a big part to links in ranking, and Google knows
that you can control you linking habits. If you link to a non related site
or something that doesn't need to be there put a "no follow" on it.

How much of any part of one day or all day does Google expect anyone
to spend checking who links to who links to whom...it's an impossible
task.

You don't have to spend everyday. Just do it once a month and spend a bit of
time on it. I think I spent a couple of hours on a site I was helping and
found some problems. I think after a few days pretty much all of the linking
problems had been found.

Essentially we're talking how many degrees of separation are there
before we become linked to Kevin Bacon? We simply cannot avoid being
associated with bad neighbourhoods by virtue of our being on the web.
Good Guy A might not link to Bad Dude B, Nice Guy B might not link to
Bad Guy C and so there may be no immediate association, but what about
when lots of Xes links to lots of Ys who link to lots of Zs and they
are villains all and A becomes party to this through a wholly
unintentional distant accumulated association?
I can't see that myself, no-one could link to anybody.

You haven't read how you can become associated good enough. Anyone can link
to you and you will not beome associated with them. You need to link back
some how.

Don't know, but I do know that Dave has done some tests and there is a
flag
done for to many links to quickly.

I'm not surprised. Google looks for links gained gradually over a
period of time, not gained because someone's gone on a buying spree.

Humm, well so they say as in theory. I believe what Dave has told me with
his research though.

Stacey