Linking Question?

[critter]

Hello All...

I am currently working on Link Building Campaigns for many clients and something I am curious about. Although I am aware it is believed Google does not give credit for backlinks contained on a page with "links" referenced in the URL, Title, etc....but does it harm you if you still do the swap?

Suppose the proposed partner website is well built, seo'd properly and spam free, but its links/directory is still called links.html. Is this going to hamper my rankings or risk a possible ban?

Thanks in Advance!

Cheers

Critter
:)

[robwatts]

I think too many people worry about minutae and theory.

Thats not to say that it isn't understandable. IMO Google has done a great job in muddying the waters with weird updates. odd algo shifts, and various cryptic messages designed to confuse and obfuscsate and doesn't exactly do a great deal to quash urban myths (no offence google peeps).

Some people like to assert that because at some point or other ( I haven't checked recently so I don't know if its still the case) Google didn't show pages named links or link in the backlink count, and that this in some way meant that all pages that were linked out from such pages might be receiving 0 value, or a possible penalty as a result.

IMO, this is utter cobblers, but like I said its only my opinon, and many a clever so and so would enjoy going to great links to disprove it.

Even if it were true, the determined 'link spammers' for want of a better word, would simply come up with new naming conventions like resources.htm or friends.htm etc. What then? Would Google then ban or penalise all sites linked to from these?

I dont think they would :)

[Daria_Goetsch]

Even if it were true, the determined 'link spammers' for want of a better word, would simply come up with new naming conventions like resources.htm or friends.htm etc. What then? Would Google then ban or penalise all sites linked to from these?

This has certainly been my take on it as well. I would guess it wouldn't be a problem. I haven't gone out and done research on this situation myself, but it makes sense to me.

From my understanding, the algorithm of an automated program using so many computers, such as Google, really has to generalize some of its procedures, it can't be absolutely specific to every detail. We saw how the Florida update created some mistakes in the SERPS, then Google corrected them afterwards.

If you take a test sampling of say ten websites that are similar link pages and see what's going on with them in regards to Google, then compare with the page you are interested in, it may shed some light on the subject.

[steve sardell]

Well that makes three of us. As Rob mentioned there was some talk awhile back that G was not showing links from pages called links. Perhaps this was true for a moment. Now, they are showing links from pages named links. I recommend the name resources not because of G, but because that is what they are-resources, and I personally simply think it has a better sound.

[David Wallace]

IMO Google has done a great job in muddying the waters with weird updates. odd algo shifts, and various cryptic messages designed to confuse and obfuscsate and doesn't exactly do a great deal to quash urban myths (no offence google peeps).
Yes they have and it makes it confusing for algorithm chasers. Whereas a few month ago, backlinks from pages with the term 'links' or 'link' in them were not showing, now they are.

And just yesterday I noticed two separate pages on our sites names 'clients.htm' are not showing backlinks where they did before this last update. If I was an algo chaser, I'd be scrambling to rename those pages. However I am not so they will stay the same and I am sure at some points, backlinks will show once again from those pages and Google will be "muddying" some other waters.

[robwatts]

All this talk of muddy waters makes me think that some of those Google dudes and dudettes might be big blues fans... ;)

[debraM]

All this talk of muddy waters makes me think that some of those Google dudes and dudettes might be big blues fans

Based on the techno bop stuff they play at their parties, it's doubtful.

Muddy Waters (http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/database/waters_m.html) :cool:

[robwatts]

Hehe Techno Bop! now theres a phrase I haven't heard in ages!

Makes me feel all 19 again...;)