Tedster, administrator of the WebmasterWorld, recently posted a thread at WebmasterWorld.
The thread was related to the discussions that were going around an updated Google patent named Information retrieval based on historical data.
In any event, Tedster has indicated a lot of abstracts that are new in this document. I would like to extract some of them.
…if the content of a document changes such that it differs significantly from the anchor text associated with its back links, then the domain associated with the document may have changed significantly (completely) from a previous incarnation. This may occur when a domain expires and a different party purchases the domain… All links and/or anchor text prior to that date may then be ignored or discounted.
So now you got it right! It states that it is not just about changing the domain name registration information. It is because of this fact that a lot of people who buy sites, try to keep the same form, same style as well as the same category of content on that domain.
We know that "Don't get links too quickly" because it seems unnatural. Now here is the written proof with us:
The dates that links appear can also be used to detect "spam," where owners of documents or their colleagues create links to their own document for the purpose of boosting the score assigned by a search engine. A typical, "legitimate" document attracts back links slowly.
A large spike in the quantity of back links may signal a topical phenomenon (e.g., the CDC web site may develop many links quickly after an outbreak, such as SARS), or signal attempts to spam a search engine (to obtain a higher ranking and, thus, better placement in search results) by exchanging links, purchasing links, or gaining links from documents without editorial discretion on making links. -Tedster
Recommend this story
Navneet Kaushal, CEO PageTraffic is a trusted authority in the search engine marketing industry. He is a featured author at Web Pro News, Search Newz, Website Notes, DevWebPro, SEO Article and Web Help Now among many others.
@pagetraffic
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
This makes sense building links slowly. It’s funny when people on webmaster forums say they got some SEO expert to build 20,000 links in 2 months then end up getting their sites sunk in the serps. I have a 8 and 9 year old site and I think I only have 2400 links for one site and 1600 links for the other. These are natural links not blog posts or forum signature links.
geart info man! it really helps
& besides thats the reason why i say link farms r link spam. new webmasters can easily get caught into it.
Hello and thanks for the article about Google and Linkage Penalties! I social bookmarked your article at the http://www.tutable.com website.
It is interesting to see reference to a typical link-development profile and to the effect of a topical phenomenon. I’d like to understand how the spike associated with news story can be differentiated from a spike created by SEO linkbuilding
It’s great that we know have confirmation about not getting links too quickly. Thanks for sharing.
Good post with useful information. I just like to add that domain age could also be an important factor during the link building, as you have to be very careful whilst building links for new domains.
Great post buddy. Wouldn’t it be cool to know exactly what the metrics are that will trigger an alert or penalty with Google. Some excellent info here.
My tip: Have several pages of articles related to your website’s topic. Use a different keyword search term for each article. For instance, one article might use frequently the term “safe car for girl”, while another might use the term “girl safety”.
i wonder if the recent change from Google (May 2010) had an even greater impact upon this?