Forum Backlinks - Google Limiting Count?

[ViciousSummer]

With this new update, I recently had my backlinks decline (57 to 43). Which I though was strange since I have well over 100 posts in this forum alone. Does anyone have any theories, or know, if Google limits the count of links from signatures in forums?

[digitalpoint]

I doubt they are limiting links, but the same rules apply. Only PR4(ish) links will show publicly (others are still taken into account). So older threads get pushed back so they are deeper (and lower PageRank). That of course is assuming the forum itself hasn't lost any PageRank value.

PageRank is relative to every other site in the world, so you could add more links, but go down in PageRank if other sites added more links than you did.

[Will.Spencer]

I have also noticed a very bizarre phenomena where, for a short time during a PR/Backlink update, my backlinks will fall about 40% before rising to the correct levels.

I have seen this happen through several update cycles. I suppose right now is when I should be trying to figure out why I see that!

[Smyrl]

I have a site with 56 backlinks previous update. Now is showing 23. I have no forum backlinks for this or other sites. My backliinks appear to have plummeted across the board.

Shannon

[Will.Spencer]

More on topic, I don't think Google is limiting forum backlinks, I think it is limiting backlinks from the same URL.

One of my sites has gone from 13 backlinks and a PR of 5 to 125 backlinks and a PR of 4.

And this was even with my brand new DMOZ listing!

Most all of my sites were hammered this round because of a name change to my largest site. The old URL is a PR0 and the new URL is also a PR0. A PR0 with 210 inbound links, but still a PR0.

I now begin the 4-6 week wait all over again...

[ViciousSummer]

From what I've noticed so far, this backlink update is showing significantly lower totals for everyone. Has anyone seen an increase thus far? It would be interesting to see what the is difference between sites that show an increase versus sites that show a decrease.

[Will.Spencer]

At least two of my sites did show a backlink increase.

The one mentioned above which jumped from 13 to 125, and another which jumped from 58 to 98.

These were both a result of adding more links. <grin>

[stripersonline]

Has anyone seen an increase thus far? It would be interesting to see what the is difference between sites that show an increase versus sites that show a decrease.

I saw an increase from 41 to 86 Google listed backlinks.

I'm noticing some strange things going on still...I wonder if this update has balanced itself out or if there's still some more shaking up to do?

[Smyrl]

I have gained one backlink to site which was new at the time of the last update. This truly is the only backlink I have aquired. I have acquired none for my other sites. So far things look brutal.

Shannon

[relaxzoolander]

From what I've noticed so far, this backlink update is showing significantly lower totals for everyone. Has anyone seen an increase thus far? It would be interesting to see what the is difference between sites that show an increase versus sites that show a decrease.
i am seeing lower backlinks also summer. :(

[eCommando]

My backlinks jumped quite a bit but it's because I have more links than before. I am not sure if some of the links I had were dropped. Also I am not seeing a lot of links that should be there -- links that I got like 2 weeks ago are not showing up. I guess my suspicion was right; the links that are showing now are links that were there a while ago. So next update they should show the links from 2 weeks ago.

[SEbasic]

My backlinks jumped quite a bit but it's because I have more links than before. I am not sure if some of the links I had were dropped. Also I am not seeing a lot of links that should be there -- links that I got like 2 weeks ago are not showing up. I guess my suspicion was right; the links that are showing now are links that were there a while ago. So next update they should show the links from 2 weeks ago.


Exactly what I am seeing...

I've gone backlink crazy the last few weeks...

Yet my backlinks are not all showing up...

I've chacked some of the high PR sites to make sure the links are still in place and spiderable - which they are...

Real odd...

[Will.Spencer]

With this new update, I recently had my backlinks decline (57 to 43). Which I though was strange since I have well over 100 posts in this forum alone. Does anyone have any theories, or know, if Google limits the count of links from signatures in forums?


One more thought... if you have two posts in the same page of a thread - they will very possibly count as only one link.

[DarrenC]

Hmmm everyone I have spoken to this morning are reporting that backlinks have being reduced. Doing some checked on my backlinks, I have some sites which are PR0 that are listed on Google.

Has anyone seen any forum backlinks added in this update?

Darren :)

[mcdar]

Yes, Forum Backlinks have been added! This can be seen in our experiment in this forum.

A nice tool that Shawn didn't write -- hard to believe... (http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=256&page=55&pp=10)

We jumped from two links to 85 links from this forum.

REMEMBER though, only links from pages ~ PR4 and above will show up in a link:www.domain.com search.

This dosn't mean that ALL links less than that are not counted. They are just not visible in the results.

Also, my main site lost 50 links this past update BUT, with many sites losing PR, the links may still actually be there just they are "below the Google radar" now (i.e. now PR3 or less).

[Arnica]

One more thought... if you have two posts in the same page of a thread - they will very possibly count as only one link.
Yes for the threaded view but Google also picks up the individual post pages so you do get at least one backlink per post - sometimes two. :D The single post pages start with a lower PR though so tend to show up in the backlinks later than the threaded view.

It would be interesting see if large numbers of backlinks, all from forums.digitalpoint.com, have a significant impact or whether Google will dampen their effect above a certain threshold.

Mick

[stripersonline]

Also I am not seeing a lot of links that should be there -- links that I got like 2 weeks ago are not showing up.

I've been working on a set of pages for a couple weeks - it seems as if the latest backlink update/PR update was done on data that was crawled about 10 days prior to the update. In other words, some of the sites I had linked to were showing a page from my site as a backlink - even though I had removed that page 8 days earlier. Yet when I checked their cached copy of the page it correctly showed the "this page has moved" cached copy that had no external links at all.

I think this data/backlinks update lag was due to Google making substantial data or algo changes at all their datacenters.

Another thing I'm noticing - does anyone see a single referrence in their backlinks from sites that name their links page "links.html", "links.htm" or "links.shtml"? Cause I can't find any at all in my backlinks - or the backlinks of others that I've checked. Apparently, Google is starting to take some kind of issue with flat out "links" pages with the word "links" in the anchor text.

Maybe one of these projects test pages can confirm that one, it's bugging me :)

[digitalpoint]

That is the buzz going around the last few weeks (that Google is not passing along PR or back link credit from pages named links). I was skeptical myself at first, but I found some PR8 link pages that were not link exchanges (basically an internal site map), and sure enough. They didn't show as back links with the link: query.

[jarvi]

Have to agree on the links.htm, links.shtml etc issue. I have one site that has links.php, links2.php and the pages are over two years old and they are not showing as backlinks to the sites appearing on those pages.

Do you think it is just the single word links, as I do see back links from pages with word_links.htm and similar variations?

[digitalpoint]

Well, if you have a links page, I would think it would be best to simply name it something that doesn't have "link" in it. :)

[SENewbie]

Actually my guitar_links.html PR4 page is showing up when I check backlinks to my homepage. But given that this seems pretty new its probably a good idea to change it to something else.

[stripersonline]

Well, if you have a links page, I would think it would be best to simply name it something that doesn't have "link" in it. :)

Good point :) Currently, Google seems to only have a problem with pages named "links.___" - I think the anchor text is important as well, the few "links.__" pages I've seen in backlinks have anchor text other than "Links".

Pages like "guitar_links" are showing up just fine - I guess it tells Google that it's not just a plain "links" page and that's, currently, good enough for them ;)

But the best suggestion would be quoted above - if possible, use a different name - I changed my "links" page into a "resource section" - it helps the few folks I've linked with because they'll get more PR from less crowded pages and there's no question Google will transfer that PR. And I get 10 pages to utilize for links....errr....resources ;)

[GuyFromChicago]

From what I've noticed so far, this backlink update is showing significantly lower totals for everyone. Has anyone seen an increase thus far? It would be interesting to see what the is difference between sites that show an increase versus sites that show a decrease.

I had a couple sites up and a couple sites down. Most of the ones that went down are due to dropping forum backlinks which is to be expected.

[disgust]

I disagree with shawn on this one.

I doubt google discredits pages called "links"- in fact i'm almost sure of it.

some "links" pages show on our backlinks queries.. but if you're worried I guess it doesn't hurt to change it

[GuyFromChicago]

I doubt google discredits pages called "links"- in fact i'm almost sure of it.

some "links" pages show on our backlinks queries.. but if you're worried I guess it doesn't hurt to change it

Google might be making an effort to do this, but as of today I still show ibls to some of my sites from pages named "links".

[digitalpoint]

I disagree with shawn on this one.

I doubt google discredits pages called "links"- in fact i'm almost sure of it.

some "links" pages show on our backlinks queries.. but if you're worried I guess it doesn't hurt to change it

Do you have an example of one?

[ZanderXML]

From what I've noticed so far, this backlink update is showing significantly lower totals for everyone. Has anyone seen an increase thus far? It would be interesting to see what the is difference between sites that show an increase versus sites that show a decrease.

I have increase in PR from PR5 to PR6 and backlinks changed from 256 to 535 for http://gameguru.ru/