Google Ignores everything after 100 links or 100 KB ?

Read somewhere on this forum, but unable to trace the post.

From the Topic Title What is really true ?
Google ignores indexing content which goes beyond 100 links or 100 KB or both ?

Thanks.

 

It's after atleast 100K that it stops.

So yah, you could have a 500K file of high quality content, and Google wouldn't even bother to look at the last 400K of it!

 

google say so,but in fact it seem not

 

Alrite, If I have a webpage with 10 KB of content first, then followed by a 200 KB image, video file or anything except text content.
What does google do in this case ?

Thanks for your time Nintendo.

 

The limit refers to the length of the html text, not the images, videos, or other things referenced by the html.

 

First 100K of text that makes up the file. I have hurd that it might be as high as 120K. I once had a page with a few hundred K of links, and Google didn't go past the first low 100K of it. I quickly broke the big pages up in to smaller files!

 

I have a 161k page indexed by G

 

Google changed the limit a few months ago. Now Google can index, if i'm not wrong, without limit. Search and you'll find pages over 100kb. Found this:
http://www.google.com/search?hs=kgC...nt=opera&rls=es-ES&q=dedicatorias&btnG=Search

The 1st is 214k

 

thanks for replies, satisfied that it goes beyond 100K

 

thanks for clarifiying theres me trying to squeeze everything into top half of page

 

The original suggested limits of 100 links or 101kb are still very good guidelines for any site, whether or not they are actually rules.

100 links on a single page is a LOT of links, not matter what the purpose -- categorize them and break them up into more meaningful groups.

101 kb (text!) is a HUGE web page, especially for dial-up visitors but even for broadband. It's hard to imagine any page that wouldn't benefit from being broken up into smaller chunks.

 

Good point minstrel

 

Yes, very true. But it's nice to know that if you happen to go over that limit for special circumstance...it will get indexed at least.

 

Indexed at last, but do you think most people will wait more than 100kb to download? Internet is plenty of webs, if one result is ennoying, people have thousands of results

 

Those of us on DLS and other fast connections will. One second it's long at all!

 

I disagree, Nintendo. First, 101 kb of text is a lot more when you add scripts, includes, and graphics. Second, faster access doesn't usually translate to more patience but actually less patience. A dial-up visitor may be used to typical load times of 30 seconds or even more on some sites. A high-speed visitor isn't likely to wait arounf for more than 5-10 seconds.

 

BTW, it seems the limit is back to 101k, any pages indexed on or after 30th aug seem to be back at 101k. Anyone else saw this/agree to this ?

 

How does google handles/parses a page like this:
http://forums.techarena.in/archive/index.php/f-129-p--p-136.html
which has more then 400 links in it ? but less then 30KB

Does it ignores the links @ bottom after 100 links ?

 

I've seen posts in forums in the past where people experimented and Google followed links beyond 100 in a page.

Just real quickly, I looked at my new site design where this is a concern for me. Counting headers like <link rel=...> and javascript links, I have 154 links on the home page at http://www.bkweddings.com. I think that it is laid out well, and it is important to me that first time visitors get a grasp of all of the information that is available to them. I certainly don't have an indexing problem with google, although I do have ranking issues (i.e. sandboxed or penalized). 99% of my links are in-site links, and I could reasonably slim them down a little, but to remove 55 links would be detrimental to my overall design. The page itself is 30K and load times including graphics and scripts (totalling 95K) are less than 9 seconds on a 56K modem with connectivity issues (noisy line, etc) because of various server and on page optimizations. (theoretically at least) (hey, I think I just reached a world record in parenthesis in a paragraph)(see. I over do things sometimes, but with good reason it works) (but when you overdo it, at some point it's just too much)

You can look at one of the sites that is a "competitor" of mine that is doing very well in google that has 116 links on their home page- http://www.allweddingcompanies.com/

I think for the design of most sites, so many links just wouldn't work, aesthetically speaking. My goal was to have a strong intra-site linking structure that encouraged full site indexing, gave clear anchor text for the SE's to understand my site theme and page themes, and was also useful to end users. I think I've achieved that, but it took a good deal of work to get to that point.

In my opinion - and I'm just a small fish here - is that if you have a good reason for it, and it fits in with your design, then more than 100 links is reasonable. 100 off-site links would seem fishy, but I don't know that I've ever seen anything like that other than obvious spam sites or extremely large directory pages.

If you consider each page to have a certain "voting power" and that is important to you, then 100+ links dilutes the effective voting power of any single page dramatically.

 

Very nice post, nevetS. Yours is an example of a situation where it makes sense to you to override Google's guidelines with respect to internal links. If you as a designer asks yourself the questions you obviously asked yourself about what does and does not make sense from the visitor's viewpoint, you won't go wrong very often. And that is pretty much what Google tells you in it's "guidelines for webmasters".