I have a question about "the natural link building" penalization...

Discussion in 'Google' started by Sean-Pollock, Sep 13, 2007.

  1. #1
    So, google wants to see natural link building trends in your site, but say your site at launch almost immediately recieved.... 10k or 5k backlinks, and your traffic was huge, your content was frequently updated, you had tons of social bookmarking listings. Would google penalize you for getting all this so quickly? As it is not natural?

    Also the same thing, if it happened on a older domain (say 3/4 of a year) that was already indexed but with next to no backlinks.

    Thanks,
    Sean Pollock
     
    Sean-Pollock, Sep 13, 2007 IP
  2. adwordaffiliate

    adwordaffiliate Active Member

    Messages:
    760
    Likes Received:
    22
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    58
    #2
    Depends on the trust of the domain, more Trusted domains can get backlinks much quicker without tripping any filters.

    They also look at Anchor text, if you get 500+ inbound links all with the same Anchor text then it'll trip the filter.
     
    adwordaffiliate, Sep 13, 2007 IP
  3. IEmailer.com

    IEmailer.com Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,864
    Likes Received:
    27
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110
    #3
    Try to use more than 10 anchor text in your backlinks and you will fine.
     
    IEmailer.com, Sep 14, 2007 IP
  4. billybw

    billybw Peon

    Messages:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    25
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #4
    I think Google has probably done a lot of research and testing on how to tell if a site is acquiring links naturally.
     
    billybw, Sep 14, 2007 IP
  5. flash902007

    flash902007 Banned

    Messages:
    750
    Likes Received:
    6
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    in my opinion google would deem that as un-natural as no site gets launched and instantly has 5/10k worth of back links, hundreds of articles digged etc.

    its much safer for you to aquire all these things over a number of weeks, rather than days.
     
    flash902007, Sep 14, 2007 IP
  6. Forrest

    Forrest Peon

    Messages:
    500
    Likes Received:
    25
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    If your traffic is huge from all these other sources, what does it matter how Google sees you? Ideally you don't want to depend on search referrals anyway, because the Google Dance can cause minor earth quakes. Google traffic should be the icing on the cake, not the main course.
     
    Forrest, Sep 14, 2007 IP
  7. nlgordaz

    nlgordaz Peon

    Messages:
    138
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    oops delete me
     
    nlgordaz, Sep 14, 2007 IP
  8. Sean-Pollock

    Sean-Pollock Peon

    Messages:
    696
    Likes Received:
    18
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    That's the kind of tip I was looking for :) Thanks.
     
    Sean-Pollock, Sep 14, 2007 IP
  9. TVS TELEVISIONS

    TVS TELEVISIONS Peon

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    I thought the idea was to optimize keywords that make it to the top natural listings on page one to grab traffic looking for whatever you have optimized for.
     
    TVS TELEVISIONS, Feb 20, 2009 IP
  10. vansterdam

    vansterdam Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,145
    Likes Received:
    120
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    245
    #10
    I agree with the comment above about this penalty being more about websites that quickly get many links with the same anchor text. I don't think you would necessarily get penalized if those links used a variety of link anchor texts. The link anchor text variety is one way that Google analyzes how natural the links are. They can also look at link patterns over time. Google knows that some websites may get a lot of links all at once, but if that page is still relevant they should keep getting links after that initial surge.
     
    vansterdam, Feb 20, 2009 IP