Just a quick link to a great new SEO article/ paper called Search Engine Ranking Factors that was recently posted on seomoz.org.
The list of SEO heavy weights that contributed is pretty impressive: Danny Sullivan, Dan Thies , Graywolf , Jill Whalen, Donna Fontenot, Michael Martinez, Bill Slawski, Ammon Johns, Scottie Claiborne, 2K, Todd Malicoat, and Rand Fishkin.
You probably couldn’t ask for a more in depth free guide to seo.
After writing the last little article about Backlinks, I decided to do a little comparison to see the difference between backlink searches in Google and Yahoo . (note: I decided not to compare MSN; they say that this site has 745 BLs, but only ends up being 35…Maybe when their API comes out, it will be more accurate)
- Google [link:www.seologs.com]
Results from 5 unique domains (mostly from seologs.com – 24 results)
- Google Alternative BL Tool (uses a google xml query)
Results from 20 unique domains (I would like to do some comparisons over time with this tool. I still cant determine why this information is different that the regular [link:] command in Google)
Results from 41 unique domains (1,470 results)
- Backlink Analyzer Tool (uses Y! api)
Results from 53 unique domains
This reinforces what I discussed last time about the Backlink Analyzer tool being the best for showing most backlinks, however, I found that there were actually a few that showed up on the Google Alternative BL Tool that weren’t in the Backlink Analyzer Tool results.
I think a tool that compares BL results across all SEs would be a good thing. Maybe when I get some time.
I just read the latest post from Matt Cutts Blog. In the post, he addresses the topic of Google Updates, and verifies what many already know:
Google updates its index data, including backlinks and PageRank, continually and continuously. We only export new backlinks, PageRank, or directory data every three months or so
It is funny how a Google Backlink update can dominate the popular SEO forums, both speculation of when the next update will be, and also verifying when it actually happens.
Why do we care so much, when Google only shows a fraction of the actual backlinks for a site anyway? Maybe because doing well in Google means so much more than any of the other popular search engines. Honestly, I don’t see what good it does to only show part of the backlinks, other than to taunt SEO’s / SEM’s.
Ive said it before, but in case I didn’t say it here…USE YAHOO TO CHECK BACKLINKS!!!
Either use the Backlink Analyzer on this site, or just do it directly in Yahoo with their link command:
I thought Id write a little post about the new little Blue Frog link I just added to the side of this page.
The link goes to a company called Blue Security. When you sign up, you get a special email address that you can foreward any unwanted spam emails to. If the offenders don’t stop sending people spam, then Blue Security steps in and gets the offending email servers shut down. I think its a great idea and all, but maybe the best thing about it is that I don’t feel helpless anymore.
I think they are going to eventually charge for membership, but if you sign up now, while they’re in the beta phase, its free.
Hey, I just posted an article about using the rel=nofollow attribute a few days ago. Now Matt Cutts has an article today that’s interestingly similar. What gives?
Im only kidding, but It would be cool. I think its great that Matt Cutts has a blog. We can all learn a thing or two from him.
Now Matt, if you’re reading this, write more SEO articles. 🙂
My last little article was about modifying FireFox to detect nofollow links. I hope you all had fun doing that, and are enjoying the results. I know I am.
Today I wanted to discuss the nofollow attribute again.
I left a comment on Matt Cutts blog the other day (scroll down a bit to see the comment). He uses a WordPress blog. Just like this site. If you haven’t noticed, any links in comments have the rel=”nofollow” attribute included in them. Its to deter comment spam. Well, When I was checking my backlinks today, I found that Matt Cutts site showed up as linking to me. The backlinks analyzer uses Yahoo to search for backlinks, because for the most part Yahoo shows all backlinks (including nofollow links).
I looked for the link in Google and MSN, but it wasn’t there. I just wonder how Yahoo is handling these links. Are they indexing them, but then discounting them? Comments welcome.
Here’s a link that I meant to add. Its from Yahoo Search Blog. They say that they support the rel=nofollow attribute.
I mentioned before that I was skeptical about the person they call “GoogleGuy” who goes around posting on webmasterworld.com, and other noteworthy forums. I always felt like he really didn’t ever give any solid information. Well I don’t know if we will ever really know his identity, or if he really did work at Google, but now I really dont care anymore. Ive found a Real Live Tangible GoogleGuy and his name is Matt Cutts. He is a senior software engineer at Google, and he is currently giving lots of great information at this years Search Engine Strategies conference.
He just started his own site / blog at mattcutts.com. It looks like we won’t have to spend time trying to figure out the cryptic messages from the “GoogleGuy” anymore. This is the real thing.
Matt Cutts isn’t beating around the bush on his site either. In his blog he writes “One of my goals in doing this site is to give my advice on solid, common-sense search engine optimization (SEO). ”
I predict that this site will be the PR 10 before you know it. Well, Im going to get back to reading his blog.
Google has added a new and powerful tool to their already dominating search engine. Searchers will now have the option to use the wildcard (*) within search queries.
This will make it much easier to find the answers to questions. Here’s an example:
[the capital of California is *]
Here’s another example from Google’s Blog: [Glasgow is the * capital of Europe]
Now Google Guys. If you are reading this, you guys have done an excelent job with this new wildcard search, but now you need to make some way to search for special characters. Stuff like this: &*()&-+. It would seem reasonable to just allow them to be escaped with a slash () character. I know this would only benefit a small percentage of Google users, but It sure would make me happy.
The following is an excellent example of what the new Google Tool shows.
Very nice site (mmmm … popcorn)
A search for backlinks in google (link:www.popcornpalace.com) yields a whopping 5 results:
1 – 5 of 5 linking to www.popcornpalace.com. (0.12 seconds)
Comes up # 1 in Google for a phrase from the title of the site: “flavored gourmet popcorn”
A search for Backlinks in Yahoo yields 1250 backlinks:
1,250 for link:http://www.popcornpalace.com/
Now a search google with the Seologs BL – PR toolyields 79 backlinks (actual google data)
What is the purpose of only showing 5 Backlinks? What is the purpose of the “link:” search? The seologs tool is a bit better, but still only 79?
I’ve always had my doubts about “GoogleGuy”, the alleged Google Employee who goes galavanting from forum to forum putting in his 2 cents. Ive never actually read a post of his that wasn’t either super cryptic, or quoted from the google website. Whats to stop anyone from going to a forum and claiming to be someone they are not? It happens every day.
Some people seem to think that they know:
4) Do you think the guy that posted here (and in subsequent comments on that thread) is really GoogleGuy as we know him (aka Matt Cutts)?
You don’t know a person for sure based on a few heated forum posts. I am not sure if that was GoogleGuy or Matt Cutts. Rumour has it that Matt loves tomatoes though.
Here are some links to good discussions: