The Internet is a dangerous place filled with smart people who write totally bullshit articles, so be careful who you take advice from
Case in point: Google gets search results very badly wrong.
This person thinks they are calling Google out by catching a result in search that should have never been there. Instead they are just showing their ignorance.
Look the the above link, (it's a short one) then read my response below.
Chris Lang says...
What you have done is produce a theory from unfounded information. You do not understand what has happened here and you did not look into it enough either.
It's OK I have done this too. But if I can, let me point out your mistakes in thinking this through.
#1 Since the post is from 10-12-2007 it has accrued pagerank over time, hence it will outrank other pages.
The Digg post is a PageRank 0 page, all the others are news items, since they are only a day or so old they have a greyed out page rank.
#2 Next you mention it has only 7 links. At the time you published your blog post the news articles were only hours old so they had NO links.
7 links is more than 0 links.
You also have to take into account the quality of the links, not all links are created equal.
#3 The news articles are few hours old and may have 100s of links but none of those pages have any incoming links or any PageRank either since no one has linked to them.
It is also important to note that PageRank has nothing to do with the rankings you will receive in Google results. It is however a visual indicator of a documents quality, it's incoming link's quality and it's power to rank well in the search engines.
Hope this clarifies why this link is here. Search engine results are not always fair.
It they were you and I would always be top ten under every keyword.
Cheers - Chris Lang
Be careful out the guys, the internet is a dangerous place filled with disinformation.
2 comments:
I was not trying to explain WHY Google were showing this result as number 1, rather I was pointing out the inadequacy of Google’s search results (and therefore their algorithm) in this case.
In reference to what you have said in your post here…
It is true that this page has 7 links, but as I said they are all internal. Again it is true that “not all links are created equal” and I would think that 7 internal links pretty much count for nothing.
You also say that “PageRank has nothing to do with the rankings you will receive in Google results”. In fact PageRank is the basis of Google’s results - it is not only a visual indicator but an important factor in ranking (along with relevancy). Admittedly, toolbar PageRank is a very much simplified version of the real thing.
There are things I could point out, such as this sentence:
"#3 The news articles are few hours old and may have 100s of links but none of those pages have any incoming links or any PageRank either since no one has linked to them."
I just don't understand what you mean here? Do you mean these articles DO have lots of links, or DON'T they? Please clarify.
First of all I included the PageRank disclaimer so I did not get flamed by SEO guys for quoting pagerank.
Next, the news articles may or may not have 100s of links, it does not matter, they are new links from pages on blogs that have no links themselves.
I am certainly not attacking anyone's views, but the way the article comes off is that the Digg item should not be there.
In fact it has every reason to be, just not from an organic point if view.
Post a Comment