|
   |
| Forum moderator: bigblog |
| uCoz Community » General Information » First Steps with uCoz » Design #1321 - Site Menu Links | Builder (Question on how Search Engines take into account these links) |
| Design #1321 - Site Menu Links | Builder |
For Design #1321, i have a question regarding if Search Engines like Google do take into account when calculating page rank the links that appear in Site Menu Builder ?
If they do, then are these links and sub-links connected to all other links and sub-links of the site menu ? For example if : A, B, C = 3 main links. A1, B1, C1, = sub-links of A, B, C <-> = reciprocal link Will the uCoz site present to Google this site menu in this way : A <-> B | A <-> C | B <-> C | A <-> A1 | A <-> B1 | A <-> C1 | B <-> A1 | B <-> B1 | B <-> C1 | C <-> A1 | C <-> B1 | C <-> C1 | A1 <-> B1 | A1 <-> C1 | B1 <-> C1 ( all links and sub-links are reciprocal with all other links and sub-links, on each page, regardless of parent link ) ? Thank you ! Thassos Island Portal :
https://thassos.one Post edited by Urs - Saturday, 2017-05-20, 10:18 PM
|
Urs, if the link is within the same domain, then it is not actually phased into the algorithm as a backlink. The number (or structure) of internal page links doesn't impact the overall page rank algorithm (as far as Google have told anyone).
If your navigation is structured badly, aka doesn't provide clear (valid) links between pages then this would negatively impact the "trustworthiness" and "usability" of the website, however, there isn't a "righter" way to structure links. As long as they're there, that's all Google is concerned with. So in terms of the template, as long as you're using the menu builder, you'll be fine. Jack of all trades in development, design, strategy.
Working as a Support Engineer. Been here for 13 years and counting. |
Hello Paradox,
Please read and scroll this link down and check the examples : http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~chazelle/courses/BIB/pagerank.htm (there actually is a "righter" way) As far as i understand you don't need back-links from other sites to get decent page rank, each page in your own site produces some page rank/juice that can be directed towards another internal page. If you have many high quality pages like news sites have and if you use a hierarchical tree with page hubs that concentrate page rank for a subject you are able to get page rank to those pages and rank well in Google without the need for external sites pointing to your site. Please, show to me where Google have told, what you are saying. Thassos Island Portal :
https://thassos.one |
Urs, that Princeton link references the PageRank algorithm from 15 years ago. I wouldn't put much stock into it still being a reliable source of information. Very few people nowadays can confidently state the impact/usage of PageRank on websites - Google themselves are fighting to curb the liturgical belief in PageRank and how it benefits or negates websites and domains on the search platform.
Current day uses of PageRank as I understand it primarily revolve around the backlinks between individual websites; the higher PageRank of the website linking to you, the better your website's PageRank will be, and so on. The internal site structure as far as I have ever seen, primarily comes down to good usability & design principles over much else. Sure, having a dead end on your website is bad, and yes, it will affect your PageRank adversely, however, that's because of bad UX design, and not factoring in contemporary design concepts. As you know, the uCoz navigation system links every page to the every other page, so I can't imagine you're going to have too many troubles there. PageRank is (sorry Google) an outdated algorithm that I would almost put money on has been changed greatly in the past 2-4 years as Google have moved quite rapidly to remove it from the overtly visible position in the public eye that it held for the 8-10 years prior. There are many more tools and algorithms now used to determine whether your website is what an individual user is looking for, so I wouldn't stress too much on the PageRank of your website. Good SEO (for Google or otherwise) in my honest opinion comes about from having reliable content, a well designed UI/UX, and taking initiative to stay as up to date with the times as you can ensuring microdata/schema and so on are appropriately used. Hope that explains a little bit of where I'm coming from.  Quote Paradox (  ) The number (or structure) of internal page links To clarify what I meant by this, I did not mean the navigation structure, I was referring to the physical HTML structure of the links. Google PageRank doesn't see whether the link is A1/A2, it only sees it as D/E unless they are only linked from the parent pages. 
Jack of all trades in development, design, strategy.
Working as a Support Engineer. Been here for 13 years and counting. |
What is D/E ?
See : http://www.ecreativeim.com/blog....or-text http://www.ecreativeim.com/blog....erarchy Raw popularity or Page rank will always be in the algorithm. Same page with same content with Page rank 2 is on first page of Google, while with page rank 1 is on page 7 of google, and with 0 page rank is on page 21 of google. Quote Paradox ( ) There are many more tools and algorithms now used to determine whether your website is what an individual user is looking for, Care to share with me, some ideas, as you see them, regarding when exactly Google algorithm decides if a page is bad for the user and penalizes it ( like too many stuffed keywords etc ) ? (maybe you can give a list of examples from your experience) Thassos Island Portal :
https://thassos.one Post edited by Urs - Saturday, 2017-06-17, 10:09 PM
|
Urs, alright. So, the first link discussing anchor's is not part of the PageRank algorithm. It's part of the wider circle of tools and algorithms Google uses to determine page relevance to a users search. A lot of people generalise PageRank as the final deciding factor that goes into this, the reality is far from that - PageRank is a specific algorithm which has been around since the paper was released in 2002. Over the years since then Google have been challenged by the growing rate of information out there, to organise it more efficiently and effectively. Which has resulted in less reliancy on PageRank, and a lot more on tools that check whether a website has:
a) Good Usability & Accessibility b) Trustworthy Interactions (popups, HTTP/S, links to blacklisted websites, etc.) c) Appropriate Integrations (Schema/Microdata) d) Consistent Quality Content If you're wanting to discuss SEO in its wider scope; the first link you posted I would definitely stand by. Google implicates <a>, <title>, <h1> (et al), <strong>, <em>, keyword frequency, and into determining the relevancy of a page/website against respective keywords. The big thing here is to write keyword rich and quality content that is readable and provides for the user. Stuffing keywords into content with no purposeful context is considered borderline black-hat SEO, so you'll also want to avoid that. Bad Example: Title: Experience Dance | Townsville Dance Lessons H1: Welcome Code We are the foremost dance studio in the Townsville region. Good Example: Title: Townsville Dance Lessons & Socials | Experience Dance H1: Dancing In <strong>Townsville</strong> Code We are Experience Dance, Townsville's foremost social Ballroom and Latin American dance studio. As you can see, one is keyword rich while still readable, where as the other is lacking in keywords and doesn't provide consistency between elements. I'll explain some more later, but for now I've got to run and deal with my day. Hope that helps. Jack of all trades in development, design, strategy.
Working as a Support Engineer. Been here for 13 years and counting. |
| |||
| |||