(Difference between revisions)
|-|What You Need To Know About Reciprocal Linking |+|
|-|This is a subject that everyone appears to be arguing about at this time. Everyone trying to be able to second-guess Google's actions - they will will never do - and wanting to know whether reciprocal backlinking is dead, dying or if it's something worth holding on. |+|
|-|Enough of the speculation. Here's the substantiation. Google do in contrast to reciprocal link directories and they can sniff one out a kilometer off. There was a link directory on my own site until lately, but I have now removed it, because it received become as useful as being a chocolate teapot. Whilst the major front page with the site has kept it's Google Pr of PR5, in one of their last updates, Google relegated in which directory, which had likewise previously had a new PR5, to a PR 0. Meanwhile, I had not necessarily altered my backlinking structure that pointed with it. I had not really altered my plans either: I did not hyperlink to any PR0 sites, kept the number of links per page as a result of a minimum and there are even text descriptions for each and every entry listed. Google could tell what it absolutely was and acted because they saw fit. This online game has changed since the latest Panda update and although [http://www.backlinksant.com/edu-links/ edu links], contextual back links, and several additional backlinks still carry some weight, some link building methods are far less efficient than before. |+|
|-|There's zero point wondering or whining about this. They can and they are doing so so that you can provide better results to searchers. You can want it or lump the idea, but if you desire them to offer you decent listings, ranks or send you any targeted visitors, their rules rely. My advice: forget *artificial* reciprocal relating completely. The time taken to maintain the listing, approve and disaprove articles (mostly the particular latter, because the just people still requesting links are weak PR0 sites in addition to spammers) might be much better spent. |+|
Revision as of 14:04, 28 February 2012
This appears to be a spammer.
Administrators may want to check the user's contributions to see if there's justification to the claim, the history of this page to see how long the allegation has been undisputed, and perhaps look at the block log before waving the banhammer.
Or, maybe just pause to do a better hack-code on the underlying Template:Spammer, y'know.
This page is a candidate for speedy deletion.The user who added this tag made the following comment: spam
If you disagree with its speedy deletion, please explain why on its talk page. If this page obviously does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from articles that you have created yourself.
Administrators - Remember to check if anything links here and the page history (last edit) before deleting.