There's a lot of great information on the Web, and a lot of even greater misinformation.
I was going to link to some pages that claim to be Google's Ranking Factors, which are lists that some people have come up with that supposedly tell us all of the things that Google might rank pages upon in search results. These are usually more linkbait than legitimate.
I searched at Google for "Google ranking factors" and started looking through the first few results, and couldn't bring myself to go any further.
It's better if you learn as much as you can about logical fallacies, and how people make flawed assumptions and arguments when doing something like coming up with a list of something like "Google's Ranking Factors.
Here are some specific things to keep in mind:
1. Just because Google has a patent on it (and I love patents), doesn't mean that Google decided to use it, or has since stopped.
2. Just because SEO Toolmakers sold tools to help you identify things like perfect keyword densities, or LSI keywords, don't mean that either of those things were ever anything more than a waste of your money when you paid for them, and a waste of your time when you used them.
3. Just because a large group of SEO "experts" participated in a group survey of ranking factors and gave "opinions" (emphasis on the word "opinion") on them, doesn't make them anything more than opinions.
4. Just because Matt Cutts didn't talk about something, doesn't mean that he's "hiding" that something.
5. Just because "Many SEOs think" something, doesn't make it so.
6. When someone suggests that something is a "sign of a quality site" or a "sign of a low quality site", that doesn't mean that Google is using that factor to rank pages.
7. When another SEO firm "confirms" something is a ranking factor, don't take their word for it, test it yourself. This appeal to "authority" is a fallacy.
8. Just because Google has publicly stated that they like "user friendly features" on web pages doesn't mean that the presence of those features helps a page rank higher.
9. Google has had "quality rater documents" leak and spread throughout the Web, and those are instructions and guides to people attempting to identify spam and to rate the quality of page. They aren't a "search engines guide to ranking web pages," and were not created specifically for that purpose. They may be interesting, and you may be tempted to create inferences from them, but don't assume that they are guides to how Google ranks pages.
10. Stupid things like, Google says they don't give nofollow links any credit, so they probably do give some of them credit, and you should have a natural looking link profile, so you need some nofollow links in your profile for it to look natural.
You'll see a lot of things on the Web about SEO and Search engines, and you should look at all of it with some amount of rational skepticism.
I'm stopping at 10, because it's like shooting fish in a barrel, and because there are some people who really believe this stuff.
More: Click Here
I was going to link to some pages that claim to be Google's Ranking Factors, which are lists that some people have come up with that supposedly tell us all of the things that Google might rank pages upon in search results. These are usually more linkbait than legitimate.
I searched at Google for "Google ranking factors" and started looking through the first few results, and couldn't bring myself to go any further.
It's better if you learn as much as you can about logical fallacies, and how people make flawed assumptions and arguments when doing something like coming up with a list of something like "Google's Ranking Factors.
Here are some specific things to keep in mind:
1. Just because Google has a patent on it (and I love patents), doesn't mean that Google decided to use it, or has since stopped.
2. Just because SEO Toolmakers sold tools to help you identify things like perfect keyword densities, or LSI keywords, don't mean that either of those things were ever anything more than a waste of your money when you paid for them, and a waste of your time when you used them.
3. Just because a large group of SEO "experts" participated in a group survey of ranking factors and gave "opinions" (emphasis on the word "opinion") on them, doesn't make them anything more than opinions.
4. Just because Matt Cutts didn't talk about something, doesn't mean that he's "hiding" that something.
5. Just because "Many SEOs think" something, doesn't make it so.
6. When someone suggests that something is a "sign of a quality site" or a "sign of a low quality site", that doesn't mean that Google is using that factor to rank pages.
7. When another SEO firm "confirms" something is a ranking factor, don't take their word for it, test it yourself. This appeal to "authority" is a fallacy.
8. Just because Google has publicly stated that they like "user friendly features" on web pages doesn't mean that the presence of those features helps a page rank higher.
9. Google has had "quality rater documents" leak and spread throughout the Web, and those are instructions and guides to people attempting to identify spam and to rate the quality of page. They aren't a "search engines guide to ranking web pages," and were not created specifically for that purpose. They may be interesting, and you may be tempted to create inferences from them, but don't assume that they are guides to how Google ranks pages.
10. Stupid things like, Google says they don't give nofollow links any credit, so they probably do give some of them credit, and you should have a natural looking link profile, so you need some nofollow links in your profile for it to look natural.
You'll see a lot of things on the Web about SEO and Search engines, and you should look at all of it with some amount of rational skepticism.
I'm stopping at 10, because it's like shooting fish in a barrel, and because there are some people who really believe this stuff.
More: Click Here
No comments:
Post a Comment