#61
  1. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    317
    Rep Power
    639
    Originally Posted by KernelPanic
    Yes, that has not changed. (Links) #1 by a long shot.
    So you don't distort my statements again... external links are usually a Google ranking factor.

    What Google and many folk disagree with is your statement that links are the #1 ranking factor "by a long shot".

    You keep giving examples that seem to prove Google and "us" correct.

    1. Your Example Search for: wind

    "This is how (the example URL result for "wind" search) ranks for me across a number of G country SEs.

    USA = #11
    Canada = #199
    UK = #31
    Aust = #99
    NZ = #78

    The link numbers are constant."

    If links are the god of rankings that you believe, why are we still waiting for you to explain what is causing such wild ranking fluctuation for the same query across 5 different G properties?

    2. Your New Example: # Links to Adam Riley site

    How about we look at the top 3 results to the example query: Cheshire Wedding Venues

    My backlink tool gives these numbers:

    Rank #1 = 1,005 links
    Rank #2 = 21 links
    Rank #3 = 355 links

    I could ask why the answer with only 21 links to it out ranks the one with 355 to it. I could also waste time collecting hundreds of examples of much lower ranked pages with many, many more external links to them than the #2 answer.

    Instead, please explain to us, why does G UK rank hitched.co.uk/wedding-photographers/cheshire/ at #2 for this query instead of the site's Home page?

    • The site's Home page qualifies for the search query
    • There are 20,000 external links to it.
    • There are a dozen or so other pages from this site in the top 1,000 list for the query
    • The site's Home page does not rank in the top 1,000 places.

    What? A thousand times more links to the Home page than any internal pages and Home is nowhere in its ranking? Please explain!

    Every example you give us seems to support what Google's Gary Illyes told us when he said...

    5 Sep 17: Google: We Ignore Tons Of Links But Which Links Is Almost Impossible To Figure Out

    Quote:
    "...it is "close to impossible for you to check which links are actually deemed critical." So why bother trying to figure out which links are important and which links are not if there is no way for you to do so?"

    "Gary then added that Google "ignores tons of links" and that even if you collect data from Google Search Console and third-party tools " that you won't know which ones are absolutely critical."'

    KP, Your own examples seem to prove to us that total external link numbers have no correlation with search query results. Why not? Is it remotely possible that your SEO knowledge is out of date with how G currently ranks web pages?

    How about you help the poster for a change by answering these questions.

    • Which external links does G use in each search query?
    • What ranking values does G place on each link it includes in its assessment?
    • How many links and from where will the poster need for all the search queries he wants to target?

    I will always believe that cost-effective SEO starts with getting on-site factors sorted first.

    This actually seems to be a very low competition search market - only 400k pages match the example search query. As a rule of thumb, I would expect any search query with less than 1 million matching results to suggest that a page #1 search results is likely possible without any external link building.
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Oct 10th, 2017 at 04:59 AM.
  2. #62
  3. Digital Marketing
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    7,342
    Rep Power
    5031
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    a page #1 search result is likely possible without any external link building.
    I agree, but you were talking about a specific website and going on about secondary, minor ranking elements when the truth is, he ranks well because of his links.

    Don't get offended, just the facts
  4. #63
  5. Digital Marketing
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    7,342
    Rep Power
    5031
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    I'm afraid you are misinformed about how G ranks "keywords".
    um, FYI, Google doesn't rank "keywords", they rank webpages, just so you know.
  6. #64
  7. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    317
    Rep Power
    639
    Originally Posted by KernelPanic
    um, FYI, Google doesn't rank "keywords", they rank webpages, just so you know.
    Don't you see how you are compromising your SEO reputation with these petty, inaccurate and out of context comments?

    Eg: "Google doesn't rank "keywords", they rank webpages, just so you know."

    What I said was, G uses the individual words in search queries to rank web pages.

    You don't seem to be able to read and comprehend what people say in the forum.

    More importantly, aren't you concerned about your inability to answer the substantive SEO questions I posed above?

    Try answering the BIG SEO questions!

    Maybe then you will be able to rescue your SEO reputation.

    Please stop wasting our time with light-weight and/or irrelevant answers to the big SEO questions!

    If you don't know the answers to the big SEO questions, then please just admit it!
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Oct 10th, 2017 at 05:50 AM.
  8. #65
  9. Digital Marketing
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    7,342
    Rep Power
    5031
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    What I said was, G uses the individual words in search queries to rank web pages.
    hmm, no, I am pretty sure you said
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    I'm afraid you are misinformed about how G ranks "keywords".
    To which I said Google doesn't rank keywords, they rank webpages. How on earth could that simple statement get you so excited?
    With all of your Bold, ALL CAPS and exclamation point replies to very simple, factual statements, I have to wonder why you're getting so wound up? Relax man. You don't even do this work anymore. It's all ok Take a breath, you live on a beautiful little island, go enjoy your retirement
    Last edited by KernelPanic; Oct 10th, 2017 at 06:54 AM.
  10. #66
  11. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    317
    Rep Power
    639
    Are you going to answer the BIG SEO ranking questions posed above or are you so insecure of your SEO knowledge that you can only try to change the subject to minor irrelevancies?
  12. #67
  13. Digital Marketing
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    7,342
    Rep Power
    5031
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    Are you going to answer the BIG SEO ranking questions posed above or are you so insecure of your SEO knowledge that you can only try to change the subject to minor irrelevancies?
    OK fine, looking at "above"... You said:
    Originally Posted by JohnAimit
    external links are usually a Google ranking factor
    Yikes, lol. I believe quality, naturally gained, inbound links are always a ranking factor. I don't get why you think links are not important to ranking on Google. Have you ever read Google's algorithm patent? It talks a lot about inbound links and calculating Page rank. It would probably help you.
  14. #68
  15. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    68
    Rep Power
    1
    Originally Posted by KernelPanic
    OK fine, looking at "above"... You said:

    Yikes, lol. I believe quality, naturally gained, inbound links are always a ranking factor. I don't get why you think links are not important to ranking on Google. Have you ever read Google's algorithm patent? It talks a lot about inbound links and calculating Page rank. It would probably help you.


    Thanks everyone no need to turn this into an SEO argument


    I took everything on board, I designed a whole new site, I am still readding weddings as we speak

    My weddings pages are now super small compared to what they were

    well 2mb isnt small but ive seen much larger taking slot 1 from my competition

    this page: www.leonardo-studios.com/wigan-wedding-photographer/ashfield-house-wedding

    GTMetrix score - (from canada - I am based in the UK)

    PageSpeed Score
    (86%)

    YSlow Score
    (89%)
    Page Details

    Fully Loaded Time
    4.6s

    Total Page Size
    1.98MB

    Requests
    100 (not sure where the 100 requests are coming from?)

    Pingdom Score: (from sweden my closest country)

    Performance Grade A 100
    Load time 1.46s
    Faster than 81%
    page size 1.9mb
    requests 101

    and finally the google page speed for that page is

    79 mobile
    86 desktop


    So I should have TOO much difficulty ranking this page for "Ashfield House Wedding" right?
    The page does have a lot of content (good quality i think? - I paid someone to write it!)



    From what you guys are saying, I dont even need to put the words Ashfield House Wedding together?

    If I wrote a sentence in Ashfield about someones wedding in a house, that would rank better?
    Last edited by Test-ok; Oct 10th, 2017 at 05:41 PM. Reason: Live link
  16. #69
  17. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    970
    Rep Power
    1550
    Originally Posted by dwallis2012
    feast your eyes
    Crikey - that is one miraculous improvement - I actually wanted to look at a second page! Some of the text is still on the small side and there are some responsive issues that need to be resolved in the CSS (try it with a screen width of 1280 as one example and for couples cuddling up on the sofa to make a choice they are going to struggle to see your talents on a tablet)

    Where are these 4 awards? Should be on the home page?

    But ... what a huge step forward ... now it is worth optimizing ... but not only. At the back of my mind I would be asking how long before the directories end up dominating the top 10? Yelp / YP / etc. One Google tweak and you are all gone so spread your bets and make sure you are in all the other places people search.

    Also Social Media - searched Facebook and you came up #2 because of your association with a Facebook Group for models - not sure if that is good or bad for your reputation ...... ?????
  18. #70
  19. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    68
    Rep Power
    1
    Originally Posted by Doodled
    Crikey - that is one miraculous improvement - I actually wanted to look at a second page! Some of the text is still on the small side and there are some responsive issues that need to be resolved in the CSS (try it with a screen width of 1280 as one example and for couples cuddling up on the sofa to make a choice they are going to struggle to see your talents on a tablet)

    Where are these 4 awards? Should be on the home page?

    But ... what a huge step forward ... now it is worth optimizing ... but not only. At the back of my mind I would be asking how long before the directories end up dominating the top 10? Yelp / YP / etc. One Google tweak and you are all gone so spread your bets and make sure you are in all the other places people search.

    Also Social Media - searched Facebook and you came up #2 because of your association with a Facebook Group for models - not sure if that is good or bad for your reputation ...... ?????

    thanks doodled really happy with how its going so far I had to recode so much of the template and the CSS

    I had to shrink the slider (it was full pahge previously) which helped a bit with page speed but also allowed more above the fold content
    to show. Its still very low in google page insights though but not too much can be done for that page. it started life at 55 on google page insights and I have got it up to around 71 for mobile and 86 for desktop so a big jump

    I will put those awards up its something i meant to do but got sidetracked adding more weddings!

    I had trouble with some text to the bit in the slider I had to create a new viewport for because it didnt resize any text or sliders for mobile so what you can see in mobile view is a huge improvement (template monster support were useless I had to code everything on my own!)

    good job I had notepad experience!

    will look at the model thing, I did join the odd group intending to branch out into portraits and such in the off season but i quickly found out
    most of those were topless modelling and such (i guess the pictures made me hang around rather than leaving the group?!)

    just working my way through another wedding, my old page ranked 45 and never any higher even after 6 months so I will see where this one goes.
    Just wrote 650 words of original content myself , all natural no keyword stuffing. Scored 58 on the flesch scale. see how that goes

    just finishing off the pictures.

    Also trying to work out how to add a telephone number field to my contact form. I did do it and it worked but redirected me to a blank page with an error code (in the php file is says message sent successfully - not sure why it redirectedme and I did received the test email)
  20. #71
  21. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    68
    Rep Power
    1
    this is my new page i just worked on

    www.leonardo-studios.com/styal-lodge-wedding-photography

    all orignal content written by me

    do i NEED to <EM> the keywords? or will google figure it out?

    keywords.cognitiveseo.com says it can rank in the top 5 , I have been using this to help score my page content ( i like it!)
    Last edited by Test-ok; Oct 10th, 2017 at 05:38 PM. Reason: Live link
  22. #72
  23. SEO Since 97
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    7,735
    Rep Power
    4753
    Folks lets stop with all the live links, it gives spammers the wrong impression and creates more work for the moderators
  24. #73
  25. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    970
    Rep Power
    1550
    Originally Posted by dwallis2012
    Scored 58 on the flesch scale.
    You do seem a bit obsessed with pleasing machines and gizmos rather than people - it is the wrong place to start.

    Now you have a website that does not offend retinas don't start rushing off on SEO for keywords until you know they have value so:
    - set yourself up with Analytics and Adwords, link the two accounts together, set up Goal monitoring in Analytics, advertise on Adwords for your chosen phrases (exact match only) and monitor your success via Goal conversions

    If Goal conversions disappoint use Analytics to see where your site is letting you down with people, how far do they get, when do they leave? But always be prepared to admit a phase you thought would bring you targeted traffic is wrong.

    SEO only comes when you know what you are targeting for ... and as I said before don't forget the zillion other avenues for getting clients which lie outside Google Search which could actually work much better for you.

    Comments on this post

    • IvanDrago agrees : Excellent advice.
  26. #74
  27. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1
    Rep Power
    0

    Arrow


    the version of RankBrain you have mentioned, is slightly different, the ranking tools are not deteriorating but enchancing and updating, Google release updates almost every now and then, you can read about the RankBrain in detail with examples SEO in 2018 latest updates with RankBrain , hope this article will provide you indepth details, if now ping me here anytime for help.
    Last edited by Hikin Mike; Oct 28th, 2017 at 03:05 AM. Reason: removed link and warned
  28. #75
  29. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Discoverer (100 - 499 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    317
    Rep Power
    639
    Hi Gurjeet,
    I tried to send you a detailed message about your post but I am unable to communicate with you via your website.

    IMHO, the article you wrote and reference above seems to be largely out of date and inaccurate. Can I strongly recommend these videos and articles:

    a. Video: Google Q&A+ #March 2016

    This is a must watch video because it discusses RankBrain and "engagement" signals like CTR, bounce rates, dwell time etc. It also includes Rand Fishkin of MOZ in the panel. Fishkin was an early proponent of G using "engagement" signals as ranking signals.

    b. Jul 2017: Here’s how RankBrain does (and doesn’t) impact SEO

    A good review article.

    c. Problems with Google Analytics Measurements

    Analytics does not report "dwell time". It cannot accurately report other metrics. Eg:

    These go to the problems of Analytic's inability to report dwell time. Then there is the problem that perhaps 40% of generic search referrals as shown in the Analytics Acquisition report but which are not recorded in the Search Console report.

    d. Mar 2017: The State of Searcher Behavior Revealed Through 23 Remarkable Statistics
    Author: Rand Fishkin, MOZ.

    I strongly recommend a careful read of this research. To my mind it kills a number of the presumptions made by those who believed "engagement" signals would be useful ranking signals.

    Rand Fishkin was one of these. He commissioned this research and seems to have been very surprised by some of its findings. It seems he has been very quiet about "engagement" signals as ranking factors since these data were reported.

    To me, the crucial metric is:
    "#22: What percent of Google queries result in pogo-sticking (i.e. the searcher clicks a result, then bounces back to the search results page and chooses a different result)?" = 8%

    Can any SE place any significant ranking importance on a factor that is only used by 8% of searchers?

    e. Google ranks search words not keywords
    I formed the impression that you believe G ranks exact match search queries, not the words in the search query.

    It is easy to prove that the exact sequence of words in a keyword query have very little impact on a page's ranking.

    Your Example Keyword Search: best hatchback 2017

    Google reports these matching page results:

    • For an exact search query: 2,310 pages
    • For an inexact search query: 68.3 million pages

    I don't see a single top 10 exact match search page in the top 10 results for the inexact search results.

    G can't use exact match keywords as an important ranking factor because so few pages actually include the exact match sequence of most queries.
    Last edited by JohnAimit; Oct 31st, 2017 at 04:45 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Huge ranking drop
    By SEO_DB in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Feb 17th, 2017, 01:33 PM
  2. [HELP] HUGE google IMPRESSION DROP about 97%
    By fajarali in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: Jan 8th, 2013, 01:10 PM
  3. Huge drop in Google traffic,can't find the reason?
    By iisark in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Oct 21st, 2011, 04:56 AM
  4. HUGE Drop in Google Index
    By catad83 in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Feb 6th, 2008, 09:24 AM
  5. Huge diffence in ranking between MSN and Google
    By jefbak in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jun 9th, 2006, 01:26 PM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo