All E-Solutions Spotlights |
Sep 17, 2013 at 8:55am ET by Julie Joyce I was recently asked how to make sure that each link you build (however you do it) remains a safe one — and I have to say that I truly had no idea how to answer that. A few years back, my answer would have been different than it is today. Remember when we all said that any free link was a good link?
Today, things are more tricky. How can you do the best job possible at judging a site that isn’t an authority? And what about those pesky little new sites that are happy to link out but aren’t yet established? How can you tell what the future holds for them? In this post, I’ll focus on analyzing those sites, as this is much trickier than analyzing sites that have a defined presence and backlink profile.
Is the site indexed in Google and Bing? Do a site:domain.com search in both. If it’s not indexed, check the robots.txt file to make sure it’s not blocking the engines. If there’s no real reason why it’s not indexed and it’s more than a few weeks old, that’s not a good sign.
Does it rank for its brand? Obviously, if the brand name is one that’s very close to another established one, this may take time. But unless they’ve chosen a poor domain, they should be in the top 5 at the very least.
Do they have a blog? If so, do they regularly write good posts? I guess you’d have to define “regularly” here — for some sites, blogging once a month may be the norm, while others might not manage to blog unless they actually have something notable to say, which could be once every few months. If you see a blog link and there aren’t any posts, that’s a bad sign.
Do they have social sharing buttons set up? If they do have a blog, they should make it easy to promote the posts socially. Not having that set up, in my opinion, is a sign that the site won’t be very active socially.
Do they seem active on social sites, or are their profiles stagnant? If there are Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, and LinkedIn accounts that are all fairly dead, that isn’t good.
Is their content unique, or are they just rewording or scraping someone else’s content? If they can’t be bothered to have a unique voice, how will they compete with everyone else?
Do they have Google authorship set up? Plenty of content creators don’t (and maybe never will), but those who take the time to set it up might enjoy the benefit of having their content rank better when they contribute to a site with a lower quality signal. If you’re a recognized authority and you write a post on a site that has a low PageRank, due to your authorship authority, it should still do well despite the site’s low PageRank. Danny Sullivan has also written that “[b]eing on Google+ alone is a potential ranking boost, one that can sometimes trump all other factors, including links.”
Is there an “About” page? You want to be able to get some actual information about the site. Sites that don’t give you this? do they have something to hide?
Is there contact information of some sort? There should be, even if it’s just an email address or a contact form. You should feel confident that someone’s actually managing the site. Note: I will say that I’ve run across sites that list an invalid email address or have a contact form that is either broken or doesn’t seem to actually work, and it’s been a lack of testing that’s caused those issues, so try multiple routes if you find that one isn’t working properly.
Do they have some sort of analytics set up? Check the source code for this. While I know that not everyone does look at their analytics, most people who want to do something good with their sites will be tracking visits.
Do they have links from any authorities yet? If they’re very new they may not — but if you find a new site and it has some good authority links already, that’s a really good sign.
What type of links do they have? Some new sites may make the mistake of taking shortcuts and trying to get networked links up, or just spam a ton of free directories. If the link profile is already suspect, it might not get any better.
What is the domain’s history? Was it parked for 5 years? Was it previously a porn site? Are there tons of crap links coming to it, or bad sites 301-redirecting in? If the site’s been around for a while, check it in the Wayback Machine to see what it used to be. Was it previously a PR 5 and is now a 1?
Example 1: A domain was registered in July 2010 and the site went live within a day or so. As of this date, the site has a homepage PageRank of zero. There are 5 pages indexed in Google. There is a grand total of 1 domain that provides 1 backlink for the site. Majestic metrics show a 0% citation flow and a 0% trust flow. The site is indexed in Google and ranks for its brand, though at number 4.
Here’s what that information tells me: this site is not somewhere I’d want my link. It has very little, if any, value to users as no one is linking to it. It’s been around for three years and should have a higher PR than zero. Five pages indexed tells me that it’s probably a stagnant site that won’t be updated or improved upon.
Example 2: The domain was registered in June 2013 with the site going live almost immediately. The site does not yet have any PageRank but has 150 pages indexed, with new blog posts going up every few days. There are 25 linking domains providing 75 links. The site is indexed, ranks for its brand name and other search terms, and they’re active on Twitter and Facebook. Each post they write tends to generate 10 good comments minimum, with the blog writers responding to comments. Most posts get around 25 tweets on average.
I’d probably want a link on this site, as it would seem that they’re doing all the right things in order to be successful. The lack of PR wouldn’t bother me because they’re so new. Twenty-five linking domains in a few months doesn’t raise any flags with me, but I’d check them out and make sure they weren’t from a network or just from press releases.
There’s really no failproof way to determine what’s going to happen down the road, of course. Some sites may start out doing none of the “right” things only to later see the light and hire someone who get them on track. So, just because they don’t have it together when you first check them out, that doesn’t mean that they won’t later on.
If you do happen upon a site that looks like a good one for your purposes (whether it’s writing for them, partnering with them, asking them for a link, etc.) and it doesn’t yet have much good stuff going on, note it and go back to it later — or heck, offer them some pointers! (That might get you a link faster than anything else.)
Tell them that you’d be much more likely to socialize their content if they had social buttons on each post, or that they might want to start being more active on Pinterest if that’s where their demographic usually hangs out. We use this sort of tactic for broken link building, so why not use it for other things?
Related Topics: Channel: SEO | Link Building | Link Building: General | Link Week Column
About The Author: Julie Joyce owns the link development firm Link Fish Media and is one of the founding members of the SEO Chicks blog. See more articles by Julie Joyce
Follow @sengineland
Succinct checklist, Julie. There are a must in measuring a website’s value, not just as you see it now, but it’s future potential as well.
Julie, your writing is quite constructive and informative as well and has truly touched my heart. I truly appreciate the points that you have accounted in evaluating the value of a website, since nowadays the number of spammed websites have increased significantly. However, I feel that links are essential to check the credibility of websites, facebook sayfa reklamı especially back links. Again, not only the number of back links, but also the quality of back links that does matter.
Julie, I think we must look at few more points before getting backlink from any website like check already placed links that whether they are relevant to your targeted link or not (for Co-citation), number of external links, and also the page rank of internal pages, what you say?
That’s the whole point of the article…there is no foolproof way to judge a site’s future. I’m simply trying to give out the things I look for in order to help judge it. Even if I did think I could list 5 definite metrics that would say “this site will still be fantastic next year” I can’t take into account any changes that Google might make that will affect the site, nor can I take into account whether it gets sold, whether the webmaster gets sick and stops doing anything new, whether they decide to hire a spammy SEO company to throw up some link networks, etc.
I can also say that almost every case is different, and I can look at a site and see something awesome that no one else in my office sees. We’ve been trying to figure out how to better analyze newer sites that don’t come with a PR 7 homepage, loads of great authority links, and a very visible brand that’s popular and shown everywhere. These are the things that we look for in order to help us make the call as to whether a newer site without those benefits will be one that we want to work with.
Absolutely…that’s what I meant by this section: “What type of links do they have? Some new sites may make the mistake of taking shortcuts and trying to get networked links up, or just spam a ton of free directories. If the link profile is already suspect, it might not get any better.”
I have also experienced some sites which have PR7 or PR8 but their internal pages are not ranked, to my knowledge, Paid Link provider sites buy high PR expired domains on godaddy.com.
See More Top News
See More News Briefs
See More Features
See More Columns
See More How To
Google Celebrates 15th Birthday With #GoogleBirthday Piñata Logo & Game
FAQ: All About The New Google “Hummingbird” Algorithm
Google’s Knowledge Graph Gets Smarter With Comparisons & Filters
Last Call ? SMX East Starts Next Tuesday in NYC; All Access Conference and Free Expo+ Passes Available
Apple Maps Sends Two Users Driving Across An Airport Runway
Study: 61 Percent Of Mobile Callers Ready To Convert
Google May Have Penalized Another Major Link Network: Ghost Rank 2.0
Post-PRISM, Google Confirms Quietly Moving To Make All Searches Secure, Except For Ad Clicks
The PPC Experiment You Never Dare Run
Follow @sengineland
Search Engine Land produces SMX, the Search Marketing Expo conference series. SMX events deliver the most comprehensive educational and networking experiences - whether youre just starting in search marketing or youre a seasoned expert.
Learn more about internet and search marketing with our free webinars, whitepapers and research reports at Digital Marketing Depot.
See More Topics
See more at Marketing Land
Arama darbe dördüncü baskı şimdi arşivlendi. Bu gösteriyi biz herhangi bir coğrafi konumda sanki sonuçlarını kontrol etmek için bir araç kapalı, Live.com tavsiyeleri, Kanadalılar değil duygu Hoşgeldiniz, Dannynin doğumgünü, Yahoo reklam büyümenin 
