查看文章 |
Google对交换链接的态度改变了吗？
|
Links to the Internet is becoming the basis for the Internet, but also logical for Chapter to be judged web search engine importance and authority of the principal basis. Relative to Yahoo! With Live Search, Google’s ranking algorithm to link the dependence stronger -- As Baidu, I have limited capability, not determine, but its time to sing the kind of tongue twister, perhaps in its algorithm that magic, "the Chinese word technology" plays a more crucial -- more vulnerable to various kinds of "artificial link" that also Because of this, Google how to solve unnatural link to the impact of rankings is best efforts, an objective, the effect is still very notable, for instance, explicitly oppose sponsored links, such as directly Zhi Text Link Ads Class space of survival was almost completely compressed. Recently, attentive friends may have noticed that Google Webmasters center right may lead to the punishment of the program is the link to a detailed qualification, which clearly stated that "I, I, you link your links" links exchange or mutual link will be the final rankings negative impact, a Thus friend asked to mail, which means that Google is not right to exchange links the attitude of fundamental change, does it mean in the future should avoid SEO exchange links. Below we talk about this view. Exchange Links : inefficient but widespread Although personal perspective, I have to exchange links with the attitude of exclusion, SEO exploration has never accepted any link on the exchange of the request, but mainly because of personal links and that the exchange can not guarantee the efficiency of SEO, in exchange for a link not only difficult to ensure that relevant, but also the value of links vulnerable to shrink, and not as a reliable means of SEO. I believe that this point is not controversial, after all, exchange links very low threshold of the implementation can almost be said that any Web site can be as willing to use, easy to implement the inevitable result is not very meaningful. But on the other hand, precisely because the exchange link low-threshold, but also makes it on the Internet is widespread, almost the majority of the sites exist to a greater or lesser extent to exchange links behavior. Although we can not say that this "there is a reasonable," but to Google’s clever and really put this kind of surgery or widespread? It seems a bit of Don Quixote fighting windmills suspects. Google will penalize exchange links? Let us look at specific Google links in the program known as the homepage that is how the (Chinese version for example) : However, some webmasters use a link exchange programs, simply for the establishment of cross-links and cooperation in the company’s website, regardless of the links (sources) and the quality of its own long-term impact of the site. This practice violates Google’s site administrator’s guide, the site may search results in the rankings have a negative impact. Links program examples include : * Seeks to manipulate the PageRank Links * Links to the Web sites of contraband or "bad neighborhood." * Links and reciprocal link exchange program ( "You link me, I link you.") * Links to the purchase or sale First, the page ID from the "66356", the page is the Google side of Webmasters Guide when the new update, we have introduced ID for "66,355" hidden real content or deceptive means and redirect the ID to "66357" automatic inquiries, they miss this one. Quite interesting is that the update to the Google page Administrator’s Guide, a new ID from "66353" to "66361" (Note : The "66360" does not exist), all the other elements, and only area in which no page, I do not know what the note. -- Statement is not allude to this page by writing interns Italy. The language of the page is also quite mean : a general understanding, the four listed in the "example" to be tied, at least that is not included in each other, but an objective analysis of the debate, the third of its "exchange links and reciprocal links" and the fourth "buy or sell links," Do not all "intended to manipulate PageRank links" subset? -- Perhaps some friends to this view. For example, may feel that the purchase or sale of links were not improper, but if the purchase or sale link on Google’s request to use nofollow attributes or link to be redirected to intercept robots.txt document on the website in the middle, then its entirely, there should not be the "may lead to the punishment of the list of examples "ah! -- This 4 What kind of a logical relationship ah? Downright collapse! Even suspected former vice president of the renowned teaching the "Chinese students," I also educate "students" (of course, the prerequisite is the page contents by the Americans take the lead in creating the English version. However, I am not sure, after all, Google is also considerable cattle, for instance, the famous AdSense domain the list is not protected by Google first introduced to the fact.) . Perhaps more justified only explanation is that despite the 3,4 are a subset, but Google will continue with a 3,4 tie, is intended to emphasize the link exchange, the clear link pay attitude : from the previous vague changed clear opposition? "Readiness" of Google Although the new "program links" page in the field of Chinese SEO caused much concern -- or ignorant, I do not see? -- However, in the field of English seems to have triggered a lot of reaction, many people were not the topic. Soon, perhaps, to appease SEOers, Google may also realize some wrong about 8 / 16 around quietly above list on the third link in the exchange of Laws (English version), from the original : Link exchange and reciprocal links schemes ( "Link to me and I’ll link to you.") Excessive reciprocal links or excessive link World of Warcraft Gold Cheap Blizzard Gold Blizzard Gold exchanging (" Link to me and I’ll link to you. ") That added a qualifier, "Excessive" and criticizing those who have all mute. However, it is not mean that Google has a new attitude change? It would be hard to say, the words "Excessive" Perhaps just to make matters more closely, people find loopholes living. Meanwhile, it also raises another key issue : whether the exchange how to link the building is appropriate? There were no standard yardstick? Otherwise, something similar will, "which means they want to go" joke : the punishment is excessive exchange links with impunity would represent not excessive exchange links? In addition, the closing date (8 / 22), Google’s Chinese version has not yet been updated. -- Seems to be the exception other than the English language versions are not updated, including English (UK), of course, I do not understand any other language. We exchanged proposals Links Again, we do not propose to exchange links. If you have other viable SEO strategies and programs, the proposed link from the exchange. If your website there is a certain link exchange, but it’s not a result of excessive panic. It must be noted that the link Google algorithm is the core of existing categories of misconduct and the abuse has links to fundamentally affect Google’s search quality, it is Google yet solved, therefore, not to underestimate Google may take intensity. With other types, "designed to manipulate the PageRank Links" is as difficult to detect paid links through Google users to report to identify ways to exchange links in the search engine is almost scares the most vulnerable judgment. If not for site link exchange be punished, search engines can be very simple to the value of its "reset." From a personal perspective, in relation to site "Active" link exchange, I would suggest friends to be vigilant against repealing the exchange links : Many blog To encourage customers to voice mail, and messages were canceled links "nofollow" attribute, which has greatly increased the website link the continent : even if your body on the link however cautious, but the message will have strong links to the uncertainty, it is easy inadvertently with his web site pages constitute a de facto exchange links; What is more, perhaps many blog to attract links canceled Trackback "nofollow" attribute, the consequences of almost 100% in exchange link : as long as the receiving page to link to the other side of the site to WordPress / TrackBack and to be published, two websites link between the exchange will pose. Of course, the above quote is only against blog simple example, but similar to this, if not your intention to do this, if your site frequently happen, the consequences will probably become very serious. 链接是Internet之所以成为Internet的基础，也顺理承章地成为搜索引擎判断网页重要性与权威度的主要依据。相对于Yahoo!与Live搜索，Google的排名算法对链接的依赖性更强——至于Baidu，因本人能力所限，不敢判定，但从其当年铺天盖地大唱绕口令来看，也许在其算法中那神奇的“中文分词技术”起着更关键的作用 ——更易受各类“人工链接”的影响，也正因为此，Google在如何解决非自然链接对排名的影响方面也是最努力的，客观地说，效果还是很显著的，比如说明确反对付费链接，直接让诸如Text Link Ads之类的生存空间几乎完全被压缩。 最近，细心的朋友可能已经注意到，Google在网站管理员中心对可能导致惩罚的链接方案给出了详细的限定，其中，明确地指出“你链接我我链接你”的链接交换或互惠链接将会为最终的网页排名带来负面影响，一位朋友因此发来邮件询问，这是不是意味着Google对交换链接的态度发生了根本性的改变，是不是意味着今后在SEO中应避免交换链接。 下面谈谈我们对此的看法。 交换链接：低效但普遍存在 虽然从个人角度，我对交换链接一直持排斥的态度，SEO探索也从未接受过任何关于交换链接的请求，但那主要是因为个人认为交换链接并不能保证SEO的效率，交换得来的链接不仅很难保证相关性，而且链接价值也极易缩水，并不能称为一种可靠的SEO手段。这点相信不存在争议，毕竟，交换链接的实施门槛很低，几乎可以说任何网站只要愿意都可以采用，易于实施的必然结果便是意义不大。 但另一方面，正因为交换链接实施的低门槛，也使得其在Internet上是普遍存在的，几乎绝大多数的网站都或多或少地存在着交换链接的行为。虽然我们不能由此而说“存在的就是合理的”，但是，以Google的聪明，真的会对这么一种普遍存在的行为动刀？似乎有点堂吉诃德战风车的嫌疑。 Google将惩罚交换链接？ 让我们具体来看看Google在该名为链接方案的网页中是怎么说的(以中文版为例)： 但是，某些网站管理员利用链接交换方案，单纯为交叉链接而建立合作商网页，而不顾链接（来源）的质量及其对自有网站的长期影响。这种做法违反 Google 的网站管理员指南，可能对网站在搜索结果中的排名产生负面影响。链接方案的示例包括： * 旨在操纵 PageRank 的链接 * 链接到网络上的违禁网站或”恶邻” * 链接交换和互惠链接方案（”你链接我，我链接你。”） * 购买或销售链接 首先，从该页的ID号“66356”来看，该页应该是在前段时间Google网站管理员指南更新时新加入的，当时我们曾介绍过ID为“66355”的隐藏真实内容或欺骗性的重定向手段和ID为“66357”的自动查询，却漏过了这一篇。颇为有趣的是，在更新后的Google网站管理员指南页中，新加入了ID自“66353” ~ “66361”(注：“66360”不存在)的其他全部内容，而惟独没有该页，不知道说明了什么。——声明，绝非暗喻该页由实习生撰写之意 。 该页的行文也颇有意思：按一般理解，其所列的四条“示例”，应为并列的，即至少不能是互相包含的，但客观地分析一下，其第三项“交换链接和互惠链接”及第四项“购买或销售链接”难道不都是“旨在操纵 PageRank 的链接”的子集么？——也许有的朋友对此有异议。举例来说，也许认为购买或销售链接并不都是不当的，但如果购买或销售链接时按Google的要求使用 nofollow 属性或将链接重定向至被 robots.txt 文件拦截的中间网页上的话，其便完全不应该出现在“可能导致惩罚的示例列表”中啊！——这四项究竟是怎样的一种逻辑关系啊？简直令人崩溃！甚至要怀疑李前著名副总裁在教导“中国学生”之余也在同时教导“美国学生”了(当然，前提是该页内容由美国人率先在英文版本中创建。不过本人不敢确定，毕竟谷歌目前也相当牛，比如说著名的AdSense域名保护列表不是由谷歌率先推出的嘛。)。 也许，勉强说得过去的解释只能是，尽管3、4均为1的子集，但Google垃圾车仍将3、4与1并列，意在强调对交换链接、付费链接的明确态度：从之前的含含糊糊转变了明确的反对？ “从善如流”的Google 虽然这个新加入的“链接方案”页在中文SEO领域未引起太大关注——还是我孤陋寡闻没有看到？——不过，在英文领域似乎引发了不小的反弹，许多人对此展开了讨论。 很快地，可能是为了安抚SEOers，也可能Google自己也意识到某些不妥，大约在8/16左右，悄悄地将上述列表中第三项关于交换链接的内容进行了修改(英文版本)，从最初的： Link exchange and reciprocal links schemes (”Link to me and I’ll link to you.”) Excessive reciprocal links or excessive link exchanging (”Link to me and I’ll link to you.”) 即加上了一个修饰语，“Excessive”，吸粪车让挑剔者们统统哑口无言。 但是，这是不是意味着Google的态度又有了新的改变？恐怕很难说，加上“Excessive”也许只是为了让表述更加严密，不让人找出漏洞而矣。同时，又带来另一个关键的问题：究竟怎么的交换链接建设才是适度的？这里面有没有个标准尺度？不然，便会闹出类似于“打哪指哪”的笑话：受惩罚的便是交换链接过度而未受惩罚便代表着交换链接未过度？ 此外，截止到目前为止(8/22)，谷歌的中文版本中仍未予更新。——似乎除English外的其他语言版本均未更新，包括English (UK)，当然，我也看不懂其他语言 。 我们对交换链接的建议 再次重申，我们不建议交换链接。如果您有其他可行的SEO策略与方案，建议远离交换链接。 如果您的网站中存在一定的交换链接，倒也不必因此而过度惊慌。但必须看到，链接是Google算法的核心，而目前各类不当链接的泛滥已经从根本上影响到Google的搜索质量，这点是Google亟待解决的，因此，不要低估Google可能采取的力度。而与其他类型“旨在操纵 PageRank 的链接”相比，如付费链接难以发现Google希望通过用户举报的方式找出，交换链接在搜索引擎中几乎是无所遁形的，最易判断。网站即使不因交换链接受到惩罚，搜索引擎也可以很简单地将其价值“清零”。 从个人角度，相对于网站“主动的”交换链接，我倒是建议朋友们应警惕无意中形成的交换链接： 许多blog网站为了鼓励用户留言，而取消了留言中链接的“nofollow”属性，这大大增加了网页中链接的不可控性：即使您对正文中出现的链接多么谨慎，但留言中的链接则有着很强的不确定性，很容易在无意中与其他网站中的页面构成事实上的交换链接； 专用车更有甚者，许多blog也许为了吸引链接，取消了Trackback的“nofollow”属性，这带来的后果几乎是百分之百的交换链接：只要接收到链接到该页的对方网站发来的PingBack / TrackBack并予以发布，两个网页间链接的交换便形成了。 当然，上述所举的只是针对blog的简单例子，但是，类似这样的情况，即使不是您有意而为之，如果在您的网站中频繁发生，后果也许便会变得很严重。
|
东方网