I’ve been posting on this blog for a couple of months now and I feel like I’ve really learned a lot about SEO during that time (obviously I still have a hell of a lot more to learn, but that’s the whole point of SEOpCentre).
I’ve had to find answers to a lot of pretty basic questions over the last month or so but there are plenty more that remain unanswered. I’ve got a feeling that some of these questions might seem really simple and obvious to most of the experienced SEOs out there, but they’re things that I’ve found myself wondering about at various points since I began blogging about learning SEO. They may even be so basic that everyone else out there just takes them for granted and all I’m doing is showing what a Big Dumb Noob I am for even having to ask.
Among this list are some of these questions. Where I’ve already found the answer to a question, I’ll give it in italics. If I haven’t yet been able to answer a question, I hope that some of the more experienced SEOs out there will share their knowledge in the comments.
If you’re trying to learn about SEO and there’s a simple question that you haven’t been able to answer yet then add that to the comments too and maybe someone will be able to answer that for you as well.
I’ll try to update this post with any answers we get and include a citation of the sources.
To get the ball rolling here’s one that I don’t understand yet:
Why do Yahoo Site Explorer, Webmaster Centre, Google Webmaster Tools and WP-Blog Stats (a really handy plugin - BTW) all show a wide variety of links pointing towards my sight now, but a simple link:www.seopscentre.com query on Google doesn’t return any results at all?
I really don’t get this one. Does it just take time for Google to feel like giving me an answer? Has it got something to do with the whole Main Index/Supplemental Index thing? Is this part of the “sandbox” effect? Am I just doing something wrong?
Update 1.0: Frank from fhmedia.dk and Michael Martinez from SEO-Theory both offered their takes on this one (you can read their full comments below). They both pointed out that Google have deliberately limited the results returned by the link: query in an effort to prevent SEOs from hammering their system with queries to try and check competitors’ link profiles.
Michael went on further to explain that, “The Webmaster Tools link reports are completely useless because they… don’t distinguish between links that pass value (links from pages in the Main Web Index) and links that don’t pass value (links from pages in the Supplemental Results Index).” which actually reminded me of another question that’s been on my mind…
Update 1.1: At the risk of making myself sound like the Michael Martinez fan club, I’ve just read a new post on his blog that gives a lot of useful tips about how to effectively use query commands for gathering SEO data and it really deserves another link.
How can I tell whether a page is in the main or supplemental index? And does it still matter?
I’ve seen a lot of talk about “Supplemental Result Index Hell” and, as Michael points out, links from supplemental pages don’t pass value, but since last summer Google have stopped labeling which results in the SERPs come from the supplemental index and have claimed that the distinctions between the supplemental and main index are “continuing to narrow.” I’ve done a bit of hunting around and the clearest explanation I’ve been able to find is a post by Jim Boykin about How to Find if a Page is in Google’s Secret Supplemental Results. Jim’s post is from around the same time last year when Google made the change and I’m still wondering whether anyone’s come up with a more precise method to find a definitive answer to the index status of a page.
Should I use rel=nofollow on strategic internal links to try and “sculpt” my pagerank towards my more important pages?
There seem to be two sides to this debate and I’m not entirely sure where i on fall on this one yet (my site’s still so new that Google won’t give me any indication of what my pagerank is, so it’s kind of hard to speak from personal experience on this one yet).
On the one hand I can understand the point of view that there’s not really any point trying to push the ranking of your about page or your login screen. Plus, all those pretty pictures of buckets full of link juice can be quite convincing.
On the other hand I can see a lot of sense in the opposing arguments (mostly from Michael Martinez of SEO-Theory) that since there’s no way to know what your actual pagerank is (and we all know that the little green bar is largely meaningless) there is no way of effectively measuring your pagerank sculpting efforts in the first place.
The jury’s still out on this one. Maybe once the Big G sees fit to light up my little green bar I’ll have a better idea of where I sit, but for now I think I’ll stick with a simple rel=nocomment ;-).
Update 2: Michael weighed in on this one as well, saying, “As far as NoFollow on internal links go, using it only hurts a Web site’s search visibility. Any site whose “About Us” page comes up for something other than “About X” and related queries is badly optimized. The correct solution for such problems is to properly optimize the site, not to “sculpt PageRank”.” You can read the rest of Michael’s comment below and I’d also recommend having a read of a few of his other posts about SEO Myths.
I think I’m definitely leaning more towards Michael’s point of view on PR-sculpting, mainly because he presents his case logically and far more scientifically than the more simplified arguments generally given in favour of PageRank sculpting theories.
Hmm, if only there was some way for me to comment-bait some of my other SEO-heroes into coming here and adding their opinions into the mix…
Should I put advertising on my blog?
So far, I’ve chosen not to. At the moment I’m not even sure if I ever will put ads up on here. I’m still just trying to establish this site and build up both my content and my readership and I don’t really want to let concerns over ad revenues get in the way of either of those things right now. I’m not saying never ever, just not yet. And if and when I do decide to place ads on SEOpsCentre I’d prefer to be selective about using affiliate ads for relevant SEO training providers rather than just covering the site with AdSense widgets.
As far as advice for anyone else starting a new blog goes, you need to ask yourself, “Will my audience (if you’ve even got one yet) benefit from what I’m advertising? Or will it put people off visiting my site if they feel it’s covered in more adverts than a NASCAR winner?”
Is SexySEO real?
I’d certainly like to think so. mmm
Now it’s over to you guys.
If you’re new to blogging and there’s a question that you’re struggling to find the answer for, ask it in the comments. If I can help I will.
And if you’re an experienced SEO who knows the answers to these question please share your knowledge with us. With any luck, it’ll mean one less dumb noob question that you’ll get in an email. And if there are any questions that you regularly get asked by SEO noobs and you’re sick of having to answer them all the time, why not throw those into the mix as well? You never know; the time you save may just be your own.
PS I’ve just scored a Guest Blogger Post over on SEO-Scoop (thanks Donna) so if you’ve found your way here after reading my post on there, then Welcome. Feel free to poke around and check out some of my other posts and if you like what you see don’t forget to hit the big orange button up at the top of the sidebar on the right so that you can get the RSS feed delivered direct to your favourite news reader.
PPS If you feel like referencing this post in your own blog, feel free to use the phrase Big Dumb Noob in your anchor text. You can even make it Ken Jones is a Big Dumb Noob if you like. I won’t mind. Really. In fact I think it’d be kind of funny if I end up ranking for that term :-).
Big Dumb Update: I checked my rankings for a few key terms this afternoon. I’m hardly setting the SERPs alight just yet, but I am number 1 in Google for Big Dumb Noob. Is it wrong that I feel oddly proud of that?







The link-command in Google has been made almost useless on purpose, is my understanding. For any website, the link-command will only return a fraction of the links pointing towards that site.
The motive is of course to keep SEO’s guessing about the number of backlinks indexed in Google for the websites of other people.
For ones own sites, they have introduced the backlink part of webmaster tools.
Thanks Frank.
What struck me as particularly odd though was the fact that the link: command doesn’t return any results at all. I know they don’t want to show a complete list of all the links, but I’m still wondering why they refuse to show any.
That’s what got me thinking it may have something to do with being “sandboxed”
I guess I’ll just have to be patient and wait until the next toolbar PR update and see if Google wants to start showing link: results at the same time that the bar goes green.
Google’s “link:” query operator has always provided less than a full report on links Google knows about, but for the past few years Google has only reported a random selection of links (apparently because many people with at least a smidgen of SEO knowledge were constantly checking link profiles).
The Webmaster Tools link reports are completely useless because they are incomplete, outdated, and don’t distinguish between links that pass value (links from pages in the Main Web Index) and links that don’t pass value (links from pages in the Supplemental Results Index).
You can use Google’s “link:” query operator to get a quick idea of how strong a site may be in terms of relative PageRank. You would probably be safe to assume that reported links are probably passing value, so if you have a site that gets 16 links in a Google link report and you’re comparing it to a site that gets 300 links in the Google report, you don’t need to guess about which site has the stronger link profile.
As far as NoFollow on internal links go, using it only hurts a Web site’s search visibility. Any site whose “About Us” page comes up for something other than “About X” and related queries is badly optimized. The correct solution for such problems is to properly optimize the site, not to “sculpt PageRank”.
In other words, if you run a query for your site name or company name and your “About” page shows first, the reason it’s showing first is that your on-site optimization sucks and using rel=nofollow will only make your on-site optimization suck more.
People who optimize correctly to begin with don’t resort to using rel=nofollow on internal links. They don’t need to remove “incidental” pages from their search results.
Even login pages need to be search visible because people often use site search to locate such pages. Nofollowing your internal content has absolutely no rational justification.