Linkspun.com

I was of the opinion that a direct hardlink to your main page was the best way to get SERPs, although lately, I've been splitting up my link trades to include deeper locations such as singular posts, page numbers and category archives.

I'm leaning toward doing this a lot more in future because it's much more natural - I'm not too sure Google looks at a heap of PR2/3 links to a homepage of a site with 300+ pages and ignores the fact that none of those singular pages are linked to, although I guess it's a little easier to believe if you've got a paysite with very few visible pages.

Thoughts anyone?

I do deep linking both from my partners index to my deep links and vise versa. I also do deep links to deep links.

Link 'most relevant' to 'most relevant'

So for example... if you own a review site. And you trade links with 'BlowJobFrenzy.com' have them link to your blowjob niche page, not your index page. If you do that with 1000s of links, presorting them for search engines and weighting the correct pages with each you will do much better than if you just send them all to your index page.

Not to mention you will convert them better and have a lower bounce rate.

vrocks wrote:Not to mention you will convert them better and have a lower bounce rate.

People forget that the engines are in fact trying very hard to rank you based on how much a person will like finding you for a particular search. Doing what makes humans happy is often the easiest way to improve your ranks. It's like swimming with the tide rather than against it.

Deep linking is a necessity. Relevant to relevant is best by far.

I posted this in another thread, but am going to post it here to see what other ppl think:

I just read that Google doesn't "like" links in the format of:

http://www.insertwebsitename.com/ <--- Google doesn't like the forward slash

Yet when I've been setting up my link parters links and running the Check Links feature, I can't get the Check Links feature to approve the format of:

http://www.insertwebsitename.com

I want to give my link partners the strongest clear link possible.

1. Is this forward slash " / " a big deal with Google not liking it?

2. If so, is there a way to format my link partners URL's with out the terminal " / "

honestly, in my experience, google doesnt seem to look at a link with the forward slash any differently, in fact I think its better, looks more complete.

blogstargirl wrote:I posted this in another thread, but am going to post it here to see what other ppl think:

I just read that Google doesn't "like" links in the format of:

http://www.insertwebsitename.com/ <--- Google doesn't like the forward slash

Yet when I've been setting up my link parters links and running the Check Links feature, I can't get the Check Links feature to approve the format of:

http://www.insertwebsitename.com

I want to give my link partners the strongest clear link possible.

1. Is this forward slash " / " a big deal with Google not liking it?

2. If so, is there a way to format my link partners URL's with out the terminal " / "

Where did you read that?

At StackOverflow.com - I get geeky sometimes

blogstargirl wrote:I just read that Google doesn't "like" links in the format of:

http://www.insertwebsitename.com/ <--- Google doesn't like the forward slash

The syntax of a HTTP adddress is defined at: http://www.w3.org/Addressing/URL/url-spec.txt - for what I can see there's no mention about the final slash, so technically writing http://www.insertwebsitename.com/ or http://www.insertwebsitename.com or http://www.insertwebsitename.com/index.html is exactly the same (if your server is configured to do that, your main page can have three more different urls: http://insertwebsitename.com and http://insertwebsitename.com/ and http://insertwebsitename.com/index.html).

Google correctly recognize these three urls as the same page (other software don't) and it has no reason to prefer a syntax over another. Google follows technical standards (other companies don't, especially Microsoft and Apple, to name a few). I personally prefer the form with the final slash, it looks much more elegant...

Important: if you configured your server to work with and without www you may want to use the REL CANONICAL to tell Google these urls are the same page, specially if the page updates frequently (so Google might cache different versions of the page for different urls). Normally Google correctly handles it, but in extreme cases there could be unexpected results: PR split in both urls, only one page indexed... Interesting article here: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bi ... wer=139394