Bing Updates Webmaster Guidelines: Keyword Stuffing Now Off Limits

Last night, Bing has updated their webmaster guidelines adding a section about "keyword stuffing." Surprised it wasn't there from the onset? Yea, me too but truthfully, there are a ton of things they can/should add there that are not currently there.

What is new? The section on keyword stuffing, which reads:

When creating content, make sure to create your content for real users and readers, not to entice search engines to rank your content better. Stuffing your content with specific keywords with the sole intent of artificially inflating the probability of ranking for specific search terms is in violation of our guidelines and can lead to demotion or even the delisting of your website from our search results.

I verified using various caching services that the paragraph was indeed not there a day or two ago.

That being said, the language is pretty strong. If you do use keyword stuffing techniques on your site, Bing may give your site a "demotion" or even worse "delist" your site from the Bing search results.

Hat tip to +GauravGupta2014 for informing me about this.

Google's Matt Cutts: We Tested Dropping Backlinks From Algorithm, It Was Much Worse

Google's Matt Cutts latest video has Google admitting they did and do indeed test their search results by turning off linkage data as part of their algorithm. Matt Cutts said the results would be "much much worse" if they did indeed do that in real life.

That does indeed make sense since Google's core algorithm was mostly based on links and PageRank and all these years they spent improving on it and such. They invested so much time and resources in using links to rank sites that dropping it now would make for a mess.

It is funny, because a couple weeks ago, we asked you what you would do if Google dropped backlinks from the algorithm. We so far have over 300 responses and 34% said they would be very excited, 32% said they'd be curious and 17% said they'd be very concerned.

Here is Matt's video on the topic:

Business Names Google Places Quality Guidelines Updated

Google has updated their Google Places quality guidelines once again this time to clarify how you can name your business within Google Places/Google Local/Google Maps.

Jade Wang from Google pulled out the changes and posted them in the Google Places Help forums. The changes include:

• Your title should reflect your business's real-world title.
• In addition to your business's real-world title, you may include a single descriptor that helps customers locate your business or understand what your business offers.
• Marketing taglines, phone numbers, store codes, or URLs are not valid descriptors.
• Examples of acceptable titles with descriptors (in italics for demonstration purposes) are "Starbucks Downtown" or "Joe's Pizza Delivery". Examples that would not be accepted would be "#1 Seattle Plumbing", "Joe's Pizza Best Delivery", or "Joe's Pizza Restaurant Dallas".

Hopefully that clarifies things a bit better, because these guidelines are updated relatively frequently.

Google's Advice On Infinite Crawl Pages & SEO

Google's John Mueller, Maile Ohye, and Joachim Kupke co-authored a technical blog post on the Google Webmaster Blog on how to make infinite scroll pages more search engine friendly.

The issue, as you can understand, is that GoogleBot and crawlers can't scroll down a page and thus can't load more content with that action. In Google;s blog post, they announced the definitive guide on how to make infinite scroll pages more search-friendly.

In short, Google is recommending that you convert the infinite scroll page to paginated series by using the HTML5 History API. John even made a demo page of infinite scroll that is search engine friendly.

Google Drops New Webmaster Guideline On Not Blocking Google Ads

Yesterday we broke the news that Google added that you should not block Google ads within the technical requirements within Google's Webmaster Guidelines.

It seems Google has pulled the new line completely from their guidelines. It is unclear why but I suspect after I emailed them they reviewed it and found it to be confusing as well.

The new guideline that was added for about 24 hours read:

Make efforts to ensure that a robots.txt file does not block a destination URL for a Google Ad product. Adding such a block can disable or disadvantage the Ad.

As I explained, it was confusing because Google asks you specifically to block other ads from being crawled. But here, Google wants you to allow Google to crawl those ads. You and I understand why, because Google uses landing page quality score as part of AdWords ranking but still, it is confusing how they worded it.

Now, the language and the bullet point, is completely gone. The guidelines are back to how they were the day before.

Google has not responded to my request for clarification as of yet.

Google: GoogleBot Follows Up To Five Redirects At The Same Time

Google's John Muller said in a webmaster hangout on Friday that GoogleBot will follow up to five redirects at the same time, past that, you are probably out of luck.

I don't believe we had a number, a solid number, on how many redirects Google will follow. This may, and I may be wrong, be the first time Google gave a number on the number of redirects they follow at one time.

We had Matt Cutts talk about PageRank dilution through redirects in the past.

Google's John Mueller said this 46 minutes and 3 seconds into the hangout embedded below:

Of course, this is useful information for SEOs when doing audits.

Google Says Switching To HTTPS Won't Change Your Page Rankings

A Google Webmaster Help thread has someone complaining that his site's rankings dropped and the one thing he noticed was that his home page and 56 other pages are indexed in Google with the https version.

To which John Mueller of Google responded:

Before you get too focused on technical issues, I'd just like to add that going from https to http, or the other way around, generally won't noticeably change your pages' ranking.

So he is implying that there may be something else here to blame for his ranking drop and not the HTTPS issue he is citing.

But is it true that switching from HTTPS to HTTP or the other way around "generally won't noticeably change your pages' ranking?"

Six months ago or so, we covered that making the switch is doable but you need to do it right. Matt Cutts also posted a video on the topic in 2011, of course, things change quickly in search, so I am not sure if he would be as reserved if he made the video today:

Smo Active Users Email Id 2014

Smo Active Users Email Id Database

11webexpert@gmail.com,

11webpoint@gmail.com,

aannagates@gmail.com,

aannagates@gmail.com,

abdulsami134@gmail.com,

abhirajuts@gmail.com,

abhirajuts@gmail.com,

abhirampathak3@gmail.com,

adityakumarshrivastwa@gmail.com ,

adityakumarshrivastwa@gmail.com ,

agarwalmana404@gmail.com,

ajayk7090@gmail.com,

alaina.wats@gmail.com,

alaina.wats@gmail.com,

alariceengel@gmail.com,

alastairalex1@gmail.com,

alexzendra889@gmail.com,

alissalori1@gmail.com,

Free German Classified Sites List 2014

Free German Classified Sites List 2014

 Here is a free German classifed sites list. These sites are high page rank websites and also most popular sites in Germany.

S.No	Website URL	PR	Alexa Rank
1	http://www.postad.de/	3	1636915
2	http://www.olx.in/?from=german	3	300
3	http://berlin.de.craigslist.de/	6	24716
4	http://www.locanto.de/	6	112297
5	http://www.adoos.de/	4	947101
6	http://adsgermany.post2find.com/	2	72369
7	http://germany.global-free-classified-ads.com/	1	9378
8	http://www.markt.de/	6	7193
9	http://www.classitweet.com/-12_Germany/	2	260736
10	http://www.khotsana.com/	3	1349501
11	http://www.germanworldonline.com/	5	2655125
12	http://wantedineurope.com/	4	1124957
13	http://ramstein.bookoo.com/	3	49549
14	http://munich.yatbo.com/	3	177199
15	http://ads.comrite.com/	3	177147

Australia Free Business Listing Sites 2014

Free Business Listing Sites in Australia

S.No	Website URL	PR	Alexa Rank
1	http://truelocal.com.au	7	5603
2	http://yellowpages.com.au	8	6305
3	http://hotfrog.com.au	5	15943
4	http://aussieweb.com.au	5	38013
5	http://reverseaustralia.com	3	45749
6	http://yelp.com	7	134
7	http://local.com.au	4	82734
8	http://cylex.com.au	4	55213
9	http://findlocal.com.au	1	313911
10	http://localbusinessguide.com.au	6	39637
11	http://aubiz.org	5	184730
12	http://phonenumber.com.au	3	4564396
13	http://australianguide.net	2	170064
14	http://whitepages.com.au	7	13780
15	http://whereis.com	7	20550
16	http://yelp.com.au	7	11973
17	http://brownbook.net	4	17123
18	http://manta.com	6	835
19	http://startlocal.com.au	5	27626
20	http://yalwa.com.au	5	55688
21	http://superpages.com.au	4	143919
22	http://street-directory.com.au	6	71874
23	http://dlook.com.au	5	40586
24	http://youtube.com	9	3
25	http://issuu.com	9	494

Uk Free Business Listing Sites 2014

Uk Free Business Listing Sites 2014

Here is the some high pr free business listing sites UK…

S.No	Website Url	PR
1	http://yell.com	7
2	http://cylex-uk.co.uk	6
3	http://thomsonlocal.com	7
4	http://hotfrog.co.uk	5
5	http://misterwhat.co.uk	5
6	http://yelp.com	7
7	http://independent.co.uk	8
8	http://yelp.co.uk	7
9	http://qype.co.uk	6
10	http://thesun.co.uk	8
11	http://ufindus.com	3
12	http://scoot.co.uk	6
13	http://manta.com	6
14	http://touchlocal.com	5
15	http://bizwiki.co.uk	5
16	http://brownbook.net	4
17	http://near.co.uk	3
18	http://accessplace.com	6
19	http://localmole.co.uk	6
20	http://businessclassified.co.uk	3
21	http://dentonsweb.com	3
22	http://uk-local-search.co.uk	4
23	http://gomy.co.uk	3
24	http://mylocalservices.co.uk	3
25	http://thelocalweb.net	3

Google Places Adds A Slew Of Business Categories

Google is working on improving and expanding the business categories for Google Places For Business for countries around the world. In fact, they’re adding over 1,000 new categories in the Places dashboard.

Google Business community manager Jade Wang posted an announcement in the Google Product Forums (via Search Engine Roundtable), saying that the move comes based on feedback from merchants. She writes:

Google Warns German Webmasters That Paid Links Violate Google’s Guidelines

Google head of search spam Matt Cutts postedon Twitter this morning another stern warning to German webmasters about a link penalty looming for them.

Matt Cutts tweeted:

A reminder (in German) that paid links that pass PageRank violate our guidelines: http://goo.gl/sHDdlC

The blog post is written in German on the German Webmaster blog, which basically says Google reserves the right to issue penalties for unnatural links. It then goes through the process of explaining the types of unnatural links and how to submit a reconsideration request if you were hit.

Google Is Not Broken

In spite of what many think, Google is not broken. But wait, naysayers will say, Look at this search result, it stinks! This spammer is succeeding in ranking high, they emerged from nowhere and are now in the top three results!

It’s true — there are many such examples that you can point to. Making sense of this landscape can be quite confusing, but that’s what I will attempt to do in today’s post.

Firstly, there are two basic reasons why Google can be quite slow to address some of the problems you might find.

1. They Can Afford To Be Thoughtful And Patient

Why, you ask? They have dominant market share. Here is the December 2013 market share data from comScore:

comScore notes that “‘Explicit Core Search’ excludes contextually driven searches that do not reflect specific user intent to interact with the search results.” In my experience, the practical impact of adjusting for this is that the Google search market share is a bit higher. Most sites I look at show a larger percentage of their organic search coming from Google than 67%.

Can You Rank In Google Without Content?

A WebmasterWorld thread has a webmaster who has a site that doesn't have any real content. It is basically statistical downloads and specifications downloadable as PDFs or Zip files.

Can you rank web pages with no content at all in Google?

A good example of a page that ranks without having the exact words on it is the Adobe Reader page which ranks for [click here].

But what about a page with almost no content? It is possible to rank on anchor text alone?

Yes, but it has to be very obscure and non-competitive words.

Google's Matt Cutts: Don't Use Article Directories For Link Building

In a short video yesterday, Google's Matt Cutts told webmasters and SEOs not to use article directory sites for link building strategies.

Well, he kind of said not to use it and hinted to it at the end by saying:

Here is the video:

Google Places Business Adds 1,000 Categories Internationally

Jade Wang from Google's Places, business help, team posted in theGoogle Business Help forums that they have greatly expanded the business category support by adding over a 1,000 new categories internationally.

Previously, they had a very limited number of categories for international (Non USA) businesses. The reason was because it was complicated to translate them all. Well, now Google has translated a ton and can support 1,000 new categories.

Jade said:

Today, we are taking a first step of many to improve categories that merchants can use to represent their businesses. Specifically, we’re adding over 1,000 new categories in the new Places dashboard. These categories are available globally and translated to every language Google supports.

Why not sooner? Jade explained:

DMOZ Drops Over 1 Million Sites From Directory?

Did you notice that DMOZ, one of the oldest and largest human crafted web directories, has removed over 1 million sites and 10,000 editors from their directory?

A DigitalPoint Forum thread first noticed it. If you look at the live site now, you will see 4,261,763 sites, 89,252 editors and over 1,019,865 categories in the footer. But if you go to the WayBackMachine archive you will see 5,310,345 sites, 99,997 editors and over 1,019,508 categories.

Here are screen shots:

NOW:

OLD:

As you can see, DMOZ dropped about 1 million sites from their directory and 10,000 editors. There was no announcement about this, so I am not sure if this is just a glitch on the footer.