<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Google Data &#187; Stefanie, Search Quality team, Dublin</title>
	<atom:link href="/author/stefanie-search-quality-team-dublin/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://googledata.org</link>
	<description>Everything Google: News, Products, Services, Content, Culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2015 21:58:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>An update on spam reporting</title>
		<link>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/an-update-on-spam-reporting/</link>
		<comments>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/an-update-on-spam-reporting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2007 21:30:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stefanie, Search Quality team, Dublin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google Webmaster Central]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google webmaster tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[webmaster central]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(Note: this post has been translated into English from our German blog.)In 2006 one of our initiatives in the area of communication was to notify some webmasters in case of a violation of our Webmaster Guidelines (e.g. by using a "particular search eng...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[(<span style="font-weight: bold;">Note: </span>this post has been translated into English from our <a href="http://googlewebmastercentral-de.blogspot.com/">German blog</a>.)<br /><br />In 2006 one of our initiatives in the area of communication was <span>to </span><a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/webmaster-communication" title="notification of webmasters">notify some webmasters</a><span> in case of a violation of our </span><a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769" title="Webmaster Guidelines">Webmaster Guidelines</a><span> (e.g. by using a "particular search engine friendly" software that generates doorways as an extra). No small number of these good-will emails to webmasters have been brought about by </span><a href="http://www.google.com/contact/spamreport.html" title="spam reports">spam reports</a><span> from our users.</span><p><span></span><span>We are proud of our users who alert us to potential abuses for the sake of the whole internet community. We appreciate this even more, as </span><a href="http://www.google.com/technology/" title="PageRank™">PageRank™</a><span> (and thus Google search) is based on a democratic principle, i.e. a webmaster is giving other sites a "vote" of approval by linking to it.</span></p><p><span></span><span>In 2007 </span><span>as an extension and complement of this democratic principle, we want to further increase our users' awareness of webmaster practices that do or do not conform to Google's standards. <span>Such informed users are then able to </span></span><span>take </span><span>counter-action against webspam by filing spam reports. By doing so </span><span>a mutually beneficial process can be initiated. Ultimately,</span><span> not only will</span><span></span><span> all Google users benefit from the best possible search quality, but also will spammy webmasters realize that their attempts to unfairly manipulate their site's ranking will pay off less and less.</span></p> <span></span><span></span><span>Our spam report forms are provided in two different flavors: an authenticated form that requires registration in </span><a href="http://www.google.com/webmasters/sitemaps/" title="Webmaster Tools">Webmaster Tools</a><span>, and an </span><a href="http://www.google.com/contact/spamreport.html" title="unauthenticated from">unauthenticated form</a><span>. Currently, we investigate every spam report from a registered user. Spam reports to the unauthenticated form are assessed in terms of impact, and a large fraction of those are reviewed as well.<br /></span> <p> So, the next time you can't help thinking that the ranking of a search result was not earned by virtue of its content and legitimate SEO, then it is the perfect moment for a spam report. Each of them can give us crucial information for the continual optimization of our search algorithms.<br /></p>  <p>   Interested in learning more? Then find below answers to the three most frequent questions.<br /><br /> <strong>FAQs concerning spam reports:</strong>  </p>   <p><span style="font-weight: bold;">   Q: What happens to an authenticated spam report at Google?</span><br />A: An authenticated spam report is analyzed and then used for evaluating new spam-detecting algorithms, as well as to identify trends in webspam. Our goal is to detect all the sites engaging in similar manipulation attempts automatically in the future and to make sure our algorithms rank those sites appropriately. We don´t want to get into an inefficient game of cat and mouse with individual webmasters who have reached into the wrong bag of tricks.  </p>  <p><span style="font-weight: bold;">   Q: Why are there sometimes no immediately noticeable consequences of a spam report?</span><br /><span>A: Google is always seeking to improve its algorithms for countering webspam, but we also take action on individual spam reports. Sometimes that action will not be immediately visible to an outside user, so there is no need to submit a site multiple times in order for Google to evaluate a URL. There are different reasons that might account for a user´s false impression that </span>a particular spam report went unnoticed. Here are a few of those reasons: </p> <ul><li> Sometimes, Google might already be handling the situation appropriately. For example, if you are reporting a site that seems to engage in excessive link exchanging, it could be the case that we are already discounting the weight of <span>those unearned backlinks correctly</span>, and the site is showing up for other reasons. Note that changes in how Google handles backlinks for a site are not immediately obvious to outside users. Or it may be the case that we already deal with a phenomenon such as keyword stuffing correctly in our scoring, and therefore we are not quite as concerned<span> about something that might not look wonderful, but that isn't affecting rankings.</span>   </li><li> A complete exclusion from Google´s SERPs is only one possible consequence of a spam report. Google might also choose to give a site a "yellow card" so that the site can not be found in the index for a short time. However, if a webmaster ignores this signal, then a "red card" with a longer-lasting effect might follow. So it's possible that Google is already aware of an issue and communicating with the webmaster about that issue, or that we have taken action other than a removal on a spam report. </li><li> Sometimes, simple patience is the answer, because it takes time for algorithmic changes to be thoroughly checked out, or for the externally displayed PageRank to be updated. </li><li> It can also be the case that Google is working on solving the more general instance of an issue, and so we are reluctant to take action on an individual situation. </li><li>     <span>A spam report may also just have been considered unjustified. For example, this may be true for </span><span>a report whose sole </span><span>motivation appears to attempt to harm a</span> direct competitor with a better ranking.<span></span>  </li></ul> <p><span style="font-weight: bold;">   Q: Can a user expect to receive feedback for a spam report?</span><br />A: This is a common request, and we know that our users might like<span> verification of the reported URLs or simple confirmation that the spam report had been taken care of.</span> Given the choice how to spend our time, we have decided to invest our efforts into taking action on spam reports and improving our algorithms to be more robust. But we are open to consider how to scale communication with our users going forward.<br /></p><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/32069983-117511462595697579?l=googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/an-update-on-spam-reporting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Brand new German Webmaster Central Blog</title>
		<link>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/brand-new-german-webmaster-central-blog/</link>
		<comments>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/brand-new-german-webmaster-central-blog/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Mar 2007 00:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stefanie, Search Quality team, Dublin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google Webmaster Central]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google webmaster tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[webmaster central]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[   For those German-speaking folks among our readers of this English Webmaster Central Blog we have exciting news: We have just launched the German Webmaster-Zentrale Blog! This is a tribute to the fact that the German-speaking webmaster community is o...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="MsoNormal">   <span>For those German-speaking folks among our readers of this English Webmaster Central Blog we have exciting news: We have just launched the </span><a href="http://googlewebmastercentral-de.blogspot.com/" title="German Webmaster Central Blog">German Webmaster-Zentrale Blog</a><span>! This is a tribute to the fact that the German-speaking webmaster community is our second biggest audience of this blog. The German Webmaster Blog will provide you with first-hand information tailored towards our German-speaking webmasters. The blog will contain a mix of German versions of postings from this blog as well as unique postings about market-specific issues.<br /></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span>So German speakers around the world check out this new resource for questions about indexing, ranking, quality guidelines for webmasters, and how to design websites with the user in mind. We'll also be participating in the </span><a title="German discussion forum" href="http://groups.google.com/group/google-sitemaps-de">German discussion forum</a><span>, so head over there if you have questions or other things you'd like to talk about.<br /></span></p><span>Don't speak German? We want to talk to webmasters all over the world, so stay tuned for more!  </span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/32069983-117391488414315031?l=googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/brand-new-german-webmaster-central-blog/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Building link-based popularity</title>
		<link>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/building-link-based-popularity/</link>
		<comments>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/building-link-based-popularity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Dec 2006 20:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stefanie, Search Quality team, Dublin]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Google Webmaster Central]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[google webmaster tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[webmaster central]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false"></guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Late in November we were at SES in Paris, where we had the opportunity to meet some of the most prominent figures in the French SEO and SEM market. One of the issues that came up in sessions and in conversations was a certain confusion about how to mos...]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[Late in November we were at <a href="http://www.searchenginestrategies.com/sew/paris06/index.html">SES in Paris</a>, where we had the opportunity to meet some of the most prominent figures in the French SEO and SEM market. One of the issues that came up in sessions and in conversations was a certain confusion about how to most effectively increase the link-based popularity of a website. As a result we thought it might be helpful to clarify how search engines treat link spamming to increase a site´s popularity.<br /><br />This confusion lies in the common belief that there are two ways for optimizing the link-based popularity of your website: Either the meritocratic and long-term option of developing natural links or the risky and short-term option of non-earned backlinks via link spamming tactics such as buying links. We've always taken a clear stance with respect to manipulating the PageRank algorithm in our <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769">Quality Guidelines</a>. Despite these policies, the strategy of participating in link schemes might have previously paid off. But more recently, Google has tremendously refined its link-weighting algorithms. We have more people working on Google's link-weighting for quality control and to correct issues we find. So nowadays, undermining the PageRank algorithm is likely to result in the loss of the ability of link-selling sites to pass on reputation via links to other sites.<br /><br />Discounting non-earned links by search engines opened a new and wide field of tactics to build link-based popularity: Classically this involves optimizing your content so that thematically-related or trusted websites link to you by choice. A more recent method is <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-advice-linkbait-and-linkbaiting/">link baiting</a>, which typically takes advantage of Web 2.0 social content websites. One example of this new way of generating links is to submit a handcrafted article to a service such as <a href="http://digg.com/">http://digg.com</a>. Another example is to earn a reputation in a certain field by building an authority through services such as <a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/">http://answers.yahoo.com</a>. Our general advice is: Always focus on the users and not on search engines when developing your optimization strategy. Ask yourself what creates value for your users. Investing in the quality of your content and thereby earning natural backlinks benefits both the users and drives more qualified traffic to your site.<br /><br />To sum up, even though improved algorithms have promoted a transition away from paid or exchanged links towards earned organic links, there still seems to be some confusion within the market about what the most effective link strategy is. So when taking advice from your SEO consultant, keep in mind that nowadays search engines reward sweat-of-the-brow work on content that bait natural links given by choice.<br /><br />In French / en Francais<br /><br /><b>Liens et popularité.<br /></b>[Translated by] Eric et Adrien, l’équipe de qualité de recherche.<br /><br />Les 28 et 29 Novembre dernier, nous étions à Paris pour assister à <a href="http://www.searchenginestrategies.com/sew/paris06/fr/index.html">SES</a>. Nous avons eu la chance de rencontrer les acteurs du référencement et du Web marketing en France. L’un des principaux points qui a été abordé au cours de cette conférence, et sur lequel il règne toujours une certaine confusion, concerne l’utilisation des liens dans le but d’augmenter la popularité d’un site. Nous avons pensé qu’il serait utile de clarifier le traitement réservé aux liens spam par les moteurs de recherche.<br /><br />Cette confusion vient du fait qu’un grand nombre de personnes pensent qu’il existe deux manières d’utiliser les liens pour augmenter la popularité de leurs sites. D’une part, l’option à long terme, basée sur le mérite, qui consiste à développer des liens de manière naturelle. D’autre part, l’option à court terme, plus risquée, qui consiste à obtenir des liens spam, tel les liens achetés. Nous avons toujours eu une position claire concernant les techniques visant à manipuler l’algorithme PageRank dans nos <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769">conseils aux webmasters</a>.<br /><br />Il est vrai que certaines de ces techniques ont pu fonctionner par le passé. Cependant, Google a récemment affiné les algorithmes qui mesurent l’importance des liens. Un plus grand nombre de personnes évaluent aujourd’hui la pertinence de ces liens et corrigent les problèmes éventuels. Désormais, les sites qui tentent de manipuler le Page Rank en vendant des liens peuvent voir leur habilité à transmettre leur popularité diminuer.<br /><br />Du fait que les moteurs de recherche ne prennent désormais en compte que les liens pertinents, de nouvelles techniques se sont développées pour augmenter la popularité d’un site Web. Il y a d’une part la manière classique, et légitime, qui consiste à optimiser son contenu pour obtenir des liens naturels de la part de sites aux thématiques similaires ou faisant autorité. Une technique plus récente, la pêche aux liens, (en Anglais « <a href="http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/seo-advice-linkbait-and-linkbaiting/">link baiting</a> »), consiste à utiliser à son profit certains sites Web 2.0 dont les contenus sont générés par les utilisateurs. Un exemple classique étant de soumettre un article soigneusement prépare à un site comme <a href="http://digg.com/">http://digg.com</a>. Un autre exemple consiste à acquérir un statut d’expert concernant un sujet précis, sur un site comme <a href="http://answers.yahoo.com/">http://answers.yahoo.com</a>. Notre conseil est simple : lorsque vous développez votre stratégie d’optimisation, pensez en premier lieu à vos utilisateurs plutôt qu’aux moteurs de recherche. Demandez-vous quelle est la valeur ajoutée de votre contenu pour vos utilisateurs. De cette manière, tout le monde y gagne : investir dans la qualité de votre contenu bénéficie à vos utilisateurs, cela vous permet aussi d’augmenter le nombre et la qualité des liens naturels qui pointent vers votre site, et donc, de mieux cibler vos visiteurs.<br /><br />En conclusion, bien que les algorithmes récents aient mis un frein aux techniques d’échanges et d’achats de liens au profit des liens naturels, il semble toujours régner une certaine confusion sur la stratégie à adopter. Gardez donc à l’esprit, lorsque vous demandez conseil à votre expert en référencement, que les moteurs de recherche récompensent aujourd’hui le travail apporté au contenu qui attire des liens naturels.<div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/32069983-116621569245134199?l=googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com' alt='' /></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://googledata.org/google-webmaster-central/building-link-based-popularity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
