That page is ranked very well for a number of good keywords.
It's a PR5.
I know I know.... content is king.
But pages like that just depress me, especially when they're ranked higher than RELEVANT INFORMATION ON THE SUBJECT!
I fully understand. If you knew how to outsmart them, you wouldn't, because mere decency would make you hold back. You will patiently wait in line until the day comes when quality is being rewarded.
There are many, many websites that rank high and have crappy content. Life is not fair, surely you have heard?
I have 6 websites that have hundreds of blog post in them and hundreds of videos, pages and so on. They all target the same keyword.
The whole first page of Google for those terms are giant, one page link farms. Not fair,,,,,,
Folks, remember that Google ranks "pages", not sites. The Google bots are also not able to distinguish between quality and crap - they are bots. What they can distinguish is relevancy.
I highly relevant single page of crappy content with sufficient backlinks will almost always outrank a less-relevant "high-quality" site.
"quality" = subjective (based on opinion)
"relevancy" = objective (can be calculated with math)
I just hope that google eventually gets around to finding a better search system!
I can't get that page to open. It just shows a blank page with the words 'ship30 OK' in the top left hand side.
Exactly. I think that's why she has brought it up.
And how have you been IzzyM?
Time tells no lies and I have a feeling that you will find all that change within the next few months.
Once or twice I have seen really really crappy pages in the numbers 1-3 spot on the first page for something I was looking for and hit the back button faster then you can say 'crap'. I then noticed a little rating system thingy with room for a comment, you best believe I left the lowest rate and commented that the pages was next to useless and only was there to advertise, no actual information was on the site.
I think google could do that a bit more, let us tell them when they got it so far off the mark they aren't even in the right country anymore! Taken with a pinch of salt it could be very effective.
Nice find Wrylilt.
It actually presents a lesson for all of us. Basically we find a website that seems to be doing quite well. We then follow their successes and copy what they have done. To do this we need one tool. Its so expensive it is free.
Here it is:
http://siteexplorer.search.yahoo.com/au … amp;bwmf=s
Now I know better then anyone that even a blank page can rank well with the right backlink campaign.
The lesson? - I hear you ask - yes it's all about BACKLINKS and the fact it was created in 2003. And who needs Angela and Paul's backlinks when some sites have done all the work for us.
It is strange - I looked on the internet archive and they used to have a very nice site there, with some decent content. These archives date from 2008.
http://web.archive.org/web/200807191631 … /index.php
Maybe they are rebuilding the site or have had legal difficulties - I have no idea
if all your seeing is a blank page, what is the problem?
obviously its a technical error
Doesn't that prove that shit content is the real king and the quality stuff is at the back of the queue?
See Sunforged's post - it looks like the home page is having technical difficulties.
Whatever the cause, it looks like they got there through honest endeavour and good content
I can't be certain without trawling through my hard drive, but I am pretty sure that I have referenced that site in some psychology papers.
EDIT - as for the lower quality, maybe that is a sign that they are redesigning the site - the pages SF gave look 'temporary.'
perhaps its ugly - could be having errors with displaying styling or could be vestigial netscape era design styles, that doesnt mean its textual content is low quality.
Alright, thanks for the digging guys.
Although I would say this page might be an exception, I've seen lots of low quality or parked domains rank better than quality content.
This one is technically good information but not much of it, for instance:
by Will Apse5 months ago
Long, long ago, it was easy to write a hub. This is what I did:Spent two days producing 1500 words or so. Got the page about 80 percent right. Published it.After a couple of weeks, if the visitors started coming from...
by Paul Maplesden4 years ago
Hi there,I've been hearing discussions that noindexing hubs (because they are idled) impacts their backlinks in some way, and I'd like to find out if this is true.I've been researching this a bit online and have found...
by alternativeto2 years ago
Hey guys, i think HubPages is losing it's rank on Google, i have multiple accounts here and all are experiencing decreased traffic by 50% !!! . Anyone experiencing similar problems? Or did Google introduce any new...
by Janis Leslie Evans4 years ago
Are the rankings of our featured hubs on the topics pages precursors to how well our hubs will rank on google pages? For example, if I write a stellar hub on gala apples that lands in the #1 slot on the "All...
by Will Apse5 years ago
There is a lot of SEO related stuff about Panda in these forums, so here is something about quality and the kinds of content Google is trying to find and offer to searchers:It comes from Amit Singhal, Google Fellow and...
by yoshi977 years ago
First off ... these are observations on *my* hubs and your experience may directly vary from mine. Secondly, as these are only observations I'm not offering up that what I will say has any bearing on the way things...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.