Pages like this make me want to stop being honest on google

1. 87

   WryLiltposted 13 years ago

   http://www.workingwell.org.au/
   
   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!

   replyreport
2. 0

   Website Examinerposted 13 years ago

   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.

   replyreport
3. 69

   Bill Manningposted 13 years ago

   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,,,,,,

   replyreport
   1. 54

      MyPostingIDposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      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)

      replyreport
4. 87

   WryLiltposted 13 years ago

   
   
   I just hope that google eventually gets around to finding a better search system!

   replyreport
5. 87

   IzzyMposted 13 years ago

   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.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      EmpressFelicityposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Same here.

      replyreport
      1. 87

         WryLiltposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Exactly!

         replyreport
   2. 81

      ngurecoposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly. I think that's why she has brought it up.
      
      And how have you been IzzyM?

      replyreport
      1. 87

         IzzyMposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I'm fine thanks for asking. Still in Scotland (I came over for my nephew's funeral) and it is so peaceful and relaxing here. Great for working now that I have arranged a temporary internet access.

         replyreport
6. 0

   shazwellynposted 13 years ago

   Time tells no lies and I have a feeling that you will find all that change within the next few months.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      WryLiltposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      hope so

      replyreport
7. 79

   kirstenblogposted 13 years ago

   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.

   replyreport
8. 56

   TerryGlposted 13 years ago

   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.

   replyreport
   1. 66

      alternate poetposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I am exploring still -  but surely the answer to quality is to have quality backlinks ?  if you are backlinked to an authoratitive source it must carry weight ?

      replyreport
9. 78

   Sufidreamerposted 13 years ago

   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

   replyreport
   1. 59

      MPG Narrativesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      It's an MBF funded site??? This is even more curious ... maybe it is being upgraded but why not mention it? (BTW - MBF is a medical insurance company).

      replyreport
10. 72

    sunforgedposted 13 years ago

    if all your seeing is a blank page, what is the problem?
    
    obviously its a technical error

    replyreport
11. 72

    sunforgedposted 13 years ago

    http://www.working-well.org/posture.html
    http://www.working-well.org/massage.html

    replyreport
    1. 87

       WryLiltposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Hmmm hadn't dug that far. And it looks far lower quality on those pages than on the one sufidreamer dug up...

       replyreport
12. 60

    Joe Badtoeposted 13 years ago

    Doesn't that prove that shit content is the real king and the quality stuff is at the back of the queue?

    replyreport
13. 78

    Sufidreamerposted 13 years ago

    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.'

    replyreport
14. 72

    sunforgedposted 13 years ago

    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.

    replyreport
15. 87

    WryLiltposted 13 years ago

    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:
    
    http://www.jaffle.com/

    replyreport