Article About New Google Algorithm

1. 91

   Natalie Frankposted 5 years ago

   I ran across this article and thought it might be helpful for some.  It's a bit "techy" for me but I think I got the main points.
   
   New Google Algorithm May Update Page Ranking

   replyreport
2. 75

   Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago

   I get bored quick with all the super tech talk. Well, whatever, I'm nobody, I do try to make my things as specific as I possibly can. Not much ambiguity in my last several years of work.

   replyreport
3. STAFF

   Larry Slawsonposted 5 years ago

   Interesting.  Thank you for sharing Natalie!

   replyreport
4. 99

   DrMark1961posted 5 years ago

   I thought the amusing part was the subtitle "so how can you use this to improve your SEO" and then underneath that subtitle they did not say anything.
   Clickbaiters.

   replyreport
5. 75

   Wesman Todd Shawposted 5 years ago

   I felt like it was useful information to know that Google search users tend to compare a page to the other pages grouped next to it in results. Well, that's fairly obvious, if only you'd ever recognized we all do it, and how important it could possibly be.
   
   Anyway, I remember back when the whole deal was basically 'whoever has the most backlinks wins.' Well, pretty much everything is better than that, right?

   replyreport
6. 99

   DrMark1961posted 5 years ago

   Yeah, here is some more important info:
   "Knowing what users want can help you better understand the user’s information needs and to create web pages that better meets those needs."
   Right, I have only read this same thing about 1000 times.

   replyreport
7. 97

   CYong74posted 5 years ago

   I stopped reading SEJ last year. Most of the time they do no more than regurgitate the obvious.

   replyreport
8. 91

   Natalie Frankposted 5 years ago

   I just thought it might be useful for some of the new writers on here who aren't very knowledgeable about what's in the article.

   replyreport
   1. 99

      DrMark1961posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks! I hope you do not take all the terrible comments on here personally!!! You know we are all a bunch of angry writers looking for that next fix that will make us super-performers.

      replyreport
   2. 97

      CYong74posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Natalie, I apologize for sounding abrasive earlier! What I meant was, SEJ tends to be superficial with what they write, so I stopped reading their articles.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         lobobrandonposted 5 years agoin reply to this

         They almost always are. Definitely one of the worst places for original content. They probably scraped this piece from elsewhere and rewrote it.

         replyreport
9. 77

   lobobrandonposted 5 years ago

   Natalie, thanks a lot for this article. It's got a lot of new and helpful info. I did have it opened during lunch but closed it without reading it just because it was on search engine journal. But, since you pointed it out, I did go ahead and read it and it's pretty neat.
   
   Some key takeaways from the article (I will look into that Google paper this weekend, I missed that one). As pointed out these may not be in use, but it's based on the paper the big G published, so it will be in use some time as it's a great idea.
   
   1. Pages will not be ranked against each other, but will be given a score individually and then based on some factors such as the number of recent pages in a niche Google will decide based on the query whether the searcher wants new pages or just good info. Rankings will change accordingly. This does change things considerably.
   
   2. Instead of ranking the then selected pages by their relevance score, they will use a machine learning algorithm to determine which of the top pages are more likely to get clicked on for a query and then adjust the rankings. This is something we already think is happening when we ask people to create catchy titles with numbers, parenthesis', etc. Higher CTR will eventually give you a better ranking and this can potentially now have domain-wide influences.
   
   3. They say: Twenty-year-old ranking factors like anchor text, heading tags, and links are decreasing in importance. No, a big no. Spammy links are decreasing in importance, some spammy links still work.
   
   @Dr Mark, yeah that heading has BS below it lol.

   replyreport