Comments on: Wikipedia is droping in most recent update http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur - Red Adair Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:02:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Linkvana http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html/comment-page-1#comment-65266 Linkvana Sun, 31 Aug 2008 20:36:45 +0000 http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-65266 Yeah, I've had mild success with Wikipedia, but not really enough to warrant additional efforts. I may give it another try. Yeah, I’ve had mild success with Wikipedia, but not really enough to warrant additional efforts. I may give it another try.

]]> By: Algorithm Update At Google? | TheVanBlog http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html/comment-page-1#comment-45146 Algorithm Update At Google? | TheVanBlog Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:40:15 +0000 http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-45146 [...] Wikipedia is dropping in most recent update - David Ogletree [...] [...] Wikipedia is dropping in most recent update – David Ogletree [...]

]]> By: Gerard http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html/comment-page-1#comment-4536 Gerard Thu, 03 May 2007 15:19:46 +0000 http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-4536 *?#@! WIkipedia. Its lame. *?#@! WIkipedia. Its lame.

]]> By: Gary Ruplinger http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html/comment-page-1#comment-3382 Gary Ruplinger Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:25:58 +0000 http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-3382 I doubt that Google is manually adjusting its rankings to penalize Wikipedia, however, I do think when Wikipedia went nofollow, they actually hurt their authority. You're probably well aware of why, but I'd like to point it out to your readers. If we remember good ole Brinn and Page when they first developed the pagerank system, it was based off of how academic journals worked. An article could be judged on its importance based on how many others referred to it. However, a journal article that didn't cite any resources on its own would be viewed with a suspicous eye. When applied to a website, that means outgoing links help rankings, not hurt. I, for one, am glad to see Wikipedia getting penalized for going all nofollow. I know they had to deal with a lot of spam, but you'd think they could have come up with something better than their everything is nofollow solution. I doubt that Google is manually adjusting its rankings to penalize Wikipedia, however, I do think when Wikipedia went nofollow, they actually hurt their authority.

You’re probably well aware of why, but I’d like to point it out to your readers.

If we remember good ole Brinn and Page when they first developed the pagerank system, it was based off of how academic journals worked. An article could be judged on its importance based on how many others referred to it. However, a journal article that didn’t cite any resources on its own would be viewed with a suspicous eye. When applied to a website, that means outgoing links help rankings, not hurt.

I, for one, am glad to see Wikipedia getting penalized for going all nofollow. I know they had to deal with a lot of spam, but you’d think they could have come up with something better than their everything is nofollow solution.

]]>