﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	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/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Unexpected SEO Results?  Check On Page</title>
	<atom:link href="http://websitebuilding.biz/seo/unexpected-results-check-on-page/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://websitebuilding.biz/seo/unexpected-results-check-on-page/</link>
	<description>News for Online Business</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 10:22:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John at Website Building biz</title>
		<link>http://websitebuilding.biz/seo/unexpected-results-check-on-page/comment-page-1/#comment-11446</link>
		<dc:creator>John at Website Building biz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:06:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://websitebuilding.biz/?p=226#comment-11446</guid>
		<description>When I changed the link by fixing the URL, it bounced quickly from 61 to 11 and back down into the high 60s.  This was about a week ago so I expect that the change is probably propagating throughout the data-centers.  I also made a PDF to attach to that page and Google itself is always making changes - so I guess it is impossible to know exactly which one factor is causing the rapid 50 point fluctuations.  I do think that the broken link was holding me down a bit, though.  Linking to 404s is bad form regardless of how the SEs interpret it, and I still feel silly for leaving that issue live for so long :)

I don&#039;t think &lt;em&gt;having&lt;/em&gt; the link for “green banana widgets” is as much of a boost as having a dead link was weighing the site down.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When I changed the link by fixing the URL, it bounced quickly from 61 to 11 and back down into the high 60s.  This was about a week ago so I expect that the change is probably propagating throughout the data-centers.  I also made a PDF to attach to that page and Google itself is always making changes &#8211; so I guess it is impossible to know exactly which one factor is causing the rapid 50 point fluctuations.  I do think that the broken link was holding me down a bit, though.  Linking to 404s is bad form regardless of how the SEs interpret it, and I still feel silly for leaving that issue live for so long <img src='http://websitebuilding.biz/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think <em>having</em> the link for “green banana widgets” is as much of a boost as having a dead link was weighing the site down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve &#124; Trade Show Guru</title>
		<link>http://websitebuilding.biz/seo/unexpected-results-check-on-page/comment-page-1/#comment-11444</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve &#124; Trade Show Guru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 01:15:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://websitebuilding.biz/?p=226#comment-11444</guid>
		<description>hi John,
Are you saying that the page you were trying to link for, let&#039;s say, &quot;green banana widgets&quot; had that phrase (green banana widgets) as a link on it and it was supposed to link back to the page, but it linked instead to a non-existent page (because of your typo)? If I understand this correctly, you think that instead of google ignoring the broken link, it is penalizing the page for it? That could be. I&#039;m not sure though that google counts a link on a page that goes to the same page. I&#039;ll be curious if you can update this post if your page&#039;s ranking improves. I do agree that broken links are a no-no, and it&#039;s a bit embarassing to find them (I&#039;ve found several on my site).
Steve, aka the some what slow trade show guru</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hi John,<br />
Are you saying that the page you were trying to link for, let&#8217;s say, &#8220;green banana widgets&#8221; had that phrase (green banana widgets) as a link on it and it was supposed to link back to the page, but it linked instead to a non-existent page (because of your typo)? If I understand this correctly, you think that instead of google ignoring the broken link, it is penalizing the page for it? That could be. I&#8217;m not sure though that google counts a link on a page that goes to the same page. I&#8217;ll be curious if you can update this post if your page&#8217;s ranking improves. I do agree that broken links are a no-no, and it&#8217;s a bit embarassing to find them (I&#8217;ve found several on my site).<br />
Steve, aka the some what slow trade show guru</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

