Proving a page passes PageRank and other secrets

  • SubscribeToday!

15 users commented

Hey Dixon!

thanks for the great post!

I like the way you try to conduct the test, and agree with many of your points.

However I believe that the LENGTH of your anchor text (18 words) can have a significant impact on the actual test result.

I’ve been doing tests with long queries in Google for more than a year, and in fact we do that on a daily basis. This and several other related posts from fellow SEOs make me doubt that this long phrase is the perfect test setup.

Hit me up on IM, the next conference or twitter to discuss details…


said Christoph C. Cemper the Marketing Fan on February 3rd, 2009 at 1:57 pm

Ah – a good point. In fact, the anchor text itself is only: “just taken on an allotment”. The screenshots use the whole phrase on Page A, but the results were the same for just the anchor text itself. (I didn’t see any mileage in taking too many screenshots, but I was also using the test to verify whether words around the anchor text influence the rankings… but since I never got page B ranking under the 5 word phrase it became a little acadmic.)

I’m at SES London later this month if you are there: http://dixonjones.com/speaking/


said Dixon Jones on February 3rd, 2009 at 2:10 pm

Hi Dixon

I have noticed the error message on a definite match before. I thought, foolishly, this may have something to do with the number of stop words or denisty or positioning or in other cases that this has something to do with special characters. Perhaps it has something to do with string length? Why?

Well all I did was a simple checked what pages come up when I continue to extend the length of your searches:

“I live in Harlington with Marie” – 2 results

“I live in Harlington with Marie and my” – 2 results

“I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just” – 2 results

“I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just taken” – 2 results

“I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just taken on” – 1 results

“I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just taken on an” – 1 results

Why the drop off point is there? Someone clever is about to answer…..(please!)

ps. Only cause of your facebook status did i end up spending 10 minutes on this. Not sure if that is a good or a bad thing…

See you at SES

said JonnyScott on February 3rd, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Hey Dixon,

Nice test – don’t think there’s an error though. If you look closely, you’ll see Google is offering you the non-exact match results because the exact match returned no results.

My 2 cents on the indexed page’s slide would simply be that Google dropped it from the main index once the ‘freshness’ factor wore off.

Have fun at SES!

said LifeDesignSEO on February 4th, 2009 at 8:47 am

Hi LifeDesignSEO,

I did notice that, but the truth is that the match IS exact, as the search was cut and pasted directly from the profile page. It is possible, though,that Google decided that it wasn’t exact because only part of the text string was in a URL.

I went to test this… and… INTERESTING! Now that this post has been indexed, the Google Profile is absolutely nowehere to be seen – even in related searchs for “I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just taken on an allotment.” – This page just shows as a GoogleWhack (www.googlewhack.com). I did say that when I posted this, I would corrupt the original experiment – and so it has proved – but yesterday, Google thought my Google profile had SOME relevence to the search phrase… but now it has dropped the Google Profile altogether. So yes… looks like your 2 cents was bang on the money.


said Dixon Jones on February 4th, 2009 at 2:16 pm

The test could be flawed. You didn’t take into account a character limit on the actual hyperlink.

Your phrase is over 80 characters. A recent test I did seemed to confirm a 55 character limit (on that test alone).


Google Profiles do pass anchor text relevance. I did the same test. I will PM you if you want to see :)

Do They Pass Pagerank? Don’t know depends on other internal and external links to it I think.

said Hobo on February 8th, 2009 at 5:39 pm

OOH! Good point Hobo! Yes – if your test rings true, then there is indeed a flaw in my test. It also correlates with Chris Cemper’s comment.

It also lends itself to Jonny’s observations.

So I don’t know about 88 characters (or the cut off length) but I’ll have to do the test again now, feeding that thought in.

I have now updated the profile, with new anchor text to a new domain. You’ll be able to see what happens – but if you’ve done the test you’ll know. (I still want to see for myself).

said Dixon Jones on February 8th, 2009 at 7:45 pm

OK – new findings from the new test. So new post!


said Dixon Jones on February 16th, 2009 at 4:42 pm

If I pass pagerank to my site from totally meaningless anchor text, does this still improve the ranking of the keywords from my on-page factors?

said Saving Money Tips on November 19th, 2010 at 2:03 pm

kinda – in that a link from an image is better than no link at all. However – whilst it increases the “juice” to your site overall, it spreads the focus of what your site is about. So imho no anchor text is possibly better than confusing anchor text.

said admin on December 16th, 2010 at 6:02 pm

Just to point out it says their are no results for: “I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just taken on an allotment” not I live in Harlington with Marie and my two kids and I have just taken on an allotment…. see the difference? the one you typed in had quotations around it. Google couldn’t find that statement in quotations because it doesn’t exist but could find it without quotation because that one does exist. Hence why after the search result it found it says “(without quotation). So no their is nothing wrong with Google’s algorithm. Google’s algorithm is a complex thing (as you know) more complex then most everyones mind can handle. Thats why when you use Google you don’t ever get viruses compared to Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox witch do.

said The Big Bang Theory on February 2nd, 2011 at 5:26 am

Correction it says i posed it at 5:26 am. thats wrong its 12:26 am I’m not sure why it did that.

said The Big Bang Theory on February 2nd, 2011 at 5:28 am

I get results for both versions. The quotes are an operator you can use on Google and most search engines to ask for the exact phrase, as opposed to the words in any order.

said admin on February 2nd, 2011 at 8:09 am
said Trackbacks on September 27th, 2016 at 1:49 am

Leave a reply

Categories Archives Who’s saying what

Recent Posts Recent CommentsBadges
View additional information about dixonjones.com through Majestic SEO Site Explorer.