In your June 2, 2009 post “Get your articles indexed within hours”, you highlight a great way to get pages with backlinks indexed faster.

Can you give us some examples of popular forums that Google frequently crawls?

Thanks in advance for your insight!

I’ve just stumbled across your blog via Angela’s backlinks and your youTube channel. My question is quite simple, like you have already suggested, I always try to ensure that my profiles are as unique as possible. I also follow Angela (and Paul’s) advice to the letter when building profile links. BUT, for all the links that DON’T get cached by Google, exactly what methods can I used to ensure they are cached?

I’d really appreciate a list if you have one. If not, perhaps we could have a quick chat either via email (you have my address) or over the phone. I’m based in Bristol so just down the road!

Cheers
M

*** Note from Andy ***

Thanks for your nice comments. Glad you like them! I have just replied to your email.

*** Note from Andy ***

Hi Steve, I just ran it through Index Checker at my end and that URL shows a tick. The cache date is 25th Feb so it will just be a delay with data centres that’s all. Try it again. If you don’t see a tick you will do shortly once the data centres all get up to date. The way in which the app is designed it will always give correct data. This has been tested thoroughly with hundreds of URLs and manually checked.

There are evidence based arguments that the NOFOLLW/DOFOLLOW distinction is way overvalued.

a) Most engines except Google disregard it for indexing purposes

b) Google still values ALL inbound links in its authority/link-love calculations.

Admittedly, a link’s weighting will vary per the authority of the “referring” page plus the anchor text’s relevance to the text of the “destination” page.

But, I’ve never heard any suggestion that the indexing instructions for the referring page are relevant or taken into account in the authority calculation at the destination page.

So if your target page is already indexed, NOFOLLOW is probably irrelevant or inconsequential………?

*** Note from Andy ***

Steve, I have a ‘popular’ blog post which you can read which explains the best way in which to create profilepages. Basically, if you have a site that has 2,000 member profile pages AND those members have not added a unique bio or supplied other info, all that will be different between all those profiles are the ‘links’. Google will see most of these pages as duplicate pages offering little value. If on the other hand you add a good bio and complete other fields you are providing Google with some content that isn’t on the other 1,999 profile pages. Give your profile page som unique content and it is far more likely to get indexed onces Google crawls it.

*** Note from Andy ***

Hi Steve,

The first thing you need to think about is what does each profile contain. Does it have the same bio text? Do you only have links and no bio text? Are you completing any other available fields within each profile. If you use bio text but are just using the same block of text within each one then those may get filtered out by Google. I’m currently getting a few hundred profiles built for me for a few of my sites to test this theory. In fact… I’ve just had a batch done for one ofmy sites and I have jumped from no.86 in Google to no.18 within a couple of days. Google has obviously seen some of these links for this to happen although I have recently changed some onpage elements as well to strengthen this keyword. I’ll be monitoring this ranking over the next few weeks.

As far as getting profiles indexed, I’m testing a few things at the minute so I’ll have more information on this subject shortly. I’ll also be looking at developing a system that helps with the indexing of such pages.