It seems that new prosciptions - sometimes based on Myths - are increasing among SEOs and Webmasters. Here is a brief list of what sites many SEOs are claiming they will not accept as link partners. Feel free to add to this list.
Sites below a certain PageRank
Sites that have a certain number of links on the page
Sites that are not the same domain as the links pages
Sites that are using a Sub-Domain in a domain
Sites that have link pages ending in PHP or CGI
Sites that do not have a link to the links pages from the Home page ( or two clicks away )
Gambling or Pharmaceutical sites
Site that use a Free Host
Sites that have a links page actually called "links"
what's bad about that? i do have a links page on my site, but if it's bad, i'd like to know why and what alternatives are useful. just about every site i visit has a links/partners page.
"Sites that have link pages ending in PHP or CGI" what is the point of that? To prevent people from using php or cgi on these pages? If that is the case there are easy common ways around them.
Well there is a theory that having a "links" page is bad, but I still have a couple of old links pages with the name and they get SE traffic (just a little) and are fully indexed with same PR as other sub pages so I havent really seen the effect as of yet.
I don't actually understand what the issue is with a links page called "links" but added it as I have seen a great many webmasters recently who insist that they don't want their links there. Does anyone else know why ?
Why wouldn't somebody want a link to somebody that uses PHP or CGI? Is it just these two server-side environments or is it all such as asp, asp.net, cfm, etc. I don't think Google cares what the extension is, but they seem to care if there are variables attached to the URL.
