<?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: Does Google love your site too much?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/</link>
	<description>Internet marketing and search engine optimisation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 06:39:05 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ritz</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-35858</link>
		<dc:creator>Ritz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 13:26:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-35858</guid>
		<description>Surely PR is only spread between pages if a direct link from one page to the other exists? i.e a navigational link to the newly created page? Maybe I misunderstand exactly how the PR is distributed, but as I understand it internal PR is distrubuted via the navigation of your site. In theory there should be no direct link to these pages on your site as these are all query based pages

I might be wrong, but interesting subject and I will keep an eye out for this on our sites</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surely PR is only spread between pages if a direct link from one page to the other exists? i.e a navigational link to the newly created page? Maybe I misunderstand exactly how the PR is distributed, but as I understand it internal PR is distrubuted via the navigation of your site. In theory there should be no direct link to these pages on your site as these are all query based pages</p>
<p>I might be wrong, but interesting subject and I will keep an eye out for this on our sites</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Greg from Make Money Online</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34845</link>
		<dc:creator>Greg from Make Money Online</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 06:13:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34845</guid>
		<description>I have noticed this as well but can not figure out why this occurs. If it helps one of my sites I&#039;m all for it.

regards Gregory</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have noticed this as well but can not figure out why this occurs. If it helps one of my sites I&#8217;m all for it.</p>
<p>regards Gregory</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judd Exley</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34770</link>
		<dc:creator>Judd Exley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 03:42:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34770</guid>
		<description>I noticed this too, and thought that somebody at Google was having some fun with me... til I noticed that they&#039;d picked up and indexed legitimate pages.  Schweet, thinks I.

Though that spreading of the PR is worth thinking about, but that&#039;s what robots.txt is good for as well, no?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I noticed this too, and thought that somebody at Google was having some fun with me&#8230; til I noticed that they&#8217;d picked up and indexed legitimate pages.  Schweet, thinks I.</p>
<p>Though that spreading of the PR is worth thinking about, but that&#8217;s what robots.txt is good for as well, no?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barbara Ling</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34347</link>
		<dc:creator>Barbara Ling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 13:01:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34347</guid>
		<description>The interesting question to ask is why is it indexing particular search queries to begin with...unless you have Adsense on search results?  Googlebot would then come to visit and voila, a new page would be born waiting to be indexed.

Interesting!

Barbara</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The interesting question to ask is why is it indexing particular search queries to begin with&#8230;unless you have Adsense on search results?  Googlebot would then come to visit and voila, a new page would be born waiting to be indexed.</p>
<p>Interesting!</p>
<p>Barbara</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Altoft</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34282</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Altoft</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 10:09:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34282</guid>
		<description>A site has a finite amount of PageRank that is split amongst all of it&#039;s pages. If you have 100 pages but suddenly the site grows to 1000 pages without gaining any links you end up with each page having 1/10th of the PR it did before assuming equal PR distribution.

In some cases having more pages is fine but if you are struggling for PR and authority then if Google suddenly adds a thousand or so pages it can cause problems, especially if those pages are low value non-optimised pages.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A site has a finite amount of PageRank that is split amongst all of it&#8217;s pages. If you have 100 pages but suddenly the site grows to 1000 pages without gaining any links you end up with each page having 1/10th of the PR it did before assuming equal PR distribution.</p>
<p>In some cases having more pages is fine but if you are struggling for PR and authority then if Google suddenly adds a thousand or so pages it can cause problems, especially if those pages are low value non-optimised pages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Desmond Ong</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34269</link>
		<dc:creator>Desmond Ong</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 09:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34269</guid>
		<description>Haha...Google&#039;s too huge for the Internet</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Haha&#8230;Google&#8217;s too huge for the Internet</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Fiske</title>
		<link>http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34268</link>
		<dc:creator>David Fiske</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 09:35:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/does-google-love-your-site-too-much/#comment-34268</guid>
		<description>I may be a bit slow here so please bear with me.

If Google is indexing more pages, why is this a bad thing? Surely the more pages you have in Google, the more authority you can develop over time? A one page site would, in theory, have less authority over a 100 page site if both had no inbound links and no domain history.

I understand that the more pages you have, the more that PageRank can be distributed amongst these pages. But I can&#039;t see why that is bad.

As for duplicate content, can it not be safely assumed that if the Googlebot is creating these queries, the Google algorithm will reflect such an activity and hence not penalise you?

Hopefully you can clarify this for me as from where I&#039;m standing, this looks like a good thing. I could be wrong though :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I may be a bit slow here so please bear with me.</p>
<p>If Google is indexing more pages, why is this a bad thing? Surely the more pages you have in Google, the more authority you can develop over time? A one page site would, in theory, have less authority over a 100 page site if both had no inbound links and no domain history.</p>
<p>I understand that the more pages you have, the more that PageRank can be distributed amongst these pages. But I can&#8217;t see why that is bad.</p>
<p>As for duplicate content, can it not be safely assumed that if the Googlebot is creating these queries, the Google algorithm will reflect such an activity and hence not penalise you?</p>
<p>Hopefully you can clarify this for me as from where I&#8217;m standing, this looks like a good thing. I could be wrong though <img src='http://www.blogstorm.co.uk/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
