And now it is the case that this is

rigite2542@artg

Very long time to publish this so that not a single word was misunderstood. That's why I studied literature for three semesters. Exactly, what I find interesting is the question of why. Why are they even doing this? Why does Google do the whole thing and here they also write why not completely ignore such links as had been the case with “nofollow”? So why don't they ignore such links, like they did before with "nofollow"? And now comes the sentence Links contain valuable information, that can help us improve search such as how the words within links describe content they point at.

Are words within links describe content they point at. This means that link texts are Special Data important information that you now want to evaluate. That's my, a bit my theory. Would mean, so I basically have now/ So what does Google do with these links, what do they even want to do, yes? They basically can't say now that if we evaluate them, then they wouldn't say it doesn't matter. But what I think they will do is look at the link texts of such links in the future in order to do this more precisely. Now you have to take a step back to how things used to be. Just because the links are all on “follow” and people have also linked wildly with credit comparison, a loan here and a cheap/or great SEO agency here, SEO agency Munich and so on.





The plague for every webmaster. The last thing I want to do is ever link anyone using keywords because I'm scared to death that I'll get penalized somehow, even if the link is completely natural I won't do that. Because I'm so afraid of Google. And Google is now missing this information from the link texts. And that's why I think they noticed that if they now use the link texts again, i.e. only the link texts, to better classify a page from such links, it could be that the search results improve . That's my view. Felix: I don't know if it just has to be the link texts. It's really the references that are relevant.