Author Rank And Search Engine Optimization

on Saturday, 22 December 2012

It is obvious that the search market Google is the leader, the importance of the author (in English Author) has been increasingly emphasized. Therefore, there are discussions in the scene of the search engine optimization, whether in the future may depend on the ranking of websites by an Author Rank prevail. This may well be one, doubt for me because I wonder how it would work with the above-named individual signals of the Author Ranks.

The author is more important in the ranking of certain terms when they are apparent to Google, which is discussed frequently between bloggers. However, there are many terms, in which the author seems completely unimportant.

However, there are terms in which it may be important that you have to publish a good contribution as an author.
Author Rank

The following factors are likely to be relevant to the Author Rank:

  • The average PageRank of Website that an author has published
  • The average number of Google+ reviews that an author receives
  • The number of Google+ circles, in which the author is represented
  • The links to other high authors who have a high rank Author
  • The number and authority of the web presence where content of the author have been published
  • The involvement of an author at Google+ (posting messages on Google+)
  • The relevance of these posts to Google+, you can, for example, to read the comments and links to these posts)
  • The outside of Google+ lying and identifiable authority of the author, as if this is mentioned in the Wikipedia or store has a profile page
  • The presence on YouTube: Did the author a channel and there are relevant resonances on published videos?
  • Other signals that close to resonance in social networks can be (e.g., Twitter or at Slideshare)
  • Authority of the author of published works, which can be found for example at Google Books or Google Scholar.

What is striking about this list is that they are largely focusing on Google services (including YouTube is one), and its strong emphasis on quantity over quality.

Google has a problem with social networks. Google cannot look the same way with other social networks as it is with its own service Google+. When an author so active on social networks like Facebook or Twitter, and there is no direct its activity profile over the internet cost holds, then this commitment is not sufficiently visible to Google. Google would then interpret this lack of visibility as a lack of authority (and the corresponding author rank lower), then is obvious that the author does not rank the calculated claims it deserves. Google may therefore include only the author actually rank for the ranking after having made sure that Google+ comparable intensity is achieved at much discussion, as with other social networks, or within the world of blogging. Them but Google is still pretty far away.

What also outlined against a rank above Author speaks: There are often only based on quantitative signals to determine the calculation. If an author many Google+ circles in which he is responsible, then the question is still open whether these circles are even relevant. Circles of multipliers, which in turn are represented in many Google+ circles, would be preferable in some form, so the Author Rank works. In addition, these Google+ circles would represent in a relevant way the discussions elsewhere are shaping the world and the global network.

Overall, it can be seen that there is the Author Rank and there are terms in which he plays a certain role for the ranking. However, exactly how the calculation works remains unclear, Google will respect my opinion. That is not too much to ask for, if only they can incorporate their own services in the calculation. There is still a long way to go to the search engine in the longer term there is a world in which the author has become rank even with normal searches into a highly influential ranking factor.