Google quality rater - policy 2012

Search engines rely on algorithms for the evaluation of search results. Qualitätsbewerter complement the algorithmic evaluation. Comprehensive guidelines form the basis for assessing Web pages, Web sites and spam. These guidelines are strictly confidential. Once again became a relatively current version of valuation principles to the public.

The guidelines for Qualitätsbewerter would be a good hand tool for webmasters. Google released many aspects of these guidelines but also to other bodies, such as around the help pages for webmasters.

Qualitätsbewerter to evaluate the results lists, or individual results with their judgment, with common sense. This assessment can be done not only subjectively. While a page of a judge as well is felt, can the next judge have a completely opposite view to the same page. So Google would not help. So policies were created, which are constantly concretised and expanded. The latest, discovered in the wild output of the Google quality rater guidelines includes already 161 pages. The example from the year 2011 came out with 125 pages.

The June 2012, version 3.27, contains a completely new chapter of for quality assessment of individual pages, which was placed before the Webspam guidelines. Quality assessment is fully of the official line, runs the Google to improve the quality of search results. At the latest with the Panda was clear that Google wants to front have higher quality pages update. Number of points of the directive were already considered in the contribution of the year 2011. Following points are taken from only the new chapter of quality evaluation for pages.

Quality evaluation of pages

The policies were created because individual judges have different views to different pages. A rater can be rather affect another one more of the design from the content. The guidelines should contribute to the uniform evaluation of pages. The evaluation of pages requires practice, said the document.

The quality evaluation of a page is done regardless of whether a page for a certain search query can be helpful. There is almost always a question for which the page might be helpful, and there is almost always a question for which a page is not helpful.

Not every aspect of the quality assessment is covered in the guidelines. Evaluators are encouraged to use their own judgement and to justify the decision taken at the same time.

How the quality assessment is not pressed in a certain corner. It is not a question, to evaluate pages primarily as a priority as bad or good. The guide explains the most Web pages were created to be useful to the users. The existence of pages is versatile. Convey information objectively or personally dyed, to express opinions or views, to entertain, to share files, etc.

The difference between page review and evaluation of the URL.

The URL review considered whether a landing page answered the query. The assessment of the quality of a page aims to evaluate the purpose of the page. However, the purpose of the page alone still determines the quality of a page. Content that inform must not be of better quality than entertaining content.

Rate this content

It explains how the rater identify main ideas, additional content and advertising areas. Additional content and ads must be by no means bad when they are only in the correct context with the main content of the page. Additional content is example links to other helpful content of the website. Sometimes, the comments on a blog post are the most interesting part.

For example, pages with many ads, whose seemingly helpful Verweise all only reference pages of unhelpful content and many ads are deceptive content.

Good to know the position to display:

Many pages have ads. Some websites can not exist without ads and monthly greater powers in the site.

Clearly, it is not prinzpiell against ads, only against their misuse.

The layout of a Web site will be evaluated. With less rated the beauty of the design, will be presented as the way like the content. Key elements to focus on and be recognized immediately. Ads should not distract from the main content, etc.

Always the home page of a site should be visited as part of the quality assessment of a page. Their impression enters into the review. As well as identification of the purpose of the entire Web site. The page you want to insert in the purpose of the entire offer. Responsibilities for the site or its content, as well as contact information should be clearly visible.

Reputation is very important

The recognition of a Web site can decide whether the classification of the page is classified as high quality or high quality. Comments, reviews, articles and references on the site to be used for the assessment of the reputation. The traffic of a Web site expressly not considered reputation.

Note:

The guidelines of for quality raters are confidential documents that should not come to the public.Therefore, there is no reference to the document. In addition, experience has shown that a reference goes after a short time in vain, because Google insists that the confidential document is not publicly accessible. I became aware through a reference to the new edition of Eisy and have the document then googled me.