
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Sphinn / Petro / What's New</title>
<link>http://sphinn.com</link>
<description>Sphinn</description>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:00:38 -0700</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[[PDF] Leaked Google Quality Rater Guidelines]]></title>
<link>http://sphinn.com/story/34398</link>
<comments>http://sphinn.com/story/34398</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:00:38 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<category>Google SEO</category>
<guid>http://sphinn.com/story/34398</guid>
<description><![CDATA[This is the Full version of the Google Guidelines for Quality Raters on how to evaluate web pages (April 2007 revision). It's a 43 pages PDF (approx. 2mb), and it covers various topics about: what a QR should do and don't, relevance values - with examples as well, the EWOQ system, and (drum-roll please) what a QR should consider web spam and what, on the opposite, is fine.<br/><br/>10 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
