Would you advise removing a "links" page?
-
I'm doing a site audit for someone and they have a links page full of reciprocal links for other similar businesses across the country.
My gut instinct is to remove this page.
How would you approach this if this was your client?
-
Oooh. I like the idea of adding internal links to the page. Thanks.
-
Well put
-
The problem with this is that the link juice is still lost, if you have a link to the non indexed page it is lost.
-
Egol and Ryan both give good advice, they useually dont do any harm, but as Ryan said they can look out of place.
One thing you can do if the owner does not want to get rid of them, is to add a load of internal links on the page, that way you will be giving away less, most of the link juice will be recycled. Also dont link to the links page from your home page, link to it from a weaker page, that way it wont have much to give away anyhow.
-
The question is already answered satisfactorily, but thought I'd add my two cents as well.
In my opinion, the era of the reciprocal link relationship is over. Algorithmically and functionally it is simply far too easy for Google to find and diagnose. At best, reciprocal links will have a neutral effect, a sort of 'white noise' like most link buying programs produce. At worst, you end up linked to shady neighborhoods which influence your category and standing. Promiscuous link seekers can end up in some very interesting neighborhoods; I've done some due diligence on some in the past and realized that they brushed up against poker, pornography, adult dating, etc., all categories that I don't want to be linked to.
-
Any links pointing to authorative sites with good page ranks are fine. I would keep all the outgoing links but add the rel=nofollow syntax in the string on any completely (100%) off topic sites. Even though search are not suppose to follow them, they do anyway. I don't believe they'll penalize you in any way.
But i would definitely check out all links to see what you're linking to. broken links can hurt along with perverted sites and hacker sites.
If you really don't want the search engines to list the page, simply nofollow and noindex the page.
-
What's recommended is to create web pages which offer value to your site's visitors. If you wish to call them "link pages" so be it. The bottom line, Google is chasing the user experience. How you present your link page makes all the difference to users.
Example 1 - You have a vet website. You offer a "sponsors" page with 50 links. Most of the site's visitors would not have any interest in a sponsors page so the links will likely not be seen nor used.
Example 2 - You have a vet website. You offer a "Pet Travel" page which offers links to pet-friendly hotels, vets in major cities and other helpful information. This page is useful and would be of interest to visitors.
Your link page is content. The same rules apply. Present quality links in a helpful manner and you will be helping your site's users and improving the site's quality and usefulness.
-
Interesting!
Now I'm confused though. If it's good to have relevant links even though they are reciprocal then why don't we recommend creating a links page?
To be honest, I've always thought that there was no harm, and probably some benefit from a links page as long as it is not obviously spammy and excessive. One of our real estate sites ranks really really well and the only links coming to us are recip links.
-
I agree with most responses so far that links to relevant sites could stay, but any other should be removed. I also like the idea of making changes more slowly, one at a time, and measuring results. That way you know what is working and what is not. That's sometimes harder said than done, because when you see lots of changes needed to be made, there is the tendency to want to fix the site immediately, rather than tracking and measuring results.
-
**My concern is that Google can't really tell if it adds value to the customer. Rather, they just see a page full of reciprocal links. **
Google can tell a lot!
Google can determine if the links are relevant. A veterinary clinic can create a link to clinics in other areas which can be useful to users. Maybe a current patient is traveling or moving to a new area and looking for recommendations. I can certainly see the value in such a page. Google will recognize the site is linking to other sites which are highly relevant. On the other hand, if the site owner was linking from a vet clinic to a watch repair, car sales and other unrelated sites that would be a concern.
Google can also determine how often the links are used. If these links are rarely used, then they offer little to no value.
-
I have a few competitors who have "links.html" pages on their sites and they are still doing pretty good. So, I don't think that a links page is doing any damage to their rankings.
Do you know how the site owner feels about that page? It could have links on it to genuine business partners, cousins' businesses, etc. So, I would at least check before yanking it down.
I would also worry about the Curse of Maluk
http://forums.seochat.com/google-optimization-7/warning-ref-link-partners-5513.html
-
Thanks Ryan,
Ask "do these links offer a value for users?"
This is a tough question to answer! The site is a veterinary clinic. The page lists recommended veterinarians in other states. So, it could possibly add some value.
My concern is that Google can't really tell if it adds value to the customer. Rather, they just see a page full of reciprocal links.
Here's my current thought. I'd like him to make a bunch of changes that I am suggesting (i.e. title tags and internal linking structure, etc.) Then, after a few months when the rankings have settled we can try removing the links page and see over the next few weeks/months whether there is a difference.
What do you think?
-
I agree with your instinct Marie. Here is how I have approached the same topic with clients...
Ask "do these links offer a value for users?". If your website sells watches, then links to real estate sites and other unrelated sites clearly do not exist for a user's benefit.
If the page offers links to the repair pages for Seiko and other major watch manufacturers, then clearly the page does offer a value to users.
If the site owner disagrees as to the link value, you can use GA to analyze how often the links are used. A site owner may fear by removing these links their linking partner will do the same and their site will lose links. While that may happen, the value of those links is highly questionable.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Unsolved Are links from staff profile pages no longer good for SEO?
Hey there, We run a small site that lists lawyers and we have an opportunity to ask the lawyers to display a 'badge' on their own website's staff page, linked back to the page on our site that they are listed on. Initially I thought this would be good link building (i.e. the lawyer's own staff/profile pages on their website linking to our site where they are listed = a highly relevant link). I was less concerned about the authority of the law firm's sites, though these will range from sometimes low-ish to medium. I just assumed that Google would see the value in the lawyer wanting to link to our site where they are listed. However, our SEO has said that these days Google doesn't give much/any value to these types of links from individual staff pages. His advice was to try and get the badge added to one of their service pages (or their About page) which will be unlikely as the badge is person-specific. I thought I'd ask if this was everyone else's experience regarding Google not valuing links from individual staff pages? Thanks for you help 🙂
Link Building | | Andy-H0 -
Will massive "sculpting" make a difference?
I'm working with a very popular blog that also is associated with related products we manufacture and sell ourselves. The blog is about 99% blog content and about 1% product content. If suddenly some 99% of a 5,000 page blog is changed to have the blog pages no-indexed, will the linkjuice be now more concentrated on the remaining 1%? Also, be aware that this blog has lots of high quality backlinks from everyday recognizable magazines, newspapers and blogs. Of course, this is a highly competitive market place so I'm trying to leave no-stone-unturned here in working out the kinks. In the old days, we sort-of-called this "pagerank sculpting" and the idea was to focus the linkjuce on certain pages and defocus it on other pages. It made sense to block certain pages that were not indexible but Google supposedly dinged that tactic years ago, and today people say this is act also helps as it conserves the crawl budget. Might this make a difference these days?? Keep in mind that the 4,950 remaining pages are still followed, and all backlinks remain in place. Will the site start ranking better for the keywords on the 50 indexed (product) pages?
Link Building | | seo_plus1 -
What do you do if you have been hit by recent Google updates but cannot remove the links?
We have a potential new client who did their own SEO about 6-7 years ago.They ranked really well for years then obviously recently got hit. Some of the links they have are shocking, directories, articles sites etc. They did not use links farms but the links do not look great at all. The problem is they do not have log ins to remove these links manually themselves. Asking for a reconsideration with Google will not get us anywhere due to more recent link building issues we are trying to resolve. They have sent removal requests at least 10 times to these sites but no response. Has anyone overcome these types of issues previously and can give any tips? This would be a good client for us so keen to see what I can do to get them on-board.
Link Building | | tempowebdesign0 -
Best way to create deep links - Building links to inner pages
I am looking for a cost effective way to rank 30 inner pages, which are all low competition, long tail keywords. What type of links are the best for this type of project, social bookmarks, article marketing, high pr links, etc.... Also who would be good to hire for this type of project?
Link Building | | newcitymoving0 -
Does focussing deep linking too much on one page have a negative impact elsewhere?
Hi, I'm just starting a backlinking campaign on a new website and am focussing on one deep page for client - focussing a lot of good quality backlinks on that one page. I'm aware that most of the other pages, including homepage, lack good backlinks. Can I go ahead and focus powerful backlinks on that one 'deep' page without a problem, or may that approach result in negative impacts on other pages' SERPs.
Link Building | | McTaggart0 -
Posting "similar" blog posts to multiple blog sites seems "shady", does it work?
I've read a lot of info here in the Q & A tonight and there was a thread that stated it's potentially a good thing to post content on multiple blog platforms such as: blogger.com posterous.com wordpress.com tumblr.com I've also been trying to figure out how to deal with my blog as a subfolder instead of a subdomain. That research in Q & A clearly indicates that Google treats subdomains basically like separate websites and links from my blog to my main website will not be as valuable if i stay the course with my blog on a subdomain short term. Given that, if the 4 blogging tools above all require the use of a subdomain, then how am I actually taking advantage of the seo value of blogger,posterous, tumblr? In my case my domains would be: steripen.blogger.com posterous.tumbler.com steripen.wordpress.com steripen.tumblr.com Just not adding up to being viable given what I read states these would be treated as new websites, not to mention I worry these posts, even slightly differentiated, would be suspect. Who am I truly benefitting by doing this? Users?
Link Building | | Timmmmy0 -
How many links per week is too fast in link building?
For a new website/blog how many links per week looks suspicious or hurt the rankings?
Link Building | | aaran1 -
Link building and directory links to a new site
I have three new sites all hosted on the same server in the same public html folder and each site is in a different folder inside the public html folder. These sites are a listing of live music venues in different cities in Texas. Should I link these sites together to increase page rank to each other and also put key search phrases in the anchor text and place these links in the text in the center of each page of each site to make the links more effective? Also, because the sites are about a year old they don't have many inlinks yet. If i submit them to about 50 directories will Google not like this because there are way more directory links than natural links? I've been told that it is trouble to have more than about 50% directory links compared to natural links. Thanks in advance for your answers! Take care,
Link Building | | Ron10
Ron0