Rel="no follow" for All Links on a Site that Charges for Advertising
-
If I run a site that charges other companies for listing their products, running banner advertisements, white paper downloads, etc. does it make sense to "no follow" all of their links on my site?
For example: they receive a profile page, product pages and are allowed to post press releases. Should all of their links on these pages be "no follow"?
It seems like a gray area to me because the explicit advertisements will definitely be "no followed" and they are not buying links, but buying exposure.
However, I still don't know the common practice for links from other parts of their "package".
Thanks
-
Hello all,
Thanks for the input. I'm on the marketing side with a site that presents our products. I'm tryign to clean up inbound links.
I pulled the Inbound links report from Moz.com and have concluded that I want to focus on the sites that are NOT listed as "no_follow." Troouble I'm having is the report headers:
<colgroup><col width="90"><col width="115"><col width="143"><col width="95"><col width="37"></colgroup>
| Link Equity | No Link Equity | Only rel=nofollow | Only follow | 301 |
| Yes | No | No | Yes | No |Does a 'Yes' value in the 'Only rel=nofollow' column mean that the link is marked as nofollow? As in "Affirmative, this link is marekd as nofollow, yes."
Then there is the 'Only follow' and other headers. Know where I can find a Moz article explaining these?
Thanks in advance for any and all help.
Regards,
Joe
-
Right?! When you hit 200 Moz points you get a do follow - rock it Anthony!
-
I did not know that about SEOmoz. I guess I need to work on getting more points!
-
In that I case I would guess that they are PR sculpting as Google would not be able to discern if they are passing links through a paid service.
Also, if the site is relevant to a specific niche and not just a link farm I would further believe that Google would not penalize the site.
Its kind of like SEOMoz - after a certain amount of points you get a do follow on one of your links. I don't think Google would be able to discern if SEOmoz was asking for people to pay or not.
-
Thanks Mark, what I'm trying to get people's opinion on is whether it would be considered people "paying for links" if I give them followed links on my site that are not explicitly paid for (i.e. not in their advertisements).
Most companies I have done advertising with in the past have allowed follow links in profiles, press releases, etc. , but I've also encountered those that no follow everything and told me they were doing it to protect themselves from getting penalized by Google.
I wonder if they were scared of being penalized, or just wanted to sculpt PR and keep it all on their site?
-
No follow keeps the link juice on your site. Do follow passes it to their site. It all depends. Do you want to pass page rank authority to their site? Some find that appealing and will get ad space just for that reason alone. Others won't care as they will just be looking for a good solid site to get the word out.
So if you site has great traffic and is providing value for someone in their niche market I say go with no follow as your site will do better in the rankings by keeping the page authority within your site.
-
Just don't approve porn, illegal, and spam filled website urls. If a company's website is deemed acceptable to be placed on your website, I see nothing wrong with giving them dofollow links.
-
Oleg- Thanks for the answer. I should be more clear with the question. All user submitted links will be set at "no follow". I was interested in what to do about company profile pages, product pages and press releases which we will enter and/or approve.
-
Follow links you have to approve. If people can sign up and get followed links without any editorial review, you will be spammed sooner or later.
G recommends you nofollow all user submitted links (to be on the safe side).
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=96569
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
-
Page with "random" content
Hi, I'm creating a page of 300+ in the near future, on which the content basicly will be unique as it can be. However, upon every refresh, also coming from a search engine refferer, i want the actual content such as listing 12 business to be displayed random upon every hit. So basicly we got 300+ nearby pages with unique content, and the overview of those "listings" as i might say, are being displayed randomly. Ive build an extensive script and i disabled any caching for PHP files in specific these pages, it works. But what about google? The content of the pages will still be as it is, it is more of the listings that are shuffled randomly to give every business listing a fair shot at a click and so on. Anyone experience with this? Ive tried a few things in the past, like a "Last update PHP Month" in the title which sometimes is'nt picked up very well.
Technical SEO | | Vanderlindemedia0 -
Site address change: new site isn't showing up in Google, old site is gone.
We just transitioned mccacompanies.com to confluentstrategies.com. The problem is that when I search for the old name, the old website doesn't come up anymore to redirect people to the new site. On the local card, Google has even taken off the website altogether. (I'm currently still trying to gain access to manage the business listing) When I search for confluent strategies, the website doesn't come up at all. But if I use the site: operator, it is in the index. Basically, my client has effectively disappeared off the face of the Google. (In doing other name changes, this has never happened to me before) What can I do?
Technical SEO | | MichaelGregory0 -
Linking Root Domains after Site-Wide Redirect
(Edited for simplicity) Page #1 on site A has links from 5 different root domains. If I 301 that page to a page on site B that has zero links, will site B gain 5 linking root domains, per the Moz tool? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | ClearPoint0 -
No follow links on a blog
Hi On our blog, we have a section called 'Tags'. I have just noticed that these links are all "no follow" links. The tags section does appear on every single page on the blog - is this recommend to have them as 'no follow' links or should I get our developer to change them. Thanks
Technical SEO | | Andy-Halliday0 -
Will I still get Duplicate Meta Data Errors with the correct use of the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags?
Hi Guys, One of our sites has an extensive number category page lsitings, so we implemented the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags for these pages (as suggested by Google below), However, we still see duplicate meta data errors in SEOMoz crawl reports and also in Google webmaster tools. Does the SEOMoz crawl tool test for the correct use of rel="next" and "prev" tags and not list meta data errors, if the tags are correctly implemented? Or, is it necessary to still use unique meta titles and meta descriptions on every page, even though we are using the rel="next" and "prev" tags, as recommended by Google? Thanks, George Implementing rel=”next” and rel=”prev” If you prefer option 3 (above) for your site, let’s get started! Let’s say you have content paginated into the URLs: http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1
Technical SEO | | gkgrant
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4 On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1, you’d include in the section: On the second page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2: On the third page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3: And on the last page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4: A few points to mention: The first page only contains rel=”next” and no rel=”prev” markup. Pages two to the second-to-last page should be doubly-linked with both rel=”next” and rel=”prev” markup. The last page only contains markup for rel=”prev”, not rel=”next”. rel=”next” and rel=”prev” values can be either relative or absolute URLs (as allowed by the tag). And, if you include a <base> link in your document, relative paths will resolve according to the base URL. rel=”next” and rel=”prev” only need to be declared within the section, not within the document . We allow rel=”previous” as a syntactic variant of rel=”prev” links. rel="next" and rel="previous" on the one hand and rel="canonical" on the other constitute independent concepts. Both declarations can be included in the same page. For example, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2&sessionid=123 may contain: rel=”prev” and rel=”next” act as hints to Google, not absolute directives. When implemented incorrectly, such as omitting an expected rel="prev" or rel="next" designation in the series, we'll continue to index the page(s), and rely on our own heuristics to understand your content.0 -
How to block "print" pages from indexing
I have a fairly large FAQ section and every article has a "print" button. Unfortunately, this is creating a page for every article which is muddying up the index - especially on my own site using Google Custom Search. Can you recommend a way to block this from happening? Example Article: http://www.knottyboy.com/lore/idx.php/11/183/Maintenance-of-Mature-Locks-6-months-/article/How-do-I-get-sand-out-of-my-dreads.html Example "Print" page: http://www.knottyboy.com/lore/article.php?id=052&action=print
Technical SEO | | dreadmichael0 -
If you only want your home page to rank, can you use rel="canonical" on all your other pages?
If you have a lot of pages with 1 or 2 inbound links, what would be the effect of using rel="canonical" to point all those pages to the home page? Would it boost the rankings of the home page? As I understand it, your long-tail keyword traffic would start landing on the home page instead of finding what they were looking for. That would be bad, but might be worth it.
Technical SEO | | watchcases0 -
Are lots of links from an external site to non-existant pages on my site harmful?
Google Webmaster Tools is reporting a heck of a lot of 404s which are due to an external site linking incorrectly to my site. The site itself has scraped content from elsewhere and has created 100's of malformed URLs. Since it unlikely I will have any joy having these linked removed by the creator of the site, I'd like to know how much damage this could be doing, and if so, is there is anything I can do to minimise the impact? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Nobody15569050351140