Internal anchor text
-
Hi,
I'm not sure what approach I should be using with my internal anchor text. Ideally I would like to rank well for about 3 keyword variations, so what I am wondering is is this achievable through judicious use of onsite anchor text?
What I'm trying to establish is whether I should focus on just one term throughout and never vary?
Or, should I go for a variety of all 3 keywords?
Should I go for a wide variety of semantically similar phrases.
Where are the most important places for this anchor text?
E.g. home page, main nav, text links within articles?Should I try and use the full term in my navigation. E.g. instead of using
Pink | Blue | Green
should I go for
Pink widgets | Blue widgets | Green widgetsAny suggestions, pointers to useful articles would be very much appreciated.
TIA,
Chris -
Hi Chris,
Internal linking is an important but not over beneficial part of optimising your site.
Typically a good navigation, possibly a meaningful footer (with links) and breadcrumbs can be helpful for a users navigation. These approaches account for most of the internal linking on a site.
When running with these approaches, I would always recommend text links (avoid images where possible) and ensure above all it gives the user the best experience.
For your example above, writing Pink widgets | Blue widgets | Green widgets in the nav might take up to much real estate and look a little sloppy, try a drop down with the main category 'widgets' and run the colours as sub categories. Having a site structure www.example.com/widgets/blue will help to define widgets are an important concept on your site while also highlighting that you have Pink widgets | Blue widgets | Green widgets. It will be assumed that for the product pages in this example, engaging unique content is available.
That said, if you see the need I would also encourage you to have internal link within your content, WHERE RELEVANT. I have seen to many sites, simply go through their content and pick out the popular keywords linking all over the place. If it helps the user (possibly by defining an unusual term OR refering to a service OR product described on a different page) it's worth doing.
One of my pet hates is finding a keyword on page that links to itself (same URL) because it is a keyword that is being targeted. As a user it's frustrating and personally I immediately leave sites running this practice.
You don't have to continually link to your desired page with the same keywords, in fact it's discouraged. Google are becoming increasingly better at understanding intent, therefore do what is best for your visitors and you will ensure that your site enjoys longevity in search rankings...
Best of success,
Dan
-
I think a blended approach would be best. I think a dispersion of 50% exact keyword and 50% variations, but when choosing the specific variations I would verify through any keyword tool that the variations you use have decent traffic.
As for the most important areas to place the anchor text I would say main nav, onpage sitemap and body of content in that order respectively.
Of course this is just my view...good luck with your project!
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
-
Internal links decrease dramatically
I have an unknown problem with my internal links. but after many searches on Moz community and other sites, I didn't find any answer. the question is: why homepage doesn't enough internal links like other pages? the homepage internal links decrease dramatically in 2 months but it doesn't happen to other pages in the same domain 6l6Bh D0bC1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | canadaoptimize0 -
Same page Anchor Links vs Internal Link (Cannibalisation)
Hey Mozzers, I have a very long article page that supports several of my sub-category pages. It has sub-headings that link out to the relevant pages. However the article is very long and to make it easier to find the relevant section I was debating adding inpage anchor links in a bullet list at the top of the page for quick navigation. PAGE TITLE Keyword 1 Keyword 2 etc <a name="'Keyword1"></a> Keyword 1 Content
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP
<a name="'Keyword2"></a> Keyword 2 Content Because of the way my predecessor wrote this article, its section headings are the same as the sub-categories they link out to and boost (not ideal but an issue I will address later). What I wondered is if having the inpage achor would confuse the SERPS because they would be linking with the same keyword. My worry is that by increasing userbility of the article by doing this I also confuse them SERPS First I tell them that this section on my page talk about keyword 1. Then from in that article i tell them that a different page entirely is about the same keyword. Would linking like this confuse SERPS or are inpage anchor links looked upon and dealt with differently?0 -
Internal links to preferential pages
Hi all, I have question about internal linking and canonical tags. I'm working on an ecommerce website which has migrated platform (shopify to magento) and the website design has been updated to a whole new look. Due to the switch to magento, the developers have managed to change the internal linking structure to product pages. The old set up was that category pages (on urls domain.com/collections/brand-name) for each brand would link to products via the following url format: domain.com/products/product-name . This product url was the preferential version that duplicate product pages generated by shopify would have their canonical tags pointing to. This set up was working fine. Now what's happened is that the category pages have been changed to link to products via dynamically generated urls based on the user journey. So products are now linked to via the following urls: domain.com/collection/brand-name/product-name . These new product pages have canonical tags pointing back to the original preferential urls (domain.com/products/product-name). But this means that the preferential URLs for products are now NOT linked to anywhere on the website apart from within canonical tags and within the website's sitemap. I'm correct in thinking that this definitely isn't a good thing, right? I've actually noticed Google starting to index the non-preferential versions of the product pages in addition to the preferential versions, so it looks like Google perhaps is ignoring the canonical tags as there are so many internal links pointing to non-preferential pages, and no on-site links to the actual preferential pages? I've recommended to the developers that they change this back to how it was, where the preferential product pages (domain.com/products/product-name) were linked to from collection pages. I just would like clarification from the Moz community that this is the right call to make? Since the migration to the new website & platform we've seen a decrease in search traffic, despite all redirects being set up. So I feel that technical issues like this can't be doing the website any favours at all. If anyone could help out and let me know if what I suggested is correct then that would be excellent. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Guy_OTS0 -
Effects of pages heavily reliant on CSS for text and image content
We have a new feature that's been live for a couple days here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/t5/vs/canon/60d/ My concern is that the developer relied very heavily on css for content and image layout. Such that the meat of our pages looks pretty meager: https://gist.github.com/anonymous/b1ccb77914c6722d40bd Google does parse css, but I'm not sure if it does so for content, or just to verify the site isn't doing something nefarious. Will google see our deeper content in the css, or view the page as being very thin?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ir-seo-account0 -
Help needed for a 53 Page Internal Website Structure & Internal Linking
Hey all... I'm designing the structure for a website that has 53 pages. Can you take a look at the attached diagram and see if the website structure is ok? On the attached diagram I have numbered the pages from 1 to 53, with 1 being the most important home page - 2,3,4,5, being the next 4 important pages - 6,7,8... 15,16,17 being the 3rd set of important pages, and 18,19,20..... 51,52,53 being the last set of pages which are the easiest to rank. I have two questions: Is the website structure for this correct? I have made sure that all pages on the website are reachable. Considering the home page, and page number 2,3,4,5 are the most important pages - I am linking out to these pages from the the last set of pages (18,29,20...51,52,53). There are 36 pages in the last set - and out of this 36, from 24 of them I am linking back to home page and page number 2,3,4,5. The remaining 8 pages of the 36 will link back to pages 6,7,8...15,16,17. In total the most importnat page will have the following number of internal incoming links: Home Page : 25 Pages 2,3,4,5 : 25 Pages 6,7,8...15,16,17 : 4 Pages 18,19,20...51,52,53 : 1 Is this ok considering home page, and pages 2,3,4,5 are the most important? Or do you think I should divide and give more internal links to the other pages also? If you can share any inputs or suggestions to how I can improve this it will greatly help me. Also if you know any references for good guides to internal linking of websites greater that 50 pages please share them in the answers. Thank you all! Regards, P.S - The URL for the image is at http://imgur.com/XqaK4
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | arjun.rajkumar810 -
International Version of Website
Our website is AluminumEyewear.com and we're considering launching a specific version for Australia, naturally I want to avoid any dupe content issues but the content would largely remain the same. I have read through this post and wondered if the options given here are still relevant? I'm currently leaning towards using a sub-domain, i.e. au.aluminumeyewear.com or should I go for aluminumeyewear.com.au? Will there be dupe content issues if I do that? Confused and hoping for help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | smckenzie750 -
Duplicate block of text on category listings
Fellows, We are deciding whether we should include our category description on all pages of the category listing - for example; page 1, page 2, page 3... The category description is currently a few paragraphs of text that sits on page 1 of the category only at present. It also includes an image (linked to a large version of it) with appropriate ALT text. Would we benefit from including this introductory text on the rest of the pages in the category? Or should we leave it on the first page only? Would it flag up duplicate signals? Ideas please! Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter2640 -
Site Wide Internal Navigation links
Hello all, All our category pages www.pitchcare.com/shop are linked to from every product page via the sidebar navigation. Which results in every category page having over 1700 links with the same anchor text. I have noticed that the category pages dont appear to be ranked when they most definately should be. For example http://www.pitchcare.com/shop/moss-control/index.html is not ranked for the term "moss control" instead another of our deeper pages is ranked on page 1. Reading a previous SEO MOZ article · Excessive Internal Anchor Text Linking / Manipulation Can Trip An Automated Penalty on Google
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | toddyC
I recently had my second run-in with a penalty at Google that appears to punish sites for excessive internal linking with "optimized" (or "keyword stuffed anchor text") links. When the links were removed (in both cases, they were found in the footer of the website sitewide), the rankings were restored immediately following Google's next crawl, indicating a fully automated filter (rather than a manual penalty requiring a re-consideration request). Do you think we may have triggered a penalty? If so what would be the best way to tackle this? Could we add no follows on the product pages? Cheers Todd0