Is Inter-linking websites together good or bad for SEO?
-
I know of a website that inter-links a handful of websites together (ex- coloring.ws interlinks to a handful of other sites, including dltk-kids.com, and others).
Is this negative for SEO?
I was thinking about creating a few related sites and inter-linking all of them together, since they will all be relevant to each other.
Any thoughts would be great!
-
Google's advice on this is a bit vague, and the practical consequences can vary a lot. Linking together a couple of sites is usually fine - linking together dozens or hundreds could get you marked as a link network and get all of your sites penalized.
Usually, as Richard and James said, it's more that Google will simply devalue the links, especially if those sites share ownership/hosting/etc. It's just too easy to cross-link your own properties. I don't think getting too fancy with hosting, C-blocks, etc. is the answer. That's a lot of work, and Google can still connect you on ownership and other cues. To erase all of those cues is a lot more time, effort, and money than links from a couple of sites are really worth.
The best advice I can give is that, if you cross-link, do it in a way that's clearly of value to users. In other words, just linking these sites to each other in the footer is almost going to guarantee that Google ignores those links. If, however, you can link specific content to directly relevant content on another site, they're much more likely to let those links carry equity, and that's going to be valuable for your visitors and let them usefully traverse your sites. So, think of it more as a CRO task - how can you get visitors from one site to meaningfully engage in and convey on your other sites? If you can do that, and if you're only talking a handful of sites, you have some chance at making those links carry value.
-
What about subdomains?
Would that be more beneficial?
The idea is to have a few relevant sites inter-linking with each other, because each one focuses on a specific niche. Putting all of the niches into one site isn't ideal, let me know your thoughts on subdomains, something like what http://www.got-free-ecards.com/ does (http://printable-cards.gotfreecards.com/)
-
To be honest if it is all on the same sever with the same hosting information ect, if it not going to do much benefit from a long term point of view. I tested your site in one sever tracking tool and it shows up all the sites on the same hosting IP been 98% similar (Google would see the same data) that answers the reply above is it on the same C-Class.
| <a id="mfa99" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa100" class="domain-name"></a>kidsrcrafty.com | 98% <a id="mfa101" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | | > 1 million |
| <a id="mfa115" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa116" class="domain-name"></a>www.dltk-kids.com | 98% <a id="mfa117" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | | > 1 million |
| <a id="mfa137" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa138" class="domain-name"></a>dltk-bible.com | 98% <a id="mfa139" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | Jan. 26, 2002 | 96566 |
| <a id="mfa154" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa155" class="domain-name"></a>dltk-teach.com | 98% <a id="mfa156" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | Nov. 2, 2002 | 115330 |
| <a id="mfa172" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa173" class="domain-name"></a>dltk-holidays.com | 98% <a id="mfa174" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | Oct. 16, 2002 | 230480 |
| <a id="mfa188" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa189" class="domain-name"></a>coloring.ws | 98% <a id="mfa190" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | | 43523 |
| <a id="mfa204" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa205" class="domain-name"></a>kidzone.ws | 98% <a id="mfa206" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | | 55624 |
| <a id="mfa218" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa219" class="domain-name"></a>dltk-poems.com | 98% <a id="mfa220" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | | > 1 million |
| <a id="mfa229" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa230" class="domain-name"></a>dltk-enfants.com | 54% <a id="mfa231" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | | > 1 million |
| <a id="mfa235" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa236" class="domain-name"></a>makinglearningfun.com | 52% <a id="mfa237" class="expand-indicator expand"></a>reasons why | April 2, 2006 | 178965 |
| <a id="mfa241" class="domain-name"></a>[+] <a id="mfa242" class="domain-name"></a>dltk-ninos.com | -
If you go that route, make sure to use different hosting companies or at the very least get different C-class IPs.
Interlnking sites is generally not that effective, a single link from an authority site will carry much more weight. You are better off spending your time contacting authority sites within your niche to get a link somehow (guest blog, get you featured etc)
If say you have 10 PR 1, DA/PA of 15 linking to 1 site. A single authority DA/PA of 35 and PR 3 would carry more weight than all of those combined.
Hope that helps.
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
-
Do dead/inactive links matter?
In cleaning up the backlink profile for my parent's website, I've come across quite a few dead links. For instance, the links in the comments here: http://www.islanddefjam.com/artist/news_single.aspx?nid=4726&artistID=7290 Do I need to worry about these links? I assume if the links are no longer active, and hence not showing up in webmaster or moz reports, I can probably ignore them, but I'm wondering if I should try and get them removed regardless? I've read that google is increasingly taking into account references (i.e. website mentions that are not links) and I don't know if inactive spam links might leave a bad impression of a website. Am I being overly paranoid? I imagine disavowing them would be pointless as you can't attach a nofollow tag to an inactive link.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mgane0 -
Competitor is interlinking between his websites
I have a competitor who ranks in the first page for all his keywords and i found out in open site explorer that he has been interlinking between websites and it is obvious because he owns the same domain but different countries. for example, www.example.id (indonesia) www.example.my (malaysia) www.example.sg (singapore) (asian countries domain) my question here is this even consider "white hat"? I read one of the blog post from moz and here is the quote "#7 - Uniqueness of Source + Target The engines have a number of ways to judge and predict ownership and relationships between websites. These can include (but are certainly not limited to): A large number of shared, reciprocated links
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | andzon
Domain registration data
Shared hosting IP address or IP address C-blocks
Public acquisition/relationship information
Publicized marketing agreements that can be machine-read and interpreted If the engines determine that a pre-existing relationship of some kind could inhibit the "editorial" quality of a link passing between two sites, they may choose to discount or even ignore these. Anecdotal evidence that links shared between "networks" of websites pass little value (particularly the classic SEO strategy of "sitewide" links) is one point many in the organic search field point to on this topic." will interlinking between your sites will be ignored by google in the future? is this a time bomb method or it is fine doing so? Because as far as concern my competitor is actually ranking on the first page for quite some time.1 -
Website rankings plummeted after a negative SEO attack - help!
Hello Mozzers A website of a new client (http://bit.ly/PuVNTp) use to rank very well. It was on the top page for any relevant search terms in its industry in Southern Ontario (Canada). Late last year, the client was the victim of a negative SEO attack. Thousands upon thousands of spammy backlinks were built (suspected to be bought using something like Fiverr). The links came from very questionable sites or just low quality sites. The backlink growth window was very small (2,000 every 24 hours or so). Since that happened that site has all but disappeared from search results. It is still indexed and the owner has disavowed most of the bad backlinks but the site can't seem to bounce back. The same happened for another site that they own (http://bit.ly/1tErxpu) except the number backlinks produced was even higher. The sites both suffer from duplicate content issues and at one point (in 2012) were de-indexed due to the very spammy work of a former SEO. They came back in early 2013 and were fine for some time. Thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | mattylac0 -
NoFollow tag for external links: Good or bad?
I have a few sites that have tens of thousands of links on them (most of them are sourcing images that happen to be external links). I know that it's a good thing to externally link to reputable sources, but is it smart to place the nofollow tag on ALL external links? I'm sure there is a good chance that external links from posts from years ago are pointing to sites that may now be penalized. I feel as though nofollowing all the external links could come off as unnatural. What are the pros and cons of placing the nofollow tag on ALL external links, and also if I leave it as is and don't put the nofollow tag on them. Thanks.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | WebServiceConsulting.com0 -
Domain authority - Low quality links
I have a question I hope people can help me on. it is my intention for my next project to focus on domain authority, and a small number of high quality links. I have a couple of scenarios I would appreciate some advice on: 1. Can lower quality links lower domain authority? 2. Would you avoid links from low quality sites no matter what \ what domain authority levels should you avoid links from. 3. Should I be looking at link profiles of the sites I get links from. Does it matter if a site I get a link from has 1000's of spammy links (i.e. something to look out for when doing guest blogging). 4. Should I avoid directories no matter what, or is high pr \ domain authority directories ok to use, if I end up on a page of other relevant directory submissions related to my niche. Essentially, my aim is to have high quality links, but equally, there are some decent sites on the fringes that I will need to consider (based on a competitors link profile I researches).
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jonathan19790 -
Advice on links after Penguin hit
Firstly we have no warnings or messages in WMT. We have racked up thousands of anchor text urls. Our fault, we didnt nofollow and also some of our many cms sites replicated the links sitewide to the tune of 20,000 links. I`m in the process of removing the code which causes this problem in most of the culprit sites but how long will it take roughly for a crawl to recalculate the links? In my WMT it still shows the links increasing but I think this is retrospective data. However, after this crawl we should see a more relevant link count. We also provide some web software which has been used by many sites. Google may consider our followed anchor text violating spam rules. So I ask, if we were to change the link text to our url only and add nofollow, will this improve the spam issue? We could have as many as 4,000 links per website, as it is a calendar function and list all dates into the future.......and we would like to retain a link to our website of course for marketing purposes. What we dont want is sitewide link spam again. Some of our other links are low quality, some are okay. However, we have lost rankings, probably due to low quality links and overuse of anchor text.. Is this the case the Google has just devalued the links algorythmically or is there an actual penalty to make the rankings drop? As we have no warnings in WMT, I feel there isnt the need to remove the lower quality links and in most cases we havent control over the link placements. We should just rectify that we have a better future linking profile? If we have to remove spam links, then that can only be a good reason to cause negative seo?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | xtopher660 -
White Papers! Is this still good for SEO
Does publishing a white paper good for SEO? We are trying to decide to publish one or not for the purpose of SEO. If it will not help, we will spend money for other things.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AppleCapitalGroup0 -
Do bad links "hurt" your ranking or just not add any value
Do bad links "hurt" your ranking or just not add any value. By this I mean, if you do have links from link farms and bad neighbourhoods, would it effectively pull you down in search engine rankings. Or is it more that it's just a waste of time to get these links, as it adds no value to your ranking. Are google saying avoid them because it will not have a positive effect, or avoid them becuase it will have a negative effect. I am under the opinion that it will not harm, but it will not help either. I think this because at the end of the day you are not 100% in control of your inbound links, any bad site could add you and if a competitor, god forbid, wanted to play some black hat games, couldn't they just add you to thousands of bad sites to pull your ranking down? Interested to hear your opinions on the matter, or any "facts" if they are out there.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | esendex0