Multiple sitewide (deep)links devalued by Google?
-
In my experience sitewide links can still be very powerful if used sensibly and in moderation. However, I'm finding that sitewide text blocks with 2 or 3 (deep)links to a single domain appear not to be working that well or not at all in raising the authority of those target pages. Anyone having the same experience?
In your experience, is the link value diminished when there are multiple deeplinks to a single domain in a sitewide text area? Is anything more than 1 link per target domain bad?
Or could it even be that it's not so much the number of deeplinks to a single domain that matter, but purely the fact that they are sitewide "deeplinks"? Are sitewide deeplinks treated differently than sitewide links linking to an external homepage?
Very interested in hearing your personal experience on this matter. Factual experience would be best, but "gut feeling" experience is also appreciated
Best regards, Joost
-
Yep, it's another "it depends" - if Moz links to Search Engine Land in multiple blog posts over many years (as it has done), this is going to count for more than one vote. Those links also undoubtedly go to different pages on SEL's site (new posts, etc.). But if I write one blog post every other day, linking to my affiliate site in every post, this really won't help the affiliate site at all
-
Hi Jane, I now tend to agree in the case of multiple links that are in a sitewide block. Also I agree that receiving multiple links from one IP-adress is worth less than receiving the same amount of links from all different domain (all else being equal with regards to trustworthiness, relevancy, etc).
But I am quite sure that receiving multiple links from one domain (or even one URL on that domain) counts as more than just one 'vote' from that domain. In my experience the raw number of links from a domain definitely helps with strengthening either transfered trust, page-specific authority and page-specific topical relevancy. So, yes to that bbc versus blogspot example.
-
Hey Joost,
That's a tough one because it probably should be subjective and depend on other factors about the linking site, the site it links to and how it links. If the BBC were to link to me twice, once to a new product page on my website and once to my home page, I'm not going to be concerned that the link is only worth the first link in the HTML code, and freak out if that's not to the page I'm interested in. Same thing goes for a lesser site to the BBC, but that would be a highly authoritative example.
That said, if you're counting links from c-classes or IPs, which is a very common way to assess backlinks, that page on the BBC is going to count as one "vote".
If I see a sidebar linking out twice to the same domain, I'm not going to be all that comfortable claiming that both those links are going to be any more useful than one would have been.
I don't believe Google would be simplistic enough to treat two links from one URL on bbc.co.uk to two different pages on one website the same way as it would treat two links on a blogspot blog to two pages on another website, if that makes sense.
-
Hi Jane, thanks. Unfortunately my data so far is only good enough for me to develop a "hunch", I was hoping for empirical data in the Moz community
Bytheway, are you saying that one page linking to URL A and URL B on an external domain would only count as one 'vote' for that entire domain? Not as individual votes for each page with it's own (anchor text / contextual / landingpage) relevancy? I did read a lot about multiple links from one page to the same external URL not adding any value over just one link, but I always thought that links to individual URLs still have their own merit, even if they are from a single source page?
Best regards, Joost
-
Hi Joost,
I don't have hard data on this at all; this is a what-I-know plus gut feeling answer.
Gary is right - multiple links from one page to another target should be treated more like one link to the target domain, but this might not be a uniform rule. In effect, two links from one page whether those links be site-wide or individual shouldn't have much more or less effect on the target website than just one.
That said, if Google felt that site-wide link or text blocks were being used manipulatively, there is no reason why they would not discount the value of those links altogether. It's interesting that you may have seen a correlation between multiple links from site-wide areas and poorer performance. It would also be interesting to see the data - you could put together a good blog post about it with enough data, for sure.
-
Hi Joost
Yes now reads 'unnatural links.' Sorry for my error!
Gary
-
Hi Gary,
Thanks for your reply. I don't really understand this sentence though:
"My question would be, "are your domains carrying natural links?" This would of course have a negative impact, but if not great."
Could you clarify what you mean please? Thanks again!
-
Search engines read this type of link juice as a single vote for a site. My question would be, "are your domains carrying unnatural links?" This would of course have a negative impact, but if not great.
I have heard site wide links becoming 'devalued.' This is not factual but through conversations I've had with large corporations.
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
-
Change Google's version of Canonical link
Hi My website has millions of URLs and some of the URLs have duplicate versions. We did not set canonical all these years. Now we wanted to implement it and fix all the technical SEO issues. I wanted to consolidate and redirect all the variations of a URL to the highest pageview version and use that as the canonical because all of these variations have the same content. While doing this, I found in Google search console that Google has already selected another variation of URL as canonical and not the highest pageview version. My questions: I have millions of URLs for which I have to do 301 and set canonical. How can I find all the canonical URLs that Google has autoselected? Search Console has a daily quota of 100 or something. Is it possible to override Google's version of Canonical? Meaning, if I set a variation as Canonical and it is different than what Google has already selected, will it change overtime in Search Console? Should I just do a 301 to highest pageview variation of the URL and not set canonicals at all? This way the canonical that Google auto selected might get redirected to the highest pageview variation of the URL. Any advice or help would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SDCMarketing0 -
Does having all client websites on same server/same Google Analytics red flag Google?
If you have several clients, and they are all on the same server, and also under ONE Google Analytics account, will that negatively impact with Google? They all have different content and addresses, some have the same template, but with different images.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BBuck1 -
OSE link report showing links to 404 pages on my site
I did a link analysis on this site mormonwiki.com. And many of the pages shown to be linked to were pages like these http://www.mormonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Planning_a_trip_to_Rome_By_using_Movie_theatre_-_Your_five_Fun_Shows2052752 There happens to be thousands of them and these pages actually no longer exist but the links to them obviously still do. I am planning to proceed by disavowing these links to the pages that don't exist. Does anyone see any reason to not do this, or that doing this would be unnecessary? Another issue is that Google is not really crawling this site, in WMT they are reporting to have not crawled a single URL on the site. Does anyone think the above issue would have something to do with this? And/or would you have any insight on how to remedy it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ThridHour0 -
Dummy links in posts
Hi, Dummy links in posts. We use 100's of sample/example lnks as below http://<domain name></domain name> http://localhost http://192.168.1.1 http:/some site name as example which is not available/sample.html many more is there any tag we can use to show its a sample and not a link and while we scan pages to find broken links they are skipped and not reported as 404 etc? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mtthompsons0 -
Google Plus Authorship
Situation Description: I have a website called Website A. I wish to migrate alot of the content from Website A to Website B. Website B will be on a completely different domain name and environment. Authors of Website A will act as contributing authors for Website B. It is also possible that other contributing authors of other websites C and D commit to writing content on Website B. Questions (1) Does it make sense to create a google plus profile under UserA@websiteA.com and link from content on websiteB to their google plus profile under UserA@websiteA.com? (2) Does AuthorRank affect PageRank? If yes, if I take the above approach would websiteA be effected or websiteB since the content writers of websiteA are contributing to websiteB? (3) Is it ok for userA to have a corporate google plus profile assuming he might also have another google plus profile under a different address? I always think it make sense that there exists a google plus profile at an employee level and another google plus profile at a personal level. (4) If an employee leaves the company, do I leave his/hers Google Plus profile alive? The fact that no more content would be published under that particular profile, would that negatively effect author rank over time? (5) Another interesting observation is that UsaToday, CNN etc do not use authorship? No authors link to their twitter profile or google plus profile. Shouln't they be doing this in terms of author rank or is author rank not that important? Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seo12120 -
Does Google index more than three levels down if the XML sitemap is submitted via Google webmaster Tools?
We are building a very big ecommerce site. The site has 1000 products and has many categories/levels. The site is still in construccion so you cannot see it online. My objective is to get Google to rank the products (level 5) Here is an example level 1 - Homepage - http://vulcano.moldear.com.ar/ Level 2 - http://vulcano.moldear.com.ar/piscinas/ Level 3 - http://vulcano.moldear.com.ar/piscinas/electrobombas-para-piscinas/ Level 4 - http://vulcano.moldear.com.ar/piscinas/electrobombas-para-piscinas/autocebantes.html/ Level 5 - Product is on this level - http://vulcano.moldear.com.ar/piscinas/electrobombas-para-piscinas/autocebantes/autocebante-recomendada-para-filtros-vc-10.html Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Carla_Dawson0 -
Footer Link
Hello, Some of my hosted clients don't mind if I put a footer link on the bottom of their website. I would like to put a footer link that looks like Seomoz's - http://imgur.com/GrC8y Basically it would look like so: "Powered by "my company name". The world's #1 "keyword" provider (LOGO goes here) Here are my questions: 1. Would this hurt or help my rankings? 2. Should the logo be hosted by my clients so that a different ip is hosting my logo (where my image name will get picked up)? Or is it best to host it myself? 3. If my company name and keyword are getting linked, is that one link too many? 4. Is it a good idea to use a different keyword so that other keywords get picked up by SERPs, or should I set myself up on one keyword ? Thank you so much! Shawn
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Shawn1240 -
Footer sitewide links
Here's a question - does having a "website designed by" reference in the footer of every page of one of your clients help or hurt? I have a major university .edu that I designed a site for one of their departments and it is just about to launch and they've allowed me to put a reference in the footer. I've had pretty good luck with this on my other clients' sites, but didn't know if this practice is seen as spammy. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chas-2957210