Risk Using "Nofollow" tag
-
I have a lot of categories (like e-commerce sites) and many have page 1 - 50 for each category (view all not possible). Lots of the content on these pages are present across the web on other websites (duplicate stuff). I have added quality unique content to page 1 and added "noindex, follow" to page 2-50 and rel=next prev tags to the pages.
Questions:
-
By including the "follow" part, Google will read content and links on pages 2-50 and they may think "we have seen this stuff across the web….low quality content and though we see a noindex tag, we will consider even page 1 thin content, because we are able to read pages 2-50 and see the thin content." So even though I have "noindex, follow" the 'follow' part causes the issue (in that Google feels it is a lot of low quality content) - is this possible and if I had added "nofollow" instead that may solve the issue and page 1 would increase chance of looking more unique?
-
Why don't I add "noindex, nofollow" to page 2 - 50? In this way I ensure Google does not read the content on page 2 - 50 and my site may come across as more unique than if it had the "follow" tag. I do understand that in such case (with nofollow tag on page 2-50) there is no link juice flowing from pages 2 - 50 to the main pages (assuming there are breadcrumbs or other links to the indexed pages), but I consider this minimal value from an SEO perspective.
-
I have heard using "follow" is generally lower risk than "nofollow" - does this mean a website with a lot of "noindex, nofollow" tags may hurt the indexed pages because it comes across as a site Google can't trust since 95% of pages have such "noindex, nofollow" tag? I would like to understand what "risk" factors there may be.
thank you very much
-
-
thx, Alan. Within real estate MLS - if I index all "MLS result pages" (ex: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu/metro/waikiki-condos/) I will have about 5,000 such MLS result pages (I mean 5,000 such category pages with each category often having more than 1 page). I have added unique quality content on Page 1 of about 300 such MLS result pages and I have added rel=next prev. For the other 4,700 pages I currently have "noindex, follow".
Question: is it OK to have such a large amount of pages with "noindex, follow" on or do I run the risk Google thinks "hmmm….though we do not index, seems like a lot of crap on this website….let us lower ranking even for the quality pages." Would I simply be better off letting everything index? I am concerned if I let those pages index that will dilute the value of my high quality pages. I am thinking if I completely delete those low relevancy pages from my website it would be ideal (in order for Google to see my site's value) but users looking to buy real estate would not see as many listings as on other websites and that could be a concern.
Any insight appreciated. thx
-
If you use nofollow, then every link pointing to those pages will throw away their link juice, you don't want that.
Follow means that link juice will flow though the links back to your indexed pages. Telling google not to index is doing them a favour as they don't want duplicates I don't think there any concern. -
it is a possibility it could be seen that way yes but that's generally unlikely but before you got a bit too much "into" nofollowing links etc. wanted to make you aware of it.
With the tag what you're sort of saying is"these pages are all very similar this is the first one and this is the last one" Google's pretty cleaver and most people don't give it credit if your site is about real estate etc. it will know your listings may be seen else where for example in the UK we have Rightmove & Zoopla they both list properties from else where but they also have value in other aspects of there sites which is why they work, so as long as your site is not just about the pages that are duplicates and you give worthy content on other areas generally you should be fine. Make the site really helpful for the user and the rest sort of falls into place you can also take the time to look at how they've solved the same problem.
Regards to the 3000 pages, if you can get some unique content on there fantastic but i know its not always easy. Your original question was about the risk of nofollow, there is no risk with it, now its really your choice with the noindex tag. I can imagine you can leave it on but you may risk not being all you can be, I would suggest taking a look at your competitors and other similar sites to get an idea of what they do in a similar situation.
you might find this answer helpful which is on the same subject - http://moz.com/community/q/real-estate-mls-listings-does-google-consider-duplicate-content
-
http://www.honoluluhi5.com/moana-pacific-i-2901-kakaako-condo-for-sale-201417440/ - I have 3000+ of such property pages which is shared amongst real estate firms across the web. Currently I have "noindex, follow". You would remove that tag and just let the pages index?
-
I am using rel=next prev. So maybe I should just drop the "noindex, follow" part, though many experts recommend using that tag. However, issue with these things (rel=next prev or "noindex, follow) is that Google will read the pages and may think "hmm....We've seen these real estate listings on many other sites and we therefore consider this low quality content..."
But you are saying don't use noindex type tags as it could be interpreted as sculpting?
-
You want to use the pagination tag like the canonical tag it will let you index the pages (sort of) but avoid duplicate content. Noindexing a site is a bit of a waste of SEO effort when there are other solutions so I'd leave that as a last ditch effort. If you've have unique content on the pages that's better than one (even if its low on the page)
What you don't want to do is make it look like your trying to manipulate your link juice / pagerank internally too much.
-
ex: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu/metro/waikiki-condos/
As you scroll down you will see a lot of high quality and unique content, including aerial photos which are my company's. I have 300+ pages like that - unique and very high quality. I am in process of reducing size of may by 75% and move the unique content up much higher on the page, since I fear the unique content is placed too low on page and that could impact ranking.
Also, I currently have "noindex, follow" on page 2 to n since all those real estate listings are duplicate content since it is shared across 100+ Real estate companies across the web. I am thinking maybe I should make that those pages 2 - n "noindex, nofollow" so Google does not waste time reading those pages.
Any thoughts highly appreciated... thanks very much
-
I think you've got a bit lost there. By adding the noindex site it makes no difference if you have no follow or not. Even if you have bad content by no indexing most of your site its almost like you've got a one page site. I really recommend taking the time to write some content it pays off down the line and doesn't take as long as you think.
Matt Cutts has said most of the internet is duplicate content so don't over analyze it too much links etc. can make a fairly large impact as long as the bulk of your website is unique and authoritative you will be on a good road.
-
No index and no follow are nearly the same thing (okay take that comment with a heap of salt)
-
link juice would matter as Google is ignoring that part of your site as you've told it not to index it so any link juice going that way is just going into a black hole.
-
I think you heard wrong, no-follow is safer than follow because its like saying "i don't endorse this link" and so it doesn't transfer link juice but reduced any risks but remember trying to manipulate link juice on your site is a risky game and most of the time you will come off worse of than just writing some content for products
I would take a look over here if you needed more reasons not to - https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/
"Q: Does this mean “PageRank sculpting” (trying to change how PageRank flows within your site using e.g. nofollow) is a bad idea?
A: I wouldn’t recommend it" -
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
-
Google WMT/search console: Thousands of "Links to your site" even only one back-link from a website.
Hi, I can see in my search console that a website giving thousands of links to my site where hardly only one back-link from one of their page to our page. Why this is happening? Here is screenshot: http://imgur.com/a/VleUf
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Your typical blog disclosure. "We received a free product but are not financially compensated".
Good afternoon & Happy Friday! I've ran into the following disclosure multiple times on different blogs. It seems to me like it would be a red flag and counter productive for both the blogger and the brand sending the samples as "free samples" are subject to google link scheming. Am I correct? What are your thoughts on bloggers using this disclaimer in regards to SEO? Disclosure: Some of these products were samples provided to me to try. Opinions and the choice to review are 100% my own! I was not financially compensated for writing this blog post. This post contains affiliate links.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 90miLLA0 -
"Leeching" backlinks...yes or no?
A lot of websites, by virtue of practicality, will link to wikipedia articles to explain certain concepts. Would it be worthwhile to reach out to those websites and ask them to change the link to a different resource if that resource is a much better alternative than the wikipedia article? And how would you approach this? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mack-ayache0 -
Using both dofollow & nofollow links within the same blog site (but different post).
Hi all, I have been actively pursuing bloggers for my site in order to build page rank. My website sells women undergarments that are more on the exotic end. I noticed a large amount of prospective bloggers demand product samples. As already confirm, bloggers that are given "free" samples should use a rel=no follow attribute in their links. Unfortunately this does not build my page rank or transfer links juice. My question is this: is it advisable for them to also blog additional posts and include dofollow links? The idea is for the blogger to use a nofollow when posting about the sample and a regular link for a secondary post at a later time. What are you thoughts concerning this matter?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 90miLLA0 -
Can you recover from "Unnatural links to your site—impacts links" if you remove them or have they already been discounted?
If Google has already discounted the value of the links and my rankings dropped because in the past these links passed value and now they don't. Is there any reason to remove them? If I do remove them, is there a chance of "recovery" or should I just move forward with my 8 month old blogging/content marketing campaign.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Beastrip0 -
Is the <a data-uri="">link SEO friendly?</a>
We've earned a great link from a popular website but it is in a strange format: <a data-uri="http:;;;;;;;;www.domain.com;;;;" target="_blank">blue widgets</a> It is still visible as a link from the web browsers, but I was wondering how will it perform in terms of SEO visibility and crawabillity? Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MartinPanayotov
Thanks!
Martin0 -
Should I use the canonical tag on all my mobile pages?
I've seen flavors of this question asked but did not see the exact response I was looking for. If I have a site at: www.site.com And I am creating a mobile version at: m.site.com (let's say a responsive design is not feasible at this time) And all the content on m.site.com is duplicative of the content on www.site.com What's the best way to handle that from an SEO perspective? Should I put a canonical tag on every mobile page pointing back to the www page? I assume that is better than a 'no index' tag on all pages of the mobile site?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | hbrown1080 -
Geo-tagging using cookie - Is it Good or Bad for Rankings
We have a fairly large site which does a cookie-based 302 redirect to the the specific city page if someone types in the Home page URL. Though if the cookie is not available (first time user) it goes to the Homepage and asks user to select the city as our services are city specific. Everything is working fine with this setup. Though our tech team now wants to display the contents of city page on homepage URL itself if the cookie is available without 302 redirecting to new URL. Though no-cookie available scenario remains unchanged. Technically, I think this change should work fine without any ranking issues as still the first time users see the actual homepage as does Googlebot. Please confirm possible issues in rankings with this change from your experiences as based upon city present in the cookie homepage will display different content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Webmaster_SEO0