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
-
If I use content from DomainA on DomainB, but spread it - how do I implement the canoncial tag?
Hey community, I have a question regarding canonical tags.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ElliPirelli
I used the content of one of my domains (nameA.com/ContentA) and copied it to another domain, but on several pages: nameB.com/ContentA1
nameB.com/ContentA2
nameB.com/ContentA3
and so on). So I divided the content from domainA to several pages of domainB. The reason is, that my client wants to build a new business on domainB and wants to use the exact same content from domainA, because he can't afford another copywriter at the moment (and he doesn't want to rewrite it himself). Problem: DomainA is ranking for this content and he wants to keep the rankings, until domainB ranks similar (for the same keywords, of course). So my question is: Can I put a canonical tag on domainA?
My thoughts are: Not a single page of domainB is 100% duplicate content, as it's always only partialy the same. Can I just choose one of those pages from domainB to put as link-goal for the canonical tag? Or do I need to create a "view-all" page on domainB, with all the content put together, so it's 100% duplicate to domainA, and then put a canonical tag to domainA and link to this "view-all" page? If I do so, do I need to also put canonicals on every single page from domainB, to link to this "view-all" page?
IMPORTANT: Would the other pages of domainB then be ranked/listed in the SERRPs, or only the "view-all" site? I would really appreciate your help, as I have been seaching for answers to this specific problem since more than a week... Thank you! Best regards0 -
SEO Implications of firewalls that block "foreign connections"
Hello! A client's IT security team has firewalls on the site with GEO blocking enabled. This is to prevent foreign connections to applications as part of a contractual agreements with their own clients. Does anyone have any experience with workarounds for this? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SimpleSearch0 -
Original Source Tag or Canonical Tag for News Publishers?
I have been sourcing content from a news publisher who is my partner for publishing content online. My website deals with sourcing content from a couple of websites. I did use a canonical tag pointing towards the respective syndicated source but I have not seen traffic for those articles. I did some research and found out that Google does have a tag for news publishers which is the "original-source" tag which helps news publishers to give proper credit for their work. Here's a link to the official word by Google" https://news.googleblog.com/2010/11/credit-where-credit-is-due.html Although Google has officially stated that the "syndication-source" tag has been replaced by the "canonical" tag. However, there is no mention about the "original-source" tag.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Starcom_Search
Can I still use the "original-source" tag to syndicate content from my partner site instead of the "canonical" tag? P.S.: The reason why I am not convinced with the use of the canonical tag is because:
1. As per what Google says, duplicate content won't harm my website unless it is spam. (And since we are rightfully content from our partner'website and showcasing it to a larger audience by hosting it on our website as well, we are thereby not indulging in any unethical practices) 2. The canonical tag could possibly hamper my crawl bandwidth issues as it would essentially need the crawler to crawl the whole page to figure out that the canonical is present, post which any possible valuation that my site could have garnered gets lost.3. Moreover, since I am from the news, media and publication industry, content republication is a widely accepted practice and in such cases simply including a link to the original source of the article or using the original source tag should suffice, That being mentioned, I do not want to go ahead without taking a second opinion about this. Kindly help me to resolve this issue.0 -
Hreflang Tags & Canonicals Being Used
We have a site on which both hreflang tags and canonicals are being used. There are multiple languages, but for this I'll explain our problem using two. There are a ton of dupe page titles coming up in GSC, and we're not sure if we have an issue or not. First, the hreflang tags are implement properly. UK page pointing there, US page pointing there. Further down the page, there are canonical tags - except the UK canonical tag points to the UK page, and the US version points to the US page. I'm not sure if this will cause an issue in terms of SEO or indexing. Has anyone experienced this before or does anything have any insight into this? Thanks much! Matt
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Snaptech_Marketing0 -
Best to Fix Duplicate Content Issues on Blog If URLs are Set to "No-Index"
Greetings Moz Community: I purchased a SEMrush subscription recently and used it to run a site audit. The audit detected 168 duplicate content issues mostly relating to blog posts tags. I suspect these issues may be due to canonical tags not being set up correctly. My developer claims that since these blog URLs are set to "no-index" these issues do not need to be corrected. My instinct would be to avoid any risk with potential duplicate content. To set up canonicalization correctly. In addition, even if these pages are set to "no-index" they are passing page rank. Further more I don't know why a reputable company like SEMrush would consider these errors if in fact they are not errors. So my question is, do we need to do anything with the error pages if they are already set to "no-index"? Incidentally the site URL is www.nyc-officespace-leader.com. I am attaching a copy of the SEMrush audit. Thanks, Alan BarjWaO SqVXYMy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
"No Index, No Follow" or No Index, Follow" for URLs with Thin Content?
Greetings MOZ community: If I have a site with about 200 thin content pages that I want Google to remove from their index, should I set them to "No Index, No Follow" or to "No Index, Follow"? My SEO firm has advised me to set them to "No Index, Follow" but on a recent MOZ help forum post someone suggested "No Index, No Follow". The MOZ poster said that telling Google the content was should not be indexed but the links should be followed was inconstant and could get me into trouble. This make a lot of sense. What is proper form? As background, I think I have recently been hit with a Panda 4.0 penalty for thin content. I have several hundred URLs with less than 50 words and want them de-indexed. My site is a commercial real estate site and the listings apparently have too little content. Thanks, Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
ALT Tag Labels that Use Near Duplicate Text-SEO No, No???
Greetings Moz Community: About 280 pages of my 650 page commercial real estate website are listing pages. Each listing page contains between two and five photos, each with a corresponding ALT tag. My developer has set up the labeling of the ALT tags in the following manner. I can create a label for the first photo, but each subsequent photo automatically gets the same label plus a number tagged to the ALT. Like this: alt="Flatiron Loft for Rent"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
alt="Flatiron Loft for Rent - Photo 0"
alt="Flatiron Loft for Rent - Photo 1"
alt="Flatiron Loft for Rent - Photo 2"
alt="Flatiron Loft for Rent - Photo 3" Is this method neutral, positive or negative for SEO? I am concerned that this manner of labeling ALT tags might risk triggering a duplicate content penalty. In early July I migrated the site from Drupal to Wordpress. We changed the URL structure (adding a sub-directory) for the listings at that time. Google is refusing to index about 100 listing pages. Any chance the ALT tags are contributing to Google's reluctance to index the URLs? I might also add that images are hosted on Amazon's CDN. A sample listing URL is http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/listings/278-21st-street-flatiron-loft-for-rent
Note: (/listings/278) were added to the URL in July, representing the listing sub directory plus the listing number. I Look forward to hearing the opinion of the MOZ community!!! THANKS!!!
Alan1 -
Should we use the rel-canonical tag?
We have a secure version of our site, as we often gather sensitive business information from our clients. Our https pages have been indexed as well as our http version. Could it still be a problem to have an http and an https version of our site indexed by Google? Is this seen as being a duplicate site? If so can this be resolved with a rel=canonical tag pointing to the http version? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | annieplaskett1