Does Google Still Pass Anchor Text for Multiple Links to the Same Page When Using a Hashtag? What About Indexation?
-
Both of these seem a little counter-intuitive to me so I want to make sure I'm on the same page.
I'm wondering if I need to add "#s to my internal links when the page I'm linking to is already:
a.) in the site's navigation
b.) in the sidebar
More specifically, in your experience...do the search engines only give credit to (or mostly give credit to) the anchor text used in the navigation and ignore the anchor text used in the body of the article?
I've found (in here) a couple of folks mentioning that content after a hashtagged link isn't indexed.
Just so I understand this...
a.) if I were use a hashtag at the end of a link as the first link in the body of a page, this means that the rest of the article won't be indexed?
b.) if I use a table of contents at the top of a page and link to places within the document, then only the areas of the page up to the table of contents will be indexed/crawled?
Thanks ahead of time! I really appreciate the help.
-
Howdy Spencer!
Whoa! Lot's of questions here. Let's see if we can sort this out.
There's a lot of debate around this, and for the most part most SEOs consider the use of hashes okay for user experience, but mostly minor when it comes to influencing search results.
Here's what we know. Google indexes the first anchor text in the HTML. This is not necessarily the same thing as the first anchor on the visible page, as the HTML/CSS can be arranged so that links appear above others on the page.
That said, folks have experimented and found ways to get additional anchors indexed, including the use of hash tags. That said, what we don't know is how much weight/authority these links pass. It's generally believed (and I support this) that they probably don't pass as much value to the page as previous links.
If you have a link in your navigation, and another in the text body further down in the HTML, Google will index the first anchor, but most likely not the 2nd in most circumstances. Does this mean Google doesn't pass any value through the second? There's a lot of debate about this (read the comments here:http://www.seomoz.org/blog/all-about-anchor-text-whiteboard-friday)
I find it best not to micro-manage your links and simply keep the following in mind: If you want a link to pass as much value and authority as possible, place it in the body of the page.
Certainly there's a case made for using named anchors (#). They're good for navigation and user experience, and we see search engines pick them up in search results, but the value gained by manipulating them for ranking purposes is likely negligible.
"I've found (in here) a couple of folks mentioning that content after a hashtagged link isn't indexed."
Hmm.... I've never heard of that, and it sounds fishy. Love to see any research that's been done.
Hope this helps! Best of luck with your SEO.
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 not Indexing images on CDN.
My URL is: https://bit.ly/2hWAApQ We have set up a CDN on our own domain: https://bit.ly/2KspW3C We have a main xml sitemap: https://bit.ly/2rd2jEb and https://bit.ly/2JMu7GB is one the sub sitemaps with images listed within. The image sitemap uses the CDN URLs. We verified the CDN subdomain in GWT. The robots.txt does not restrict any of the photos: https://bit.ly/2FAWJjk. Yet, GWT still reports none of our images on the CDN are indexed. I ve followed all the steps and still none of the images are being indexed. My problem seems similar to this ticket https://bit.ly/2FzUnBl but however different because we don't have a separate image sitemap but instead have listed image urls within the sitemaps itself. Can anyone help please? I will promptly respond to any queries. Thanks
Technical SEO | | TNZ
Deepinder0 -
Trying to find all internal links to a specific page (without index)
Hi guys -- Still waiting on Moz to index a page of mine. We launched a new site over two months ago. In the meantime, I really just need a list of internal links to a specific page because I want to change its URL. Does anybody know how to find that list (of internal links to 1 of my pages) without the Moz index? I appreciate the help!
Technical SEO | | marchexmarketingmcc1 -
Will Google Recrawl an Indexed URL Which is No Longer Internally Linked?
We accidentally introduced Google to our incomplete site. The end result: thousands of pages indexed which return nothing but a "Sorry, no results" page. I know there are many ways to go about this, but the sheer number of pages makes it frustrating. Ideally, in the interim, I'd love to 404 the offending pages and allow Google to recrawl them, realize they're dead, and begin removing them from the index. Unfortunately, we've removed the initial internal links that lead to this premature indexation from our site. So my question is, will Google revisit these pages based on their own records (as in, this page is indexed, let's go check it out again!), or will they only revisit them by following along a current site structure? We are signed up with WMT if that helps.
Technical SEO | | kirmeliux0 -
What is meant by to many on page links
I have just done the report for my site http://www.in2town.co.uk and it says i have 246 on page links but i am not sure how come i have got that many. I know i have a large number of links and in the old days it says that you should keep the links under 100 but now with website speed and the net, people are saying this is no longer listened to. A report i read said that the links should not confuse the reader or put them off, so i am just wondering what your thoughts are on a site with over a 100 links on the home page and also if my site does have to many links what should i do about it. I cannot understand why it is showing 246 when i do not see that many on the page, any advice would be great
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Noindex Pages indexed
I'm having problem that gogole is index my search results pages even though i have added the "noindex" metatag. Is the best thing to block the robot from crawling that file using robots.txt?
Technical SEO | | Tedred0 -
Non-Canonical Pages still Indexed. Is this normal?
I have a website that contains some products and the old structure of the URL's was definitely not optimal for SEO purposes. So I created new SEO friendly URL's on my site and decided that I would use the canonical tags to transfer all the weight of the old URL's to the New URL's and ensure that the old ones would not show up in the SERP's. Problem is this has not quite worked. I implemented the canonical tags about a month ago but I am still seeing the old URL's indexed in Google and I am noticing that the cache date of these pages was only about a week ago. This leads me to believe that the spiders have been to the pages and seen the new canonical tags but are not following them. Is this normal behavior and if so, can somebody explain to me why? I know I could have just 301 redirected these old URL's to the new ones but the process I would need to go through to have that done is much more of a battle than to just add the canonical tags and I felt that the canonical tags would have done the job. Needless to say the client is not too happy right now and insists that I should have just used the 301's. In this case the client appears to be correct but I do not quite understand why my canonical tags did not work. Examples Below- Old Pages: www.awebsite.com/something/something/productid.3254235 New Pages: www.awebsite.com/something/something/keyword-rich-product-name Canonical tag on both pages: rel="canonical" href="http://www.awebsite.com/something/something/keyword-rich-product-name"/> Thanks guys for the help on this.
Technical SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt0 -
Does page speed affect what pages are in the index?
We have around 1.3m total pages, Google currently crawls on average 87k a day and our average page load is 1.7 seconds. Out of those 1.3m pages(1.2m being "spun up") google has only indexed around 368k and our SEO person is telling us that if we speed up the pages they will crawl the pages more and thus will index more of them. I personally don't believe this. At 87k pages a day Google has crawled our entire site in 2 weeks so they should have all of our pages in their DB by now and I think they are not index because they are poorly generated pages and it has nothing to do with the speed of the pages. Am I correct? Would speeding up the pages make Google crawl them faster and thus get more pages indexed?
Technical SEO | | upper2bits0 -
Continued Lack of Google Indexing
I run a baseball site (http://www.mopupduty.com) that is in a very good link neighbourhood. ESPN, The Score, USA Today, MSG Network, The Toronto Star, Baseball Prospectucs, etc etc. New content has not been getting indexed on Google ever since the last update. Site has no dup content, 100% original. I can't think of any spammy links, we get organic links day after day. In the past Google has indexed the site in minutes. It currently has expanded site links within Google search. Bing & Yahoo index the site in minutes. Are there any quick fixes I can make to increase my chance to get indexed by Google. Or just keep pumping out content and hope to see a change in the upcoming future?
Technical SEO | | mkoster1