Combining adjacent image and text links
-
Hey,
The pages on one of our sites has a lot of links on it, which I have read a couple of times can be bad for SEO, although many say don't worry too much about it. However, I was thinking to reduce links and also reduce code size combining adjacent image and text links.
For example they current look like this:
"
Products page"I am thinking maybe I should change to the following:
"Products page"However, is this bad code and therefore could be bad for SEO? I have tried Googling this but couldn't seem to find anything on it.
-
I think you're right to streamline your code, just for neatness! I'd do something more like this:
alt="Products Page">Products Page
It's just nice to work in some alt text to get higher relevance scores
The number of links you deploy per page depends upon the SEO authority of your site and individual web-pages. I am of course talking about PageRank which is still a leading factor in Google's ranking algorithms! Everyone knows that TBPR (Toolbar PageRank) is dead. That's the little metric you used to get on the Google toolbar for Firefox (before Chrome was created). This was a simplified version of PageRank and a rough indicator, which people misused (so Google took it away)
'Actual' PageRank (which SEOs have never seen) is still very much at large and operates, roughly along these principles:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank
Here's an image to help you out:
Basically web pages are referenced by other URLs across the web and gain PageRank. This gives a web page an amount of 'SEO authority' which travels along axioms of relevance (e.g: even a link from the world's biggest pet store, won't help a car insurance company to rank much higher). Links from web pages with higher authority and trust metrics, which are relevant to the target page (both in terms of linguistic semantics and actual usage) are worth more. Links from pages with low SEO authority which have low trust ratings, which are completely irrelevant (for users and search engines) are pointless at best (and may even have a negative impact)
The obvious implications of this knowledge are that, networking your site with other websites is a good way to raise rankings (so long as it is done properly and ethically, in an editorial manner - advertorial links don't count). That being said, these rules also hold true for the internal linking of your website! It's called PageRank, not DomainRank or SiteRank. Any time two pages link between each other (internally or externally) PageRank does flow
When one page links to another correctly, it loses some PageRank. A fraction of that PageRank is gained by the receiving web-page (unless no-follow tags are used, in which case the 'sending' page still loses some authority, but the 'receiving' page gains none - it's vented into cyberspace)
Many large, well-known sites use this to their advantage. Virgin have several expansive eCommerce driven web properties which leverage deep-linking menus and faceted navigational links to really push their long-tail traffic to its maximum! This serves them very well. That being said, Virgin have monstrous budgets, digital PR and corporate backing which you likely can't match
What's right for one site, can be totally wrong for another! If you have very little SEO authority and / or trust to begin with, then using too many internal site links can cause your homepage and category-level URLs to 'bleed out'. Think of it as, hooking up a complex water irrigation system (to feed a greenhouse of tomatoes) to a single bucket of water. All of the tomatoes receive one tiny drop of moisture, and die at basically the same time they would have - had no irrigation been attempted! But were that bucket confined to 2-3 tomato plants, they might survive a few weeks (even if the rest of the crops died). It's the same with internal linking, horses for courses and all that
Be careful when reading up on SEO theory as it's almost always highly contextual and applies to very specific situations only
-
Hi There,
I used both your codes in my test to see how Google sees it, there is absolutely no difference as per browseseo.net. Instead, you should focus on getting an ALT tag and right Caption to get SEO value for the image.
I hope this helps.
Regards,
VJ
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
-
Are sliding text SEO friendly?
Hi mozzers, I am wondering if sliding text SEO friendly such as this webpage: http://www.questexchange.org/?s=faq If it isn't is there a way to make it SEO Friendly? Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | Ideas-Money-Art1 -
Too many outbound links on a page?
We have a "Clients" page on our site with approximately 125 of our clients listed. We have a link to each client's website, so that's 125 links. I am rethinking this approach. Is there any value to having these outbound links? The SEOmoz PRO analysis tells me I have too many links on this page. I have read that more than 100 links on a page is too many, but that seemed to be referring to internal links. Any thoughts? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | nyc-seo0 -
How many outbound links is too many outbound links?
As a part of our SEO strategy, we have been focusing on writing several high quality articles with unique content. In these articles we regularly link to other websites when they are high quality, authoritative sites. Typically, the articles are 500 words or more and have 3-5 outbound links, but in some cases there are as many as 7 or 8 outbound links. Before we get too carried away with outbound links, I wanted to get some opinions on how many outbound links we should be trying to include and more information on how the outbound links work. Do they pass our website's authority on to the other website? Could our current linking strategy cause future SEO problems? Finally, do you have any suggestions for guidelines we should be using? Thank you for your help!
On-Page Optimization | | airnwater0 -
Impact of nofollow links
Does anyone know what the impact of a nofollowed link is on the ranking value any given page has to distribute? For example, if I have 2 links on a page, both followed, I know those links each distribute nearly 50% of the total ranking value the current page has to offer. However, if one of those links is nofollowed, does that automatically mean the other link gets the ranking value cast off by the nofollowed link? In other words, the single followed link now distributes nearly 100% of the ranking value the page has to offer? It seems to me I remember hearing this was not the case and that the ranking value a nofollowed link would have if it were followed just evaporates. This would mean the single followed link still only passes on around 50%...not 100%. Is the effect different if the links are internal vs. external? If any citations are available to justify knowledge here, that would be great. I know a lot of people have opinions about this subject, but I'm not sure anyone knows Google's position. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | RyanOD0 -
Does link text "more information" have more weight than a normal link?
Does the anchor text "more information" hold any additional weight than any other anchor text? My suspicion is no, but just wanted to confirm.
On-Page Optimization | | nicole.healthline0 -
Too many on page links
Our home page (and 1400 of our other pages) have well over 100 links, going beyond the recommend amount. Our competitors have less on page links (to other pages on their site) and way more link popularity so we are trying to figure out the best solution for this without hurting our sites conversions and usbaility.
On-Page Optimization | | iAnalyst.com0 -
Best Way To Host Images For Image Optimization
I need an image optimization expert to tell me whether or not we are hosting images properly for SEO. Currently, we upload all images to Picasa and then call them out with a webpart in our content management system. See example here - http://www.tennisnow.com/Photos/2011-BNP-Paribas-Open-Day-5.aspx Here's an example of the url that is attached to each image - http://lh5.ggpht.com/_1Oyc-Zgkrpk/TX5H-Pfyd7I/AAAAAAAARbc/nG3Cw-G5tsY/s400/1215548409_FU9xA-L.jpg We have a lot of images, and we've hosted them on Picasa for speed purposes based on a recommendation from our developer (makes the pages load faster). I've read that Google can now factor page load time into its ranking parameters. We are not seeing the images from each photo gallery being indexed on images.google.com. We are torn. What should we do to rank for these images?
On-Page Optimization | | tennisexpress0