Multilingual Sitewide Links
-
Multilingual links in the footer section is being counted as backlink and we are getting tons of backlinks from all the 7 lingual websites.
Is there a solution where we eliminate these links and still having the option to navigate to other lingual pages?
-
Without any indicators that Google 'do' think the links are spammy, I wouldn't worry about this too much. If you start to notice performance issues which you can isolate to these footer links, then I'd no-follow them right away
Usually site-wide links are only an issue between different domains, and even then - only if it's not a multi-domain site. A multi-domain site is usually where you have exactly the same site with linguistic differences, spread across multiple domains (so instead of having site.com/fr/ and site.com/en/, you have site.fr and site.co.uk). As long as the templates are highly, highly similar and Google begins linking the 'brand-entity' across those sites, there shouldn't be a problem
Lot's of sitewide links placed in footers across the web (cross-domain) are paid for links to manipulate SEO rankings. Those are bad. If your links are 'editorial' in nature (e.g: the site owner or editor decided they were required for user benefit) then I wouldn't be so concerned. There's always the chance Google's algorithm could get it wrong, and you could eventually have a problem
What you need to decide is, would you rather have some small performance issues now (by removing the links or no-following them) and prevent any further 'possible' action in the future? Or would you rather take a small risk, and keep your results solid. No one 100% knows how Google's algorithm(s) work (not even Googlers). As such, there are elements of chance at play here and only you can decide what you are happy with:
A) Undo or no-follow the links now for a high chance of mild devaluation now and some affected results, but it will almost 100% stop any site-wide linking penalty (which could wipe out all results) from occurring. The damage of that would be devastating, but the chance of it occurring in the first place is low
B) Leave the links as they are. Experience no mild devaluations or performance issues at all, for now. But possibly in the future, you get struck with a penalty and lose everything. The chances of that seem very low, but if it does happen... ouch
Sometimes both your choices are less than ideal. But you still have to choose! If it were me, I think (with the information which you have supplied thusfar) I'd leave it alone for now (but watch performance like a hawk)
-
It was just a suspicion that google "might" think them as spammy.
Should I be even concerned about these?
Does backlinks from multilingual pages of our own website is common?
-
If your own links are being interpreted as link-spam and causing problems, then yes I am certain. If however your suspicions in that area are incorrect, then no it would be a bad idea. It depends upon your confidence in your evaluation of the situation at hand
Without evidence (performance impacts) that these links are harming you, I'd hold back. In which case, you can just leave them as they are and there's no need for 'any' action (this question becomes moot)
I assumed that your reason for waning to 'eliminate these links' was that you feared the SEO repercussions of leaving them (link spam). If you do feel that they are harming your site from an SEO POV, then yes - no-follow them across the board. However if your assumption in that area is wrong, you could see problems (so think hard on it!)
-
Hey,
Thanks for replying. Are you sure nofollowing own links is a good idea?
-
There actually is! If you're worried that Google might see the links as 'manipulative' but you still need them for UX, then all you have to do is to is inject the individual links (in your footer / template) with rel="nofollow". Google will then discount the links from their algorithm
Note that if you are wrong and Google sees the links as valid and they are helping all your sites interconnect better (in terms of SEO authority) - then you could see some tail-off. Hope this helps
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
-
Can you regain any SERPs / link juice of links that have 404'd?
We have a client whose 301 redirects disappeared and have been gone for about 6 months now. We are going to be putting the 301 redirects back in place. Will we be able to regain any of the previous SERPs or link juice from old links or is all lost? Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | SavvyPanda0 -
Disavowing Links: Over-optimized Anchor Text
If a site has been effected by Penguin, and the main issue is over-optimized anchor text. Would the disavow file take care of this? If there is a no-follow added to the link when Google next crawls the site, wouldn't you still have the optimized anchor text in your profile?
Technical SEO | | inhouseseo0 -
How should we handle re-directory links? Should we remove these links?
We are currently cleaning up bad links that were purchased by a previous SEO agency. We have found links on anonym.to pages that redirect traffic to our site automatically. How should this be handled? Should we remove these links?
Technical SEO | | Lorne_Marr0 -
Toxic Link Removal
Greetings Moz Community: Recently I received an site audit from a MOZ certified SEO firm. The audit concluded that technically the site did not have major problems (unique content, good architecture). But the audit identified a high number of toxic links. Out of 1,300 links approximately 40% were classified as suspicious, 55% as toxic and 5% as healthy. After identifying the specific toxic links, the SEO firm wants to make a Google disavow request, then manually request that the links be removed, and then make final disavow request of Google for the removal of remaining bad links. They believe that they can get about 60% of the bad links removed. Only after the removal process is complete do they think it would be appropriate to start building new links. Is there a risk that this strategy will result in a drop of traffic with so many links removed (even if they are bad)? For me (and I am a novice) it would seem more prudent to build links at the same time that toxic links are being removed. According to the SEO firm, the value of the new links in the eyes of Google would be reduced if there were many toxic links to the site; that this approach would be a waste of resources. While I want to move forward efficiently I absolutely want to avoid a risk of a drop of traffic. I might add that I have not received any messages from Google regarding bad links. But my firm did engage in link building in several instances and our traffic did drop after the Penguin update of April 2012. Also, is there value in having a professional SEO firm remove the links and build new ones? Or is this something I can do on my own? I like the idea of having a pro take care of this, but the costs (Audit, coding, design, content strategy, local SEO, link removal, link building, copywriting) are really adding up. Any thoughts??? THANKS,
Technical SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
Feefo review links
Hi guys, so we are on feefo and noticed links coming in per review for different anchor text, this will be done on mass due to the amount of reviews we will get - this is all natural but in SEO site-wide links are typically not. How if at all do you think Google will react to this?
Technical SEO | | pauledwards0 -
Does this count as a link?
Somebody listed me on their site with this link code A Link Between Worlds Walkthrough It does this weird redirect tracking thing to my site. Would that count as a link back to me?
Technical SEO | | Atomicx0 -
Does this count as a link exchange in eyes of google?
If I see a site is linking to my site in an article I will often find a way to include them in one of my updates (if the site is of good quality). Does this count as a link exchange since they are linking to me and I am also linking to them? Or is that only if it is a sidebar kind of link?
Technical SEO | | webfeatseo0 -
Canonical Link for Duplicate Content
A client of ours uses some unique keyword tracking for their landing pages where they append certain metrics in a query string, and pulls that information out dynamically to learn more about their traffic (kind of like Google's UTM tracking). Non-the-less these query strings are now being indexed as separate pages in Google and Yahoo and are being flagged as duplicate content/title tags by the SEOmoz tools. For example: Base Page: www.domain.com/page.html
Technical SEO | | kchandler
Tracking: www.domain.com/page.html?keyword=keyword#source=source Now both of these are being indexed even though it is only one page. So i suggested placing an canonical link tag in the header point back to the base page to start discrediting the tracking URLs: But this means that the base pages will be pointing to themselves as well, would that be an issue? Is their a better way to solve this issue without removing the query tracking all togther? Thanks - Kyle Chandler0