Links from tumblr
-
I have two links from hosted tumblr blogs which are not on tumblr.com.
So, website1 has a tumblr blog: tumblr.website1.com
And another site website2.com also uses the a record/custom domains option from tumblr but not on a subdomain, which is decribed below:
http://www.tumblr.com/docs/en/custom_domains
Does this mean that all links from such sites count as coming from the same IP in google's eyes? Or is there value in getting links from multiple sites because the a-record doesn't affect SEO in a negative way?
Many thanks,
Mike.
-
I am a huge fan of building links with tumblr. On webmaster tools, when the domain linking to me is not a tumblr subdomain but is using the tumblr platform, it says these are unique domains and easily puts my site well into the hundreds of different domains linking to it.
While I do agree that linking with the same anchor text may have diminishing return you are still receiving page rank and giving the google robots more opportunities to crawl to your site which ultimately still holds a great amount of value regardless of how google sees their ip. It is a myth that google even considers the same IP to be a negative feature. Google sees each page as a unique site (even within the same domain and same IP). If that site is reputable then it can pass on good value and if it is not then it doesnt. So often when people have many sites on the same IP they are not skilled at making them authoritative and thus assume that more sites from the same IP or more links from teh same IP can't add much value which is really not the case.
Hope this helps
-
Thanks WIlliam, I appreciate your help!
-
Hi Mike,
I see. So theoretically speaking someone creates 10 different Tumbler accounts. Each with a unique domain (using the Tumbler unique domain method).
Yes, each one will be a completely different domain, but, also, they will more than likely be of the same 1 C-Block or maybe even the same 1 IP (not sure how Tumbler handles their subdomain IP structure). Since they are all hosted through Tumbler on their servers.
It's not the end of the world, but it's also not the link diversity that you thought you might get. Many people have Tumbler accounts and I don't think Google will treat each one as if it was owned by the same person.
That being said, if each of your Tumbler accounts use the same Anchor Text, or share similarities in other aspects (linking to other similar sites, being mostly linky over providing quality content, similar usernames, etc.) Google will more than likely be able to sniff that out and not see those as valuable links.From a link building perspective it seems that there are better methods. In this hypothetical case, you'll have to remember that there are now 10 micro-sites that you have to generate some value to by building links to and content on for there to even be a little bit of juice to pass along to the site you really want to rank...
Quite a lot of hustle for a little bit of payoff. -
Hi William, thank you for that. I still was in the dark about this.
Your answer seems to be more from a stand point of the effects of me owning such pages.
So, forgive me if I've misunderstood, but what about from a link building point of view?
If 10 business use tumblr blogs as their websites, it looks like they use the same IP even though they are on different domains. This is because they change their Arecords.
So, If I get one link from each website, does it count as 10 links from 10 IPs/domains, or 10 links from just one domain? I just want to know how Google would count a-records, because is it redirection, or actually a static thing?
I hope I'm making sense, and your answer will affect my link building efforts.
-
Hi Mike,
I know you asked this a few weeks ago, and you may have already found your answer.
But to answer this, no. Tumbler essentially is just redirecting your A-Record domain to a sub-domain and giving it a nice url.
So what happens is the url website2.com (from your example above) is staring from zero. It also means that if you develop some quality trust and authority on that particular domain, you won't be able to take it with you if you want to use that domain for a site.
The url is essentially invisible, so whatever links you're sending isn't really to website2.com, but to tumbler.website2.com.
Unless Tumbler offers a 301 redirect option when you want your domain back, the domain website2.com will have no value to it.
I hope that answers your question.
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
-
Internal Linking
Hi, I'm doing internal anchor text links. Relative path. if I use /destination-page instead of https://website.com/destination-page will I still receive a transfer of internal Google trust to the destination page? Does google treat just the / url the same as full url??
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Scotty_Wilson0 -
Do you get links from new websites?
There's a new industry specific website that looks decent. It's clean and nothing spammy. However, it's so new it's DA is under 10. Is it worth pursuing a link from a site like this? On one hand, there's nothing spammy and it is industry specific. On the other...it's just DA is so terrible (worse than any of our other links), I don't want it to hurt us. Any thoughts? Ruben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KempRugeLawGroup1 -
Internal links to preferential pages
Hi all, I have question about internal linking and canonical tags. I'm working on an ecommerce website which has migrated platform (shopify to magento) and the website design has been updated to a whole new look. Due to the switch to magento, the developers have managed to change the internal linking structure to product pages. The old set up was that category pages (on urls domain.com/collections/brand-name) for each brand would link to products via the following url format: domain.com/products/product-name . This product url was the preferential version that duplicate product pages generated by shopify would have their canonical tags pointing to. This set up was working fine. Now what's happened is that the category pages have been changed to link to products via dynamically generated urls based on the user journey. So products are now linked to via the following urls: domain.com/collection/brand-name/product-name . These new product pages have canonical tags pointing back to the original preferential urls (domain.com/products/product-name). But this means that the preferential URLs for products are now NOT linked to anywhere on the website apart from within canonical tags and within the website's sitemap. I'm correct in thinking that this definitely isn't a good thing, right? I've actually noticed Google starting to index the non-preferential versions of the product pages in addition to the preferential versions, so it looks like Google perhaps is ignoring the canonical tags as there are so many internal links pointing to non-preferential pages, and no on-site links to the actual preferential pages? I've recommended to the developers that they change this back to how it was, where the preferential product pages (domain.com/products/product-name) were linked to from collection pages. I just would like clarification from the Moz community that this is the right call to make? Since the migration to the new website & platform we've seen a decrease in search traffic, despite all redirects being set up. So I feel that technical issues like this can't be doing the website any favours at all. If anyone could help out and let me know if what I suggested is correct then that would be excellent. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Guy_OTS0 -
Are links safe from friendsite.com?
I have just checked my backlinks in Majestic and was shocked. It appears I've gained 1500 back links in 1 day all from the domains friendsite.com. I checked a few of the links and the links to my site have disappeared. Looking at friendsite.com, it seems that peopel can bookmark a site, and when they do it appears on the "latest bookmerk" section which is site wide. So my concern is that: 1500 links have appeared in one day from one domain 1500 links disappeared the next day Wouldnt both of these cause Google to get suspicious? What should I do? Should I ask friendsite.com to remove the links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnPeters1 -
Linking Back
Hello, I have a blog www.digitaldiscovery.eu and I have been working the link building. Now I have a few links pointing into my blog and in Google Webmaster and in Open Site Explorer I can see the URL of those websites. In scale from 1 to 10 how usefull is to have a blogroll in my blog pointing back to those high PR links? How usefull is this in link-building strategy? Tks in advance! PP
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PedroM0 -
Can I reduce number of on page links by just adding "no follow" tags to duplicate links
Our site works on templates and we essentially have a link pointing to the same place 3 times on most pages. The links are images not text. We are over 100 links on our on page attributes, and ranking fairly well for key SERPS our core pages are optimized for. I am thinking I should engage in some on-page link juice sculpting and add some "no follow" tags to 2 of the 3 repeated links. Although that being said the Moz's on page optimizer is not saying I have link cannibalization. Any thoughts guys? Hope this scenario makes sense.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | robertrRSwalters0 -
Links on Google Notebook
I have used OSE to look at links of a competitors site and notice they have dozens for links from Google Notebook pages eg http://www.google.pl/notebook/public/05275990022886032509/BDQExDQoQs8r3ls4j This page has a PA of 48 Is this a legitimate linking strategy?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seanmccauley0 -
Switching to masked affiliate links
Hi there, I run a content affiliate website where I introduce products in articles and then link to merchants where the user can buy the respective product. Currently I am using regular affiliate links here with the "nofollow" attribute. With growing size of the site, I would like to switch to masked affiliate links, so instead of a link like "jdoqocy.com/click-123" I want to use "mydomain.com/recommend/123". My question here is: When switching to masked affiliate links, does it makes sense to also convert all the older unmasked affiliate links? If yes, what would be the best way to do that - Convert all old links at once or convert them over time (e.g. over a few month)? Currently about 2/3 of my site's outbound links are unmasked, external affiliate links. So I am afraid that changing this relatively large share of links from unmasked external affiliate links to masked links doenst look natural at all... Thank you for your advice!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FabRag0