Using rel="nofollow"
-
Hello,
Quick question really, as far as the SERPs are concerned If I had a site with say 180 links on each page - 80 above suggested limit, would putting 'rel="nofollow"' on 80 of these be as good as only having 100 links per page?
Currently I have removed the links, but wereally need these as they point to networked sites that we own and are relevant...
But we dont want to look spammy...
An example of one of the sites without the links can be seen here
whereas a site with the links can be seen here
You can see the links we are looking to keep (at the bottom) and why...
Thanks
-
Sorry, by "bigger problems" I just meant the potential link-farm.
The nofollow will remove the SEO risk - you'll still lose a little link-juice to those links, but you won't get penalized down the road for having them. Of course, you won't gain any SEO value from the cross-linking either. At this point, though, I think that's inevitable. The risk is greater than the reward from cross-linking this many domains.
Any other ways to block the links are going to look more suspicious to Google than nofollow (including iFrames). Any I can think of would be best avoided in this scenario.
Any way you can contextually cross-link would create less SEO risk and potentially let you get some ranking value out of the connections. That's why I suggested links at the job listing level. I think that might benefit users a bit more, too. Even then, you don't want to go overboard.
-
Hi Dr Peter
Thanks for the detailed response. A few questions, you say I have bigger problems than the 100 links/page - is that just that the sites are at risk of looking like a link farm, or are there bigger problems still?
I hear you on the fact that links in the footer carry less weight and on the consolidating aspect, and it is something that we are working on, but in the mean time, I would really like to find a way if possible to keep some form of cross connecting the sites.. We do have the detail pages which we don't need to be SEO primed, really we only need the -
SEO primed, you can see the different phrases (search patterns) that we are targeting; each site has hundreds of pages like this, that we don't necessarily need primed as these are only live for 28 days..
Is there an option to either include these links in either an iframe in the footer area (for user reference only) or on the detail pages?
Any other options that will work, that will not result in the sites being at risk of looking like a link farm?
I appreciate your insight.
Many thanks
-
You've got bigger problems here than 100 links/page (that's just a guideline) - you're cross-connecting enough sites that it looks like a link farm. Having them all in the footer only adds to the problem, and makes the tactic look lower-quality. I'd definitely no-follow these, as you could potentially be penalized.
The nofollow won't really help with the 180 links - it'll still burn up link-juice. It'll just keep these links from getting you into trouble. Realistically, these links are probably already being devalued by the algorithm.
Practically, being in the footer, these links may not have a ton of value for visitors (if you click-mapped the page, I'm betting the CTR is very low). I wonder if there's a way to integrate them. For example, when someone clicks through to a job listing in Kent, having something like "See more jobs in Kent" on that page and link it to: http://www.kentjobsonline.net/.
From an SEO standpoint, these geo-targeted microsites have lost a lot of value over the past couple of years. I've even seen the strategy run into Panda issues. You may want to re-evaluate down the road and consider consolidating.
-
They are all legitimate links, all 74 sites act as one larger site, or a network of sites. But the thing is when I removed the links I moved up in the SERPs...
What would be the best way of showing te links to visitors but hiding them from SERPs?
Thanks
-
Quality is MUCH better than quantity
-
You should build the site for functionality and if there is a legitimate reason to have all those links then feel free to put them in. I wouldn't over think this.
-
I think nowadays rel=nofollow there is no meaning. With the changes in google, also the link juice is not been affect by it. You can check some info in this old post: http://www.seomoz.org/q/do-you-use-nofollow-and-rel-nofollow
But in SEO's live everything is gray, and not black in white. Its better for you using 100 links per page and go with more security.
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
-
How to deal with rel=canonical when using POST parameters
Hi there,
On-Page Optimization | | mjk26
I currently have a number of URLs throughout my site of the form: https://www.concerthotels.com/venue-hotels/o2-academy-islington-hotels/256133#checkin_4-21-2024&checkout_4-22-2024&rooms_1&guests_2&artistid_15878:256133 This sends the user through to a page showing hotels near the O2 Academy Islington. Once the page loads, my code looks at the parameters specified in the # part of the URL, and uses them to fill in a form, before submitting the form as a POST. This basically reloads the page, but checks the availability of the hotels first, and therefore returns slightly different content to the "canonical" version of this page (which simply lists the hotels before any availability checks done). Until now, I've marked the page that has had availability checks as noindex,follow. But because the form was submitted with POST parameters, the URL looks exactly like the canonical one. So the two URLs are identical, but due to POST parameters, the content is slightly different. Does that make sense? My question is, should both versions of this page be marked as index,follow? Thanks
Mike0 -
Can i use hard innerlinks on my blog to my landingspages ?
Hello, Ihave a website and also on the same domain a blog with a lot of posts. Is it possible in each blogpost put 2 innerlinks 1. innerlink to other blogpost with keyword or combination 2. hard link like "Design Sauna" and link to the landingspage of the webshop ? Is this the right way ? thanks 🙂 Regards, Marcel
On-Page Optimization | | Bossie720 -
Should I use an acronym in my URL?
I know that Google understands various acronyms. Example: If I search for CRM System, it knows i'm searching for a customer relationship management system. However, will it recognize less known acronyms? I have a page geared specifically for SAP data archiving for human capital management systems. For those in the industry, they simply call it HCM. Here is how I view my options: Option #1: www.mywebsite.com/sap-data-archiving/human-capital-management Option #2: www.mywebsite.com/sap-data-archiving/hcm Option #3: www.mywebsite.com/sap-data-archiving/hcm-human-capital-management With option #3, i'm capturing the acronym AND the full phrase. This doesn't make my URL overly long either. Of course, in my content i'll reference both. What does everyone else think about the URL? -Alex
On-Page Optimization | | MeasureEverything0 -
Should I use nofollow when interlinking large, networked sites?
My company runs a network of very large networked sites, each with thousands of content pages. In our main navigation we are currently not nofollowing links between these networked sites. The links appear on every single page in the top navigation, and there are thousands of pages on each site. I am worried this will look to Google like we have suspiciously received thousands of links from one domain - one link from every page on the domain. Should we be nofollowing these navigation links between the different sites in our network?
On-Page Optimization | | Natasha90040 -
Can I use Same Keyword for Multi pages Title Tags?
Hello All, I am working on client website and currently they are targeting One Keywords for multi pages. As I have search with Allintitle: Search query and Google display around 37 pages of website which carry same keyword in "Title Tags". I have told to client to change the "Title Tags" but they want that keyword for all relevant pages. So I want to know is that harm in Search Engine Ranking? Note: They have not done the link building activities for multi pages with same Keyword, they are using only in "Title Tags" only
On-Page Optimization | | jemindesai0 -
Rel=canonical Query
Hello Everyone, We have just launched our new ecommerce site for flooring in the UK. I have run through the first crawl and there are 549 instances of rel=canonical including the homepage? Is this a major issue in any way, i have never had to tackle it before and i would appreciate any advice that could be offered on the subject. Many Thanks Andrew
On-Page Optimization | | DFD20120 -
Is it a good idea to rel=canonical dozens of old outdated pages?
we have dozens old outdated manual pages that still need to be up, but have terrible code issues (they're exported from word) and no image tagging, etc. there are new pages in place, so should i rel=canonical to the new pages? will this transfer any link juice to the newer, more seo-friendly ones?
On-Page Optimization | | DerekM880 -
Using Transcriptions
Hi everyone, I've spent a long time trying to figure this one out, so I'm looking forward to your insights. I've recently started having our videos transcribed and keyworded. The videos are hosted on youtube and already embedded on our website. Each embedded video is accompanied by an existing keyword-rich article that covers pretty much the same content of the video, but in a little more detail. I'm now going back and having these videos transcribed. The reason I started doing this was to essentially lengthen the article and get more keywords on the page. Question A. My concern is that the transcription covers the same content as the article, so doesn't add that much for the reader. That's why when I post the transcription (below the embedded video), I use a little javascript link for people to click if they want to read it. Then it becomes visible. Otherwise it's not visible. Note that I am NOT trying to hide it from google by doing this - and it will still show up for people who don't have javascript on - so I'm not trying to cheat google at all and I think I'm doing it based on how they want it done. You can see an example here: http://www.healthyeatingstartshere.com/nutrition/healthy-diet-plan-mistakes So my first question is: do you think the javascript method is a good way of doing it? Question B. Does anyone have any insight on whether it would be better to put the transcription:
On-Page Optimization | | philraymond
1. On the same page as the embedded video/article (which I am doing now), or
2. On a different page, linked to from the above page, or
3. On various other websites (wordpress, blogspot, web2.0 sites) that link back to the video/article on our site. I know it's usually best practice to put it on the same page as the video, but I'm wondering from an <acronym title="Search Engine Optimization">SEO</acronym> point of view if I'm wasting a 500 word transcription by posting it on the same page as a 500 article that covers the same topic and uses the same keywords, and I wonder if it would be better to use the transcription elsewhere. Do you have any thoughts on which of the above methods would be best? Thanks so much for reading and any advice you may have.0