What is the best way to hide duplicate, image embedded links from search engines?
-
**Hello!
Hoping to get the community’s advice on a technical SEO challenge we are currently facing. [My apologies in advance for the long-ish post. I tried my best to condense the issue, but it is complicated and I wanted to make sure I also provided enough detail.]
Context: I manage a human anatomy educational website that helps students learn about the various parts of the human body. We have been around for a while now, and recently launched a completely new version of our site using 3D CAD images. While we tried our best to design our new site with SEO best practices in mind, our daily visitors dropped by ~15%, despite drastic improvements we saw in our user interaction metrics, soon after we flipped the switch.
SEOMoz’s Website Crawler helped us uncover that we now may have too many links on our pages and that this could be at least part of the reason behind the lower traffic. i.e. we are not making optimal use of links and are potentially ‘leaking’ link juice now.
Since students learn about human anatomy in different ways, most of our anatomy pages contain two sets of links:
-
Clickable links embedded via JavaScript in our images. This allows users to explore parts of the body by clicking on whatever objects interests them. For example, if you are viewing a page on muscles of the arm and hand and you want to zoom in on the biceps, you can click on the biceps and go to our detailed biceps page.
-
Anatomy Terms lists (to the left of the image) that list all the different parts of the body on the image. This is for users who might not know where on the arms the biceps actually are. But this user could then simply click on the term “Biceps” and get to our biceps page that way.
Since many sections of the body have hundreds of smaller parts, this means many of our pages have 150 links or more each. And to make matters worse, in most cases, the links in the images and in the terms lists go to the exact same page.
My Question: Is there any way we could hide one set of links (preferably the anchor text-less image based links) from search engines, such that only one set of links would be visible? I have read conflicting accounts of different methods from using JavaScript to embedding links into HTML5 tags. And we definitely do not want to do anything that could be considered black hat.
Thanks in advance for your thoughts!
Eric**
-
-
The drop in your site traffic may be due to a number of things, not just links on the page. If you restructured your URLs, changed title tags, etc etc. There can be lots of reasons besides number of links on the page. You now have a new site that Google is trying to sort out and so you may simply have a little drop in the SERPs.
If you have the tools, look and see if your ranking did drop and monitor that. Also use your analytics to see where the drop is coming from.
There are a couple of good posts on SEOMoz that have info on the 100 page link rule
http://www.seomoz.org/q/can-i-reduce-link-count-by-no-following-links
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
-
Does redirecting a duplicate page NOT in Google‘s index pass link juice? (External links not showing in search console)
Hello! We have a powerful page that has been selected by Google as a duplicate page of another page on the site. The duplicate is not indexed by Google, and the referring domains pointing towards that page aren’t recognized by Google in the search console (when looking at the links report). My question is - if we 301 redirect the duplicate page towards the one that Google has selected as canonical, will the link juice be passed to the new page? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lewald10 -
Links
Hi 64% of our links come from a .com website and only 30% from .co.uk. We only do business in the UK should I continue with the .com links as they are easier to source. Does this hurt my SEO efforts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Caffeine_Marketing0 -
Onsite search engines that are SEO friendly - which do you recommend
Hi - I am seeking an onsite search engine that is SEO friendly - which do you recommend? And has anyone tried doofinder.com - that specific search engine - if you have, is it well aligned/attuned to the SEO aspects of your site? Thanks as ever, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart1 -
Duplicate Content That Isn't Duplicated
In Moz, I am receiving multiple messages saying that there is duplicate page content on my website. For example, these pages are being highlighted as duplicated: https://www.ohpopsi.com/photo-wallpaper/made-to-measure/pop-art-graffiti/farm-with-barn-and-animals-wall-mural-3824 and https://www.ohpopsi.com/photo-wallpaper/made-to-measure/animals-wildlife/little-elephants-garden-seamless-pattern-wall-mural-3614. As you can see, both pages are different products, therefore I can't apply a 301 redirect or canonical tag. What do you suggest?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | e3creative0 -
SITEMAP - Does <changefreq>and <image:title>have any apreciable effect?</image:title></changefreq>
Hi everyone. It was hard to find some actual evidence that some of the atributes to be declared in a sitemap have some real impact.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gaston Riera
Particularly, im interested in these two: <changefreq></changefreq> and**image:title</image:title>** I've used them in a few cases just to check their effect and couldnt see any.
Do you have any experience with these? Or any other atribute that might be helpful, in order to create a more accurate and effective sitemap? Also, this could be a great topic to create a new Moz Blog post, the one about sitemap is 8years old.0 -
Should I remove all vendor links (link farm concerns)?
I have a web site that has been around for a long time. The industry we serve includes many, many small vendors and - back in the day - we decided to allow those vendors to submit their details, including a link to their own web site, for inclusion on our pages. These vendor listings were presented in location (state) pages as well as more granular pages within our industry (we called them "topics). I don't think it's important any more but 100% of the vendors listed were submitted by the vendors themselves, rather than us "hunting down" links for inclusion or automating this in any way. Some of the vendors (I'd guess maybe 10-15%) link back to us but many of these sites are mom-and-pop sites and would have extremely low authority. Today the list of vendors is in the thousands (US only). But the database is old and not maintained in any meaningful way. We have many broken links and I believe, rightly or wrongly, we are considered a link farm by the search engines. The pages on which these vendors are listed use dynamic URLs of the form: \vendors<state>-<topic>. The combination of states and topics means we have hundreds of these pages and they thus form a significant percentage of our pages. And they are garbage 🙂 So, not good.</topic></state> We understand that this model is broken. Our plan is to simply remove these pages (with the list of vendors) from our site. That's a simple fix but I want to be sure we're not doing anything wring here, from an SEO perspective. Is this as simple as that - just removing these page? How much effort should I put into redirecting (301) these removed URLs? For example, I could spend effort making sure that \vendors\California- <topic>(and for all states) goes to a general "topic" page (which still has relevance, but won't have any vendors listed)</topic> I know there is no distinct answer to this, but what expectation should I have about the impact of removing these pages? Would the removal of a large percentage of garbage pages (leaving much better content) be expected to be a major factor in SEO? Anyway, before I go down this path I thought I'd check here in case I miss something. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarkWill0 -
OSE link report showing links to 404 pages on my site
I did a link analysis on this site mormonwiki.com. And many of the pages shown to be linked to were pages like these http://www.mormonwiki.com/wiki/index.php?title=Planning_a_trip_to_Rome_By_using_Movie_theatre_-_Your_five_Fun_Shows2052752 There happens to be thousands of them and these pages actually no longer exist but the links to them obviously still do. I am planning to proceed by disavowing these links to the pages that don't exist. Does anyone see any reason to not do this, or that doing this would be unnecessary? Another issue is that Google is not really crawling this site, in WMT they are reporting to have not crawled a single URL on the site. Does anyone think the above issue would have something to do with this? And/or would you have any insight on how to remedy it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ThridHour0 -
What is the best way to incorporate region-based keywords?
Greetings Mozzers, I am wanting to get the most "bang for my buck" in regards to region based keyword pages. If I am going after the keyword "Plumber" and the region "San Antonio", would it be best to: 1- Create a San Antonio Plumber page where we can target all critical factors for the region based keyword "San Antonio Plumber"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MonsterWeb28
2- Link every instance of the term "San Antonio" and "San Antonio Plumber" throughout the site to the newly created "San Antonio Plumber" page. Thank you for any advice/clarification on this matter.0