Powered by/Credit backlinks and nofollow
-
Pseudo question:
I have a website that has 100K pages. On about 50K of those pages I have information that is fed to me via an outside 3rd-party website.
Now, I like to give credit where credit is due, so I add a backlink to the website that is feeding me this content. A simple backlink like so:
Information provided by: Company ABC
Now, this 3rd-party website wants me to remove the nofollow tags from the backlink, but I am very, very skeptical because to me, sending ~50K dofollow backlinks to a single site might make the Google monster upset with me.
This 3rd-party site is being very hard-headed about this, to the point where I am thinking of terminating the relationship all together. I digress.
Scoured the net before writing this, but couldn't really find anything directly related to my issue.
Thoughts? Is a nofollow required here? We're not talking 1 or 2 links here; we're talking tens of thousands (50K is low; it will probably be upwards of 100K when all is said and done as my site has many, many pages).
Thanks in advance.
-
Yes it did become more complex and will continue to do so. However SEOmoz has always for the most part suggested building for the users within Googles guidelines.
I like to think of Google as the God of information and its rules as a bible that SEOs need to follow... Just like the bible everyone interpits it in their own way
and tries to be good... -
This is what I'm really leaning towards. At the end of the day, and one of the first "tips" I ever read regarding SEO and Google/crawlers, is: "does whatever you're doing look natural?"
SEO has become very, very complex over the years in terms of what you can/can't, should/shouldn't do. I don't even know what's natural and what's not anymore it seems.
-
Yeah this makes sense, it's ok to have links within articles to other sites that help the users. However thousands of links appearing at once is playing rush and roulette with a fully loaded gun. IMO you are better off taking their content down then giving them thousands of followed links in one shot.
-
Thanks for the prompt reply!
And we're talking ~100,000 backlinks as that's how many pages on my site that will be using their content. The content is actually mortgage rates that they offer, and is ultimately an affiliate program.
Their link would be a standard brand name backlink with no targeted, rich anchor text. Literally, it will be the exact same anchor text/backlink URL on every single page their content is used.
I have looked at how many big players on the net handle this kind of situation, and it appears that they all have nofollow on the backlinks in identical situations, but with other companies.
-
This is very tricky.. Giving them thousands of backlinks in one shot might raise a flag. However, are these links all anchored the same or would it look like natural links? (natural link profile = mostly URLs/brand mame some with exact/diverse anchor text.)
IMO they do deserve the credit for their work (do follow). However, doing all this in one shot with a thousand links is going to look like you sold them links/that they bought those links (NOT a natural progression). This may negatively influence both parties. I would recommend asking them if they are ok with a few links so it looks naturalt and let them pick the links they want. Also, let them know that by you giving them thousands of links in one shot can hurt their site...
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
-
Will pillar posts create a duplication content issue, if we un-gate ebook/guides and use exact copy from blogs?
Hi there! With the rise of pillar posts, I have a question on the duplicate content issue it may present. If we are un-gating ebook/guides and using (at times) exact copy from our blog posts, will this harm our SEO efforts? This would go against the goal of our post and is mission-critical to understand before we implement pillar posts for our clients.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Olivia9540 -
Linking Websites/ Plagiarized Content Ranking Above Original Content
Hey friends! Sooo this article was originally published in December 2016: https://www.realwealthnetwork.com/learn/best-places-to-buy-rental-property-2017/ It has been consistently ranking in positions 2-3 for long tail keyword "best places to buy rental property 2017" (and related keywords) since January-ish. It's been getting about 2000-2,500 unique views per week, until last week when it completely dropped off the internet (it's now ranking 51+). We just did a site redesign and changed some URL structures, but I created a redirect, so I don't understand why that would affect our ranking so much. Plus all of our other top pages have held their rankings -- in fact, our top organic article actually moved up from position 3 to 2 for much more competitive keywords (1031 exchange). What's even weirder is when I copy the sections of my article & paste into Google with quotes, our websites doesn't show up anywhere. Other websites that have plagiarized my article (some have included links back to the article, and some haven't) are ranking, but mine is nowhere to be found. Here are some examples: https://www.dawgsinc.com/rental-property-the-best-places-to-buy-in-the-year-2017/ http://b2blabs.com/2017/08/rental-property-the-best-places-to-buy-in-the-year-2017/ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/best-places-buy-rental-property-year-2017-missy-lawwill/?trk=mp-reader-card http://news.sys-con.com/node/4136506 Is it possible that Google thinks my article is newer than the copycat articles, because of the new URL, and now I'm being flagged as spam? Does it think these are spam websites we've created to link back to our own content? Also, clearly my article is higher quality than the ranking articles. Why are they showing up? I double checked the redirect. It's good. The page is indexed... Ahhh what is going on?! Thanks for your help in advance!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jessica7110 -
NoFollow Rules, Inconsistent?
I'm a bit confused on what the actual "rules" are when it comes to including dofollow backlinks from widgets. When sites like YouTube offer embed codes, don't those include dofollow backlinks in them? And when sites like Facebook offer widgets, don't those too include dofollow backlinks in them? Back in December we released a WordPress plugin, seen here. A few weeks later we saw our rankings plummet. We were told by our SEO consultant that because our link profile changed so drastically over the course of a few weeks, that Google took that as unnatural link building. I have two thoughts on this. First, our plugin is directly related to our site. And it's taking content from our site. Therefore, if another publisher chooses to use our content, does that not mean that they are indeed endorsing our site, and therefore the backlink should be dofollow? Second, what is the difference between a dofollow in our WP plugin, and a dofollow in Facebook's widget? Why does one get you penalized while the other boosts your authority?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | JABacchetta0 -
The purpose of these Algo updates: To more harshly push eCommerce sites toward PPC and enable normal blogs/forums toward reclaiming organic search positions?
Hi everyone, This is my first post here, and absolutely loving the site and the services. Just a quick background, I have dabbled in SEO in the past, and have been reading up over the last few months and am amazed at the speed at which things are changing. I currently have a few clients that I am doing some SEO work for 2 of them, and have had an ecommerce site enquire about SEO services. They are a medium sized oak furniture ecommerce site. From all the major changes..the devaluing of spam links, link networks, penalization of overuse of exact match anchor text and the overall encouraging of earned links (often via content marketing) over built links, adding to this the (not provided) section in Google Analytics, and the increasing screen real estate that PPC is getting over organic search...all points to me thinking on major thing..... That the search engine is trying to push eCommerce sites and sites that sell stuff harder toward using PPC and paid advertising and allowing the blogs/forums and informational sites to more easily reclaim the organic part of the search results again. The above is elaborated on a bit more below.. POINT 1 Firstly as built links (article submission, press releases, info graphic submission, web 2.0 link building ect) rapidly lose their effectiveness, and as Google starts to place more emphasis on sites earning links instead - by producing amazing interesting and unique content that people want to link to. The fact remains that surely Google is aware that it is much harder for eCommerce sites to produce a constant stream of interesting link worthy content around their niche (especially if its a niche that not an awful lot could be written about). Although earning links is not impossible for eCommerce sites, for a lot of them it is more difficult because creating link worthy content is not what eCommerce sites were originally intended for. Whereas standard blogs and forums were built for that exact purpose. Therefore the search engines must know that it is a lot easier for normal blogs/forums to "earn" links through content, therefore leading to them reclaiming more of the organic search ranking for transaction and non transaction terms, and therefore forcing the eCommerce sites to adopt PPC more heavily. POINT 2 If we add to the mix the fact that for the terms most relevant to eCommerce sites, the search engine results page has a larger allocation of PPC ads than organic results (above the fold), and that Google has limited the amount of data that sites can see in terms of which keywords people are using to arrive on their sites, which effects eCommerce sites more - as it makes it harder for them to see which keywords are resulting in sales. Then this provides further evidence that Google is trying to back eCommerce sites into a corner by making it more difficult for them to make sense of and track sales from organic results in comparison to with PPC, where data is still plentiful. Conclusion Are the above just over exaggerations? Can most eCommerce sites still keep achieving a good percentage of sales from organic search despite the above? if so, what do the more niche eCommerce sites do to "earn" links when content topics are thin and unique outreach destinations can be exhausted quickly. Do they accept the fact that the are in the business of selling things, so should be paying for their traffic as opposed to normal blogs/forums which are not. Or is there still a place for them to get even more creative with content and acquire earned links..? And finally, is the concentration on earned links more overplayed than it actually is? Id really appreciate your thoughts on this..
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | sanj50500 -
Webiste Ranking Differently Based on IP/Data Center
I have a site which I thought was ranking well, however that doesn't seem to be the case. When I check the site from different IPs within the US it shows that the site is on page 1 and on other IPs it shows that it's on page 5 and for some keywords it shows it's not listed. This site was ranking well, before but I think google dropped it when I was giving putting in too much work with it (articles and press releases), but now it seems to have recovered when I check with my IP, but on other data centers it still shows it prior to recovering. It was able to recover after not building links to for a period of time, it showed it moved back up from the data center I'm connected to, but it still shows the possibly penalized results on other data centers. Is it possible that site is still penalized? So the question is why does it show it recovered in some data centers and not others? How do I fix this? It's been about 2 months since it's recovered from some data centers. Is this site still penalized or what's going on? There are no warnings in web master tools. Any insights would be appreciated! This isn't an issue with the rank tracking software, I've tested this on a multitude of IPs with varying differences. Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seomozzy0 -
Website Spam Backlinks Solution
I have been doing some back-link checking and found that 25% of the total back-links to my PR5 site are Spam and generated over the past 8 weeks. There are 189 links in total from 38 different domains and the anchor text is a combination of 'ugg boots for women' from TLDs in China, Russia and North Korea. The PR of these sites is 15 are n/a, 12 are 0 and the other 11 range between 1 - 6. More interestingly, all the links point to 1 single page on the domain. I have taken down that page now and wondering if I should 'disavow' the offending links in Google and Bing? Clearly with such a high % of my total links now being Spam, I want to be proactive so this does not hurt my rankings in search. If a Spambot is behind it then the issue is going to get worse moving forward. Any advice is welcome...
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Ubique0 -
Improve CTR with Special Characters in Meta-Description / Title Tags
I've seen this question asked a few times, but I haven't found a definitive answer. I'm quite surprised no one from Google has addressed the question specifically. I ran across this post the other day and it piqued my interest: http://www.datadial.net/blog/index.php/2011/04/13/special-characters-in-meta-descriptions-the-beboisation-of-google/ If you're able to make your result stand out by using stars, smiley faces, TM symbols, etc it would be a big advantage. This is in use currently if you search for a popular mattress keyword in Google. It really is amazing how the special characters draw your attention to the title. You can also see the TM and Copyright symbols if you search for "Logitech Revue" Radioshack is using these characters in their adwords also. Has anyone found any definitive answers to this? Has anyone tracked CTR and long-term results with special characters in title or description tags? Any chance of getting penalized for using this? As a follow-up, it looks like you could also put check symbols into your meta-description tags. That has all kinds of interesting possibilities. http://www.seosmarty.com/special-symbols-wingdings-for-social-media-branding-twitter-linkedin-google-plus/
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | inhouseninja0 -
What does Youtube Consider Duplicate content and will it effect my ranking/traffic?
What does youtube consider duplicated content? If I have a power point type video that I already have on youtube and I want to change the beginning and end call to action, would that be considered duplicate content? If yes then how would this effect my ranking/youtube page. Will it make a difference if I have it embedded on my blog?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | christinarule0