Excessive navigation links
-
I'm working on the code for a collaborative project that will eventually have hundreds of pages. The editor of this project wants all pages to be listed in the main navigation at the top of the site. There are four main dropdown (suckerfish-style) menus and these have nested sub- and sub-sub-menus. Putting aside the UI issues this creates, I'm concerned about how Google will find our content on the page. Right now, we now have over 120 links above the main content of the page and have plans to add more as time goes on (as new pages are created).
Perhaps of note, these navigation elements are within an html5
<nav>element:
<nav id="access" role="navigation">
Do you think that Google is savvy enough to overlook the "abundant" navigation links and focus on the content of the page below? Will the
<nav>element help us get away with this navigation strategy? Or should I reel some of these navigation pages into categories? As you might surmise the site has a fairly flat structure, hence the lack of category pages.</nav>
</nav>
</nav>
-
I'm going to disagree a bit. While I do think Google understands navigation links and generally views them a bit differently from contextual (on-page) links, there's still a fundamental problem of dilution. If you have 200 navigation links, you split your authority ("link juice") 200 ways, and you're treating the main pages, sub-pages, and sub-sub-pages as if they're all essentially equal from an SEO standpoint. If you prioritize everything, you prioritize nothing.
What this ultimately means is that you drive a bit more ranking power to your very long-tail pages but a lot less to your top-level pages. It's a balancing act and there's not one right answer, but generally this isn't going to be a good fit to your business goals.
I dig into it more in a post from last year:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-many-links-is-too-many
Again, it's not a right-or-wrong thing, but a matter of prioritization. From what you're describing, I'm worried that this could expand to hundreds and hundreds of links, and on a new site that could spread your ranking power pretty thin.
-
I absolutely think the algorithm knows the difference between navigational content and true "body" content. If you're using
<nav>, you have nothing to worry about. Feel free to worry exclusively about the UX issues.</nav>
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
-
Value of no-follow links
I'm curious to understand roughly how much % of value a no-follow link has in building authority relative to a do-follow link? I understand that Google seems consistently and growingly focused on value - ie. is the link valuable in growing the business, irregardless of SEO - and perhaps therefore the no-follow / do-follow distinction is becoming a more unnecessary dichotomy. How does Google look at do-follow vs no-follow links? And how much weight now is really given to one compared to the other?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gavo0 -
How Many Natural Links Do You Earn?
Hello Mozzers, This is a bit of an open ended question and I don't think any one person is going to be the same. I have recently seen the light in my link building practices and I am trying to get a feel for what to expect in terms of natural link acquisition in an effective content marketing strategy. My question is how many natural links do you generally find yourself earning after the first 12 months of content creation/placement with a new website/industry? I know this is going to be a question with a multitude of different answers. I look forward to your valuable insight as always!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChoChauRice1 -
Linking to one of my own sites, from my site
Hi experts, I own a site for castingjobs (Site1) and a site for selling paintings (Site2). In a long time, I've had a link at the bottom of Site1, linking to Site 2. (Basicaly: Partnerlink: Link site 2). Site1 is for me the the only important site, since it's where Im making my monthly revenue. I added the link like 5 years ago or so, to try to boost site 2. My question is:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KasperGJ
1. Is it somehow bad for SEO for site 1, since the two sites have nothing to do with each other, they are basically just owned by me.
2. Would it make sense to link from Site 2 to Site 1 indstead?0 -
Realtor site with external links in navigation
I have a client with a realtor site that uses IDX for the listings feed. We have several external links going over to the IDX site for various live custom searches (ie: luxury listings, waterfront listings, etc...). We are getting a Moz spam ranking of 2/7 for both "Large Number of External Links" and "External Links in Navigation". Chances are, these are related. My question is this: (1) Being the score is only 2/7, should I bother with fixing this? (2) If I add a rel="nofollow" to all the site-wide links (in header, footer & menu) will this help? I couldn't find anything definitive in the Q&A search. Looking forward to any insights!!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcallander1 -
Unpaid Followed Links & Canonical Links from Syndicated Content
I have a user of our syndicated content linking to our detailed source content. The content is being used across a set of related sites and driving good quality traffic. The issue is how they link and what it looks like. We have tens of thousands of new links showing up from more than a dozen domains, hundreds of sub-domains, but all coming from the same IP. The growth rate is exponential. The implementation was supposed to have canonical tags so Google could properly interpret the owner and not have duplicate syndicated content potentially outranking the source. The canonical are links are missing and the links to us are followed. While the links are not paid for, it looks bad to me. I have asked the vendor to no-follow the links and implement the agreed upon canonical tag. We have no warnings from Google, but I want to head that off and do the right thing. Is this the right approach? What would do and what would you you do while waiting on the site owner to make the fixes to reduce the possibility of penguin/google concerns? Blair
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BlairKuhnen0 -
What To Do With Too Many Links?
We have four pages that have over 100 links (danger, danger from what I gather), but they're not spammy footer links. They are FAQ videos for our four main areas of practice. Does that make a difference? If not, should I just take half the questions on each page and make four additional pages? That strikes me as a worse UX, but I don't want to get penalized either. Thanks, Ruben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Do I even bother to remove links
Hi, I'm noticing increasing numbers of scraped directory links pointing back to the websites I manage. Much of this info appears to be scraped from a well known (and respected) directory. I don't build links to an of the websites I manage - and none have more than 200 linking root domains currently - not that many. The problem is I focus on quality links and the scraped links are incredibly weak on the whole. Diluting the quality links. I've noticed a certain paranoia in the SEO community about removing / disavowing links, and yet I'm tempted to ignore the rubbish (unless part of a major negative SEO push) and just get on with the job, focusing on quality content that drives natural links, and social media work.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Navigation
An e-commerce site I am working on currently displays 6 Super-Categories with a drop down that contains about 100 Categories for items which filter down to sub-cats and then the actual products. The issue is that every page starts off with these 100+ links just in navigation alone. I can only assume this is crippling our ability to spread link juice efficiently. I have looked at larger sites that have moved towards side navigation. A few examples: *amazon.com *walmart.com *newegg.com My issue is that we would like to move towards less links on the homepage to funnel our incoming links more efficiently but I cannot figure out how large sites cope with this. As far as I can tell they are using side nav that disappears after selecting a category of item in which the navigation is replaced with filtering tools and the nav is hidden above (see the sites above). Is this the best way to handle this issue? Also is there a way to find out exactly what they are doing because I am trying to explain this to our IT person and I just get a response that our site is fine how it is and these navigation links don't affect anything...even though each page starts off with the same 100 follow links of navigation. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MichealGooden0