Google authorship syntax, plus no follow
-
I have seen two forms of rel=author syntax. Are they both valid?
-
My goodness ! they atleast they can give a dofollow link ! this is bad !
As Irving told that no-follow will be a problem. link nofollow will be simple no backlink, but the authorship nofollow is new ! consider that advice of the expert one !
we sometimes make the link no-follow, but not for the author google plus !
-
It's not my choice to no follow the author credit; it's a policy on another site where I guest blog. I'm just wondering if they're causing me not to get authorship credit by adding the no follow.
-
I'm not sure about the syntax question, but I would think the nofollow would have a negative effect, why would you want to nofollow a link you want Google to follow to make the association?
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
-
Google ignoring the Title Tag?
Anybody seen this too? We have a webpage with tiny different title tag and H1. If you search for let's say "Renovatie", you get to see the title tag "De kostprijs van je renovatie". However, when you search with the search term "Wat kost een renovatie", we see the H1 title in the SERP, which is "Wat kost een renovatie". So that's normal when you search a term that's exact the same as the H1 tag, Google ignores the title tag? N.
Technical SEO | | nans0 -
Can Google Crawl This Page?
I'm going to have to post the page in question which i'd rather not do but I have permission from the client to do so. Question: A recruitment client of mine had their website build on a proprietary platform by a so-called recruitment specialist agency. Unfortunately the site is not performing well in the organic listings. I believe the culprit is this page and others like it: http://www.prospect-health.com/Jobs/?st=0&o3=973&s=1&o4=1215&sortdir=desc&displayinstance=Advanced Search_Site1&pagesize=50000&page=1&o1=255&sortby=CreationDate&o2=260&ij=0 Basically as soon as you deviate from the top level pages you land on pages that have database-query URLs like this one. My take on it is that Google cannot crawl these pages and is therefore having trouble picking up all of the job listings. I have taken some measures to combat this and obviously we have an xml sitemap in place but it seems the pages that Google finds via the XML feed are not performing because there is no obvious flow of 'link juice' to them. There are a number of latest jobs listed on top level pages like this one: http://www.prospect-health.com/optometry-jobs and when they are picked up they perform Ok in the SERPs, which is the biggest clue to the problem outlined above. The agency in question have an SEO department who dispute the problem and their proposed solution is to create more content and build more links (genius!). Just looking for some clarification from you guys if you don't mind?
Technical SEO | | shr1090 -
Google Site Search
I'm considering to implement google site search bar into my site.
Technical SEO | | JonsonSwartz
I think I probably choose the version without the ads (I'll pay for it). does anyone use Google Site Search and can tell if it's a good thing? does it affects in any way on seo? thank you0 -
Are no follows leaking link juice?
Recently, in a discussion on resources pages EGOL informed me that just because I had no followed the links on my my resource page, I was still leaking link juice. He mentioned that this was a recent change in Google policy. This was quite a surprise. I have done a couple of searches on this recent change but have not found any information. Am I simply the last one on the planet to learn this and this change is widely known and understood? If so, does that mean honest resource pages (I have two such pages) that are there to help visitors are negatively impacting the site - at least in terms of SEO? If they are leaking link juice is it comparable to a followed link or a smaller amount that has less impact?
Technical SEO | | leatherhidestore0 -
Site being indexed by Google before it has launched
We are currently coming towards the end of a site migration, and are at the final stage of testing redirects etc. However, to our horror we've just discovered Google has started indexing the new site. Any ideas on how this could have happened? I have most recently asked for robots.txt to exclude anything with a certain parameter in URL. Is there a chance this, wrongly implemented, could have caused this?
Technical SEO | | Sayers0 -
301 mistake in Google Webmaster Tools?
Google webmaster tools has a warning for our site map saying that this url (and a couple of others) have a 301 redirect in them. http://www.aquinasandmore.com/catholic-gifts/Immaculate-Heart-of-Mary-Bookmark/sku/59682 I've checked the link and don't see that it actually is redirecting. Any thoughts on why this is popping up?
Technical SEO | | IanTheScot0 -
Google causing Magento Errors
I have an online shop - run using Magento. I have recently upgraded to version 1.4, and I installed a extension called Lightspeed, a caching module which makes tremendous improvements to Magento's performance. Unfortunately, a confoguration problem, meant that I had to disable the module, because it was generating errors relating to the session, if you entered the site from any page other than the home page. The site is now working as expected. I have Magento's error notification set to email - I've not received emails for errors generated by visitors. However over a 72 hour period, I received a deluge of error emails, which where being caused by Googlebot. It was generating an erro in a file called lightspeed.php Here is an example: URL: http://www.jacksgardenstore.com/tahiti-vulcano-hammock IP Address: 66.249.66.186 Time: 2011-06-11 17:02:26 GMT Error: Cannot send headers; headers already sent in /home/jack/jacksgardenstore.com/user/jack_1.4/htdocs/lightspeed.php, line 444 So several things of note: I deleted lightspeed.php from the server, before any of these error messages began to arrive. lightspeed.php was never exposed in the URL, at anytime. It was referred to in a mod_rewrite rule in .htaccess, which I also commented out. If you clicked on the URL in the error message, it loaded in the browser as expected, with no error messages. It appears that Google has cached a version of the page which briefly existed whilst Lightspeed was enabled. But I though that Google cached generated HTML. Since when does cache a server-side PHP file ???? I've just used the Fetch as Googlebot facility on Webmaster Tools for the URL in the above error message, and it returns the page as expected. No errors. I've had to errors at all in the last 48 hours, so I'm hoping it's just sorted itself out. However I'm concerned about any Google related implications. Any insights would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Ben
Technical SEO | | atticus70
