Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.

Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

'External nofollow' in a robots meta tag? (advertorial links)

Technical SEO

910

Alex-Harford last edited by

I believe this has never worked? It'd be an easy way of preventing any penalties from Google's recent crackdown on paid links via advertorials.

When it's not possible to nofollow each external link individually, what are people doing? Nofollowing and/or noindexing the whole page?
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0
TextMarketing last edited by

If you believe your site's ranking is being harmed by low-quality links you do not control, you can ask Google not to take them into account when assessing your site.

Use this tool...

https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/disavow-links-main?pli=1

Hope that helps!
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote -1

Got a burning SEO question?

Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.

Start my free trial

Browse Questions

View

From

Sorted by

With category

Explore more categories

Related Questions

Can I use a 301 redirect to pass 'back link' juice to a different domain?

Hi, I have a backlink from a high DA/PA Government Website pointing to www.domainA.com which I own and can setup 301 redirects on if necessary. However my www.domainA.com is not used and has no active website (but has hosting available which can 301 redirect). www.domainA.com is also contextually irrelevant to the backlink. I want the Government Website link to go to www.domainB.com - which is both the relevant site and which also should be benefiting from from the seo juice from the backlink. So far I have had no luck to get the Government Website's administrators to change the URL on the link to point to www.domainB.com. Q1: If i use a 301 redirect on www.domainA.com to redirect to www.domainB.com will most of the backlink's SEO juice still be passed on to www.domainB.com? Q2: If the answer to the above is yes - would there be benefit to taking this a step further and redirect www.domainA.com to a deeper directory on www.domianB.com which is even more relevant?
ie. redirect www.domainA.com to www.domainB.com/categoryB - passing the link juice deeper.
Technical SEO | | DGAU

0
'duplicate content' on several different pages

Hi, I've a website with 6 pages identified as 'duplicate content' because they are very similar. This pages looks similar because are the same but it show some pictures, a few, about the product category that's why every page look alike each to each other but they are not 'exactly' the same. So, it's any way to indicate to Google that the content is not duplicated? I guess it's been marked as duplicate because the code is 90% or more the same on 6 pages. I've been reviewing the 'canonical' method but I think is not appropriated here as the content is not the same. Any advice (that is not add more content)?
Technical SEO | | jcobo

0
Robots.txt & meta noindex--site still shows up on Google Search

I have set up my robots.txt like this: User-agent: *
Disallow: / and I have this meta tag in my on a Wordpress site, set up with SEO Yoast name="robots" content="noindex,follow"/> I did "Fetch as Google" on my Google Search Console My website is still showing up in the search results and it says this: "A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt" This site has not shown up for years and now it is ranking above my site that I want to rank for this keyword. How do I get Google to ignore this site? This seems really weird and I'm confused how a site with little content, that has not been updated for years can rank higher than a site that is constantly updated and improved.
Technical SEO | | RoxBrock

1
Should I nofollow Geo-located links on a site?

I run various sites that use Geo-location to place related links in navigation menus on a page. For example, if you land on the home page, we will see that you are in Florida and then in one of the content boxes on the page, show job listings that this site has in Florida. We also give the option to search for other jobs or use other navigation options. The idea is to try to help the user along the best we can, but ..... What opinions do persons have here on if these links should be nofollowed as GoogleBot will always see links to places in California etc. - wherever Googlebot is crawling from? Would this then be confusing as we are a site that focused on the entire US and not just California etc Thanks!
Technical SEO | | CleverPhD

0
Link Diversity

With the current updates in the Seo world how critical is link diversity. We are revamping our site and planning to add many new pages to our site and planning to build links to relevant pages with relevant anchor texts keywords. Also we are planning to add relevant H1, H2 and H3 tags with metatag description and content with keyword rich content specific to that page. Any advise
Technical SEO | | INN

0
Empty Meta Robots Directive - Harmful?

Hi, We had a coding update and a side-effect of that was that our directive was emptied, in other words it now reads as: on all of the site. I've since noticed that Google's cache date on all of the pages - at least, the ones I tested - have a Cached date of no later than 17 December '12 - that's the Monday after the directive was removed on mass. So, A, does anyone have solid evidence of an empty directive causing problems? Past experience, Matt Cutts, Fishkin quote, etc. And then B - It seems fairly well correlated but, does my entire site's homogenous Cached date point to this tag removal? Or is it fairly normal to have a particular cache date across a large site (we're a large ecommerce site). Our site: http://www.zando.co.za/ I'm having the directive reinstated as soon as Dev permitting. And then, for extra credit, is there a way with Google's API, or perhaps some other tool, to run an arbitrary list and retrieve Cached dates? I'd want to do this for diagnosis purposes and preferably in a way that OK with Google. I'd avoid CURLing for the cached URL and scraping out that dates with BASH, or any such kind of thing. Cheers,
Technical SEO | | RocketZando

0
We just fixed a Meta refresh, unified our link profile and now our rankings are going crazy

Crazy in a bad way!I am hoping that perhaps some of you have experienced this scenario before and can shed some light on what might be happening.Here is what happened:We recently fixed a meta refresh that was on our site's homepage. It was completely fragmenting our link profile. All of our external links were being counted towards one URL, and our internal links were counting for the other URL. In addition to that, our most authoritative URL, because it was subject to a meta refresh, was not passing any of its authority to our other pages.Here is what happened to our link profile:Total External Links: Before - 2,757     After - **4,311  **Total Internal Links:   Befpre - 125        After - 3,221
Total Links:               Before - 2,882     After - 7,532Yeah....huge change. Great right? Well, I have been tracking a set of keywords that were ranking from spots 10-30 in Google. There are about 66 keywords in the set. I started tracking them because at MozCon last July Fabio Riccotta suggested that targeting keywords showing up on page 2 or 3 of the results might be easier to improve than terms that were on the bottom of page 1. So, take a look at this. The first column shows where a particular keyword ranked on 11/8 and the second column shows where it is ranking today and the third column shows the change. For obvious reasons I haven't included the keywords.11/8   11/14   Change****10        44       -34
10        26       -16
10        28       -18
10        34       -24
10       25       -15
15       29       -14
16       33       -17
16        32       -16
17        24       -7
17        53       -36
17        41       -24
18        27       -9
19       42       -23
19        35       -16
19       -         Not in top 200
19        30       -11
19        25       -6
19        43       -24
20        33       -13
20        41       -21
20        34      -14
21        46       -25
21         -       Not in top 200
21        33       -12
21        40       -19
21        61       -40
22        46       -24
22        35       -13
22        46       -24
23        51       -28
23        49       -26
24        43       -19
24        47       -23
24        45       -21
24        39       -15
25        45       -20
25        50       -25
26        39      -13
26        118   - 92
26        30       -4
26        139     -113
26        57       -31
27        48       -21
27        47       -20
27        47       -20
27        45       -18
27        48       -21
27        59       -32
27        55       -28
27        40       -13
27        48       -21
27        51       -24
27        43       -16
28        66       -38
28        49       -21
28        51       -23
28        58       -30
29        58       -29
29        43       -14
29        41       -12
29        49       -20
29        60       -31
30        42       -12
31        -          Not in top 200
31        59       -28
31        68       -37
31        53       -22Needless to say, this is exactly the opposite of what I expected to see after fixing the meta refresh problem. I wouldn't think anything of normal fluctuation, but every single one of these keywords moved down, almost consistently 20-25 spots. The further down a keyword was to begin with, it seems the further it dropped.What do you make of this? Could Google be penalizing us because our link profile changed so dramatically in a short period of time? I should say that we have never taken part in spammy link-building schemes, nor have we ever been contacted by Google with any kind of suspicious link warnings. We've been online since 1996 and are an e-commerce site doing #RCS. Thanks all!
Technical SEO | | danatanseo

0
How much effect does number of outbound links have on link juice?

I am interested in your thoughts on the effect of number of outbound links (obls) on link juice passed? ie If a page linking to you has a high number of obls, how do you compute the effect of these obls and relative negative effect on linkjuice. In the event that there are three sites on which you have been offered the opportunity of a link Site A PA 30 DA50 Obls on page 10 Site B PA 40 DA50 Obls on page 15 Site C PA 50 DA50 Obls on page 20 How would you appraise each of these prospective page links (ignoring anchor text, relevancy, etc which will be constant) Is there a rule of thumb on how to compare the linkjuice passed from a site relative to its PA and the number of obls? Is it as simple as page with 10 obls passes 10x juice of page with 100 obls?
Technical SEO | | seanmccauley

0