What does it mean that "too many links" show up in my report - but I'm not seeing them?
-
I've noticed that on the crawl report for my site, www.imageworkscreative.com, "too many links" is showing up as a chronic problem.
Reviewing the pages cited as having this issue, I don't see more than 100 links. I've read that sometimes, websites are unintentionally cloaking their links, and I am concerned that this is what might be happening on my site.
Some example pages from my crawl report are:
http://www.imageworkscreative.com/blog/, http://www.imageworkscreative.com/blog/10-steps-seo-and-sem-success/index.html, and http://www.imageworkscreative.com/blog/business-objectives-vs-user-experience/index.html.
Am I having a cloaking issue or is something else going on here? Any insight is appreciated!
-
Thanks, everyone! I appreciate the help!
-
If you read in the on page optimization tool, it is inconsistent with the crawl tool.
"Avoid Excessive Internal Links
Employing an excessive quantity of internal-pointing links may not directly harm the value of a page, but it can influence the quantity of link juice sent through those links and dilute it's ability to help get link targets crawled, indexed and ranked.
Recommendation: Scale down the number of internal links to fewer than 100 (preferrably), and, at a minimum, fewer than 300"
That said the 100 links rule is a "Warning" (Yellow) and not a Error (Red). It is still confusing.
Here is also a Matt Cutts video that refutes the 100 links
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6g5hoBYlf0
Seems like Moz needs to update its messaging around this item.
-
Yeah Mike is right on as usual here.
I just want to point out a quick way to find out how many actual links are sitting on any given page (keep in mind this won't be exact but it'll be close.)
USING CHROME:
- Right click the page and select "View Source"
- Hit CTRL+F
- Type in<a href <="" span=""></a>
<a href <="" span=""></a>
<a href <="" span="">Boom. You'll have yourself a number of results and that's how many links you have, cloaked or not cloaked, give or take.
This is easier to look at I feel like and a fun little (maybe obvious, sorry if so) tip.
Good luck!</a>
-
Hi Jess,
Using Screaming Frog, it looks like your /blog page actually has 131 links. If you add up your footer (30), plus links to your homepage (6), plus pagination (9), plus Link Building and Content article (5), and your Alex Bogusky Video article (6) - you already have 50+ and that is not including top and side navigation, as well as the rest of the articles on your page.
Matt Cutts sums things up really well in this article saying:
"...Google will index more than 100K of a page, but there’s still a good reason to recommend keeping to under a hundred links or so: the user experience. If you’re showing well over 100 links per page, you could be overwhelming your users and giving them a bad experience. A page might look good to you until you put on your “user hat” and see what it looks like to a new visitor.
But in some cases, it might make sense to have more than a hundred links. Does Google automatically consider a page spam if your page has over 100 links? No, not at all. The “100 links” recommendation is in the “Design and content” guidelines section, and it’s the Quality guidelines that contain the things that we consider webspam (stuff like hidden text, doorway pages, installing malware, etc.). Can pages with over 100 links be spammy? Sure, especially if those links are hidden or keyword-stuffed. But pages with lots of links are not automatically considered spammy by Google.
So how might Google treat pages with well over a hundred links? If you end up with hundreds of links on a page, Google might choose not to follow or to index all those links. At any rate, you’re dividing the PageRank of that page between hundreds of links, so each link is only going to pass along a minuscule amount of PageRank anyway. Users often dislike link-heavy pages too, so before you go overboard putting a ton of links on a page, ask yourself what the purpose of the page is and whether it works well for the user experience."
Hope this helps.
Mike
-
I agree with Linda. It looks like you only 60 or so hyperlinks, so you should be okay there. But, I think it was something like 120 or so @imports.
-
If you look at your source, there are a lot of @import and javascript urls; perhaps this is what is being picked up.
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
-
Are there any hard rules about internal linking of homepage?
Hi all, Usually we link homepage from all pages. That's definitely a boost for homepage to rank well. Do we need to interlink homepage to the highest? Including links from subdomains or sub directories. Thanks
Web Design | | vtmoz0 -
Any second opinions as to why our organic search website traffic hasn't recovered from website rebrand (domain change, website redesign)?
I am hoping to see if anyone in the Moz community would be able to help troubleshoot or lend any advice on a major organic search traffic issue we've been experiencing over the last 8 months. In a nutshell, we decided our ~4.5-year-old business needed to undergo a rebrand in October 2015. After changing domains & redesigning our website (more below), our search-driven sessions have dropped 20% in 2016 v.s. 2015. We made quite a few on-site modifications (with some success) post-redesign but are still deep in a rut and not sure what more we can do to recover. I've listed my theories below as to why we're still suffering this hit. If anyone could weigh in on these and/or share any other troubleshooting ideas, I would greatly, greatly appreciate it (and owe you a lunch/beverage of your choice the next time I'm in your city!). ****Backlinks - despite our efforts to 301 all links, I sense we have lost many backlinks. According to Open Site Explorer, our old domain has 1,172 backlinks (some from some very authoritative pages domains), 1,068 of which are passing link equity. In contrast, our new domain has 367 backlinks, 321 are passing link equity, and very few overlap with our old domain. Domain Age - we may have lost much of our reputation with Google as our new domain is much younger than our old domain (1-year-old v.s. 5.5 years old). Domain Name - although I thought to have common keywords in one's domain was a myth, I am now questioning that belief. Our old domain contained a popular, topical keyword and our new domain is derived from a term that is topical, but very uncommon. New URLs - our developer has insisted all links were moved to the new domain, but I have a hunch they were not. When conducting a "site search" (i.e. "site:websitename.com"), the new domain returns 7,740 results. Prior to our switch, a site search with the old domain yielded 30,000+ results. 404s - we found and fixed 100-200 404'd links after the domain switch. We still see a few pop-up today and I'm wondering if this is a red flag in Google's eyes. For a little more background too, here are the nitty gritty details with a rough timeline: Pre-October 12, 2015 - registered new domain and designed the new website on Wordpress, while researching a range of articles and resources for a successful site migration (e.g. this and this Moz guide). October 12, 2015 - flipped the switch on the website design, domain, minor content reorganization, and social handles. We announced the change to our audience via an article, newsletter, and social; informed Google Webmaster Tools (GWT) of the new address, 301'd all links from the old to the new domain, and submitted new sitemap in GWT. October 12 - 16, 2015 - traffic is normal, everything seems to be okay. October 17, 2015 - search traffic drops by 54% v.s. the same day of week pre-rebrand. October 26, 2015 - search traffic rises, so now only down by 30% v.s. the same day of week pre-rebrand. November/December 2015 - re-added numerous elements from the old website such as category, tag, and page pagination and a few sidebar modules that linked to other important pages and tags. Search traffic rises slightly in November (down 27% year-on-year), dips again in December (down 31% year-on-year). January 2016 - today (June 17, 2016) - we published more content on a daily basis and search traffic fluctuates around the 20% versus the same period in 2015. January 2016 - down 23% year-on-year February 2016 - down 17% year-on-year March 2016 - down 20% year-on-year April 2016 - down 21% year-on-year May 2016 - down 21% year-on-year June 2016 (until the 17th) - down 23% year-on-year Thank you all in advance for your time and help, please let me know if you have any questions!
Web Design | | nick490 -
Is Sitewide Credit Link Good or Bad in 2015?
We are a web design agency thus we get a good number of links (footer) from our client's site. According to Matt Cutt, Google considers all the sitewide links to 1. So is it okay to have those links? Note: Those links are do-follow and most with 2 anchor text. "Web Design" by "Company Name" and "Website Development" by."Company Name". Thanks
Web Design | | Jubaer961 -
Does meta "Expires" tag affect website cacheing or indexing?
One of our client has a meta expire tag across all pages of their website. Does that tag affect the website overall caching or indexing? Their website pages including home page is crawled every 10 days, however the website is popular high traffic websites, receiving 240,000 visits/month. Please advise what impact this tag will have on the website indexing and caching? Thanks Atomic Team
Web Design | | JamesDixon700 -
Need to hire a tech for find out why google spider can't access my site
Google spider can't access my site and all my pages are gone out of serps. I've called network solutions tech support and they say all is fine with the site which is wrong. does anyone know of a web tech who i can hire to fix this issue? Thanks, Ron
Web Design | | Ron100 -
How Important is Title Tag while viewing in browser's tab
Hi SEOmozer,I have a dumb/silly question. Ok, I know Title tags are important for SEO and users and it shows up in the SERP and all that. My question is that, using a weird CMS, I have the title tag implemented and it appear in the SERP the way I want it. However, the problem is that when I hover over the tab on the browser, it doesn't appear the same way it is in the SERP. Does that really matter that it appears differently? I checked the HTMl and this what I got<title>Example Keywordtitle><meta name="layout" content="main"/><meta name="description" content="Keyword 1 | Keyword 2 | Company Name"/>So whats within the "content" is showing in the SERP and what is in "title" tag is showing in the browser tab. Shouldn't they be the same?
Web Design | | TommyTan0 -
Old SEO keyword "articles", are they hurting rankings?
Hello, About two years ago, the company I work for hired an SEO firm to improve organic rankings on our site. The SEO company's primary method for doing this was producing "articles" that are not really articles but keyword stuffed pages with lots of hidden, internal links to other legitimate pages on our site. Examples: http://www.creamright.com/Isi-Chargers-articles.html http://www.creamright.com/How-To-Make-Whipped-Cream-article.html http://www.creamright.com/Cream-Whipper-articles.html Obviously, this strategy wasn't greatly successful and we cancelled our work with the firm. However, we still have all of the "articles" on the site (about 50-60 pages total) and each page is navigable from the html and XML sitemaps. Additionally, the SEO firm we used built a lot of useless links to these pages from BS directory sites which are all still active. The question I have is whether we should remove these "article" pages or should leave them alone? Although I'm sure they aren't helping any of our SEO efforts, could deleting the pages after two years negatively impact our search rankings? Thanks in advance for any help on this, Doug M.
Web Design | | Loganshark1