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
-
Looking for list Pro's & Con's of removing Folder from URL?
Hi We have a sub-folder ("/shop-by-department/") which is pretty much useless on our site and I'm looking to remove it. But the team want a list of the Pro's & Con's in doing so. So for example I'll be changing www.example.ie/shop-by-department/furniture/beds/product-a to www.example.ie/furniture/beds/product-a I know there will be an intial hit as Google adjusts to the change but think it's definitely the way to go. I was lookng for a complete list of the Pro's & Con's to send onto the team. It'll be going to the traditional marketing (print, radio, etc.) too so can ve top-level points too. Hope you can help! Thanks
Web Design | | Frankie-BTDublin0 -
'Security error' for links accessed via Facebook on Android phones
Hi, This is not strictly a SEO/inbound marketing question, so please excuse me for that--- but I think this awesome community could certainly help 🙂 We recently migrated a client website to https (SSL from Godaddy; the hosting provider is a different one). All that went fine. The problem though is that when a link from the website is shared on Facebook or sent via Whatsapp, and a user tries to open the page on any Android device, it throws up a Security Error. On the Facebook app, it doesn't allow the user to go any further. It seems that this problem is not unique and many others have raised it in various forums -- we've tried many of the options mentioned; have tried to work with Godaddy support as well ---- but the problem persists. Any solution(s)/fixes will be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Manoj
Web Design | | ontarget-media0 -
Creating a new website, but I'd like to control it under a different domain.
I'd like to control it under the domain of another website with a higher DA. Can I create the new website (website A) and do an immediate re-direct to another website (website B)? Or would I be better at putting it as a subdomain? Such as www.websitea.websiteb.com? Cheers all, Rhys
Web Design | | SwanseaMedicine0 -
Links not visible in "Google cache text version" but visible in "Fetch as Google" in Webmaster tool
Hi Guys, There seems some issue with the coding due to which Google is not indexing half of our menu bar links. The cached text version of http://www.99acres.com/ is not showing links present in dropdown "All India" , dropdown "Advice" and "Hot Projects" tab in blue bar on top menu whereas these links are visible in "Fetch as Google" in Google Webmaster tool. Any clue to why is there a difference between the links shown in Google webmaster and Google cache text version. Thanks in advance 🙂
Web Design | | vivekrathore0 -
What's the best way to structure original vs aggregated content
We're working on a news site that has a mix of news wires such as Reuters and original opinion articles. Currently the site is setup with /world /sports etc categories with the news wire content. Now we want to add the original opinion content. Would it be better to start a new top /Opinion category and then have sub-categories for each Opinion/world, Opinion/sports subject? Or would it be better to simply add an opinion sub-category under the existing news categories, ie /world/opinion? I know Google requests that original content be in a separate directory to be considered for inclusion in Google news. Which would be better for that? Regarding link building, if the opinion sub-categories were under the top news categories, would the link juice be passed more directly than if we had a separate Opinion top category?
Web Design | | ScottDavis0 -
Best way to handle related content links in a sidebar?
My site contains tens of thousands of articles, studies, multimedia files, biographies, etc. To assist users with finding content that might be related to the page they're on, I use a side bar with 'also of interest' links to other, similar content on my site. This is, of course, pretty standard practice. Search engines -- Google in particular -- index these pages and then include the text in the sidebar links in search results. So, for example, on a given page I may have 20 links to related content, and the text in those links might be, 'A story about subject ABC.' When I search for 'A story about subject ABC,' Google returns not only the page titled (and containing the content) 'A story about subject ABC.' but also every page that links to it and happens to have that link text in the sidebar. What is the proper way to handle this kind of thing?
Web Design | | smorrison0 -
Hiding Links Under A Tab As Good As Anything Else And More Attractive?
I'm working with a site that finds standard linking to spread authority to interior pages ugly. Here's what they don't like: footers tag clouds sidebar lists of links text heavy paragraphs with links a gallery of images with alt text/links So, I'm looking for other ways to link from their homepage to these less prominent pages inside the site. Here are my two questions: 1. Would something like this work, with the links under the "Specs" tab (p.s., this is just a random example and not my client): http://www.goincase.com/products/detail/CL57925/ 2. Any other ideas for spreading the authority via links from their homepage and other pages on the site to less powerful pages? Thanks! Best...Mike
Web Design | | 945010 -
Site-wide footer links or single "website credits" page?
I see that you have already answered this question before back in 2007 (http://www.seomoz.org/qa/view/2163), but wanted to ask your current opinion on the same question: Should I add a site-wide footer link to my client websites pointing to my website, or should I create a "website credits" page on my clients site, add this to the footer and then link from within this page out to my website?
Web Design | | eseyo0