Will Nofollow in Nav Cause a Problem?

[kimmiedawn]

I have seen conflicting information regarding the use of rel=nofollow on internal links, but the gist of it seems to be that it's not a good idea. The top linked page on a particular site is a consultation page. Contact is not far behind. Both are linked from the header and footer or sidebar. At first, I thought no-following them would be the perfect solution. After what I've read, it seems I need to remove some of the instances of linking instead of nofollowing. Any e firsthand experience or feedback?

[kimmiedawn]

It certainly does confuse my understanding. Thanks for your help at clarifying things:)

[AlanMosley]

Yes sounds strange.

Here is a tool that may interest you.
http://www.webworkshop.net/pagerank_calculator.php

[kimmiedawn]

What got me started on this question is a situation I can't put my finger on. The pages that are bringing the most traffic right now, and ranking the best, aren't even linked from the header nav or the footer. Their only link from the homepage is in a Spry dropdown menu, which isn't showing in a screen reader emulator (Fangs - I was hoping this would duplicate Lynx text-only), so maybe that doesn't even count?

I know there are other factors, keyword difficulty etc. The two best ranking pages mentioned have no backlinks from other sites either. All their internal links are mostly from the other main pages on the site (which in turn are linked from the homepage). All the other pages, by contrast are linked A LOT from the blog subdirectory. So the best ranking two have roughly 15 internal links, while the others have 600+ and backlinks.

Can you see why I might be confused?

I have a decent understanding of site architecture and siloing, which I have used to build a site that ranks extremely well and is getting more traffic every day. Of course, I can always learn more. I am having a harder time applying the concepts to a site that was built a long time ago that has tables and Spry menus and a missing doctype and deprecated code all over, not to mention uses images for everything including the main navigation menu links (not the dropdown links). It's pushing me to the edge of my comfort zone, and that's where I take the opportunity to learn and get better.

I get that there are bigger issues here than nofollow - I'm just trying to sort it all it out and find the priority issues.

[AlanMosley]

"everything your last post posited was incorrect."
so you say

"a lot has changed since this article was published in ---> 2007 <--- no-follows weren't even a figment of anyone's imagination back then, let alone a reality"

I wrote that article more recently then 2007, and yes no-follows were around, but are irrelevant, as I don't suggest using them and never have

""Rand and I both tend to believe that it is likely Google has changed and refined the PageRank algorithm many times."

Yes I agree, that's why I said
" test have shown that while google has changed many things, PageRank still works much the same as it did when Google published its algorithm long ago."
The whole idea of PageRank is the amassing of PageRank on pages due to linking as stated here in Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank

[AndyKuiper]

It's not just PR that you have misunderstood, it's that, as I pointed out, everything your last post posited was incorrect.

As for your link to how PR works... a lot has changed since this article was published in ---> 2007 <--- no-follows weren't even a figment of anyone's imagination back then, let alone a reality.

The article closed out by saying, "__Rand and I both tend to believe that it is likely Google has changed and refined the PageRank algorithm many times."

I'm done spending time on this.

[AlanMosley]

Because I have nothing wrong.
I have read the algorithm, I know how PageRank works, my explanation is the same as everyone else that has read it. including SEOMoz
http://moz.com/blog/how-pagerank-works-why-the-original-pr-formula-may-be-flawed

[AndyKuiper]

I'm sorry Alan, I don't have the time to update you on all that you have incorrect, which is most of your last post.

[AlanMosley]

"If you're suggesting that no-following a link "keeps" more link equity on a page, you are incorrect. As I mentioned earlier to Kimberly:"

No I am not see my first reply.

"All followed links on a page pass link equity, and will reduce the link equity on the page the link is on."

all pages pass 85% of there link juice divided between the links on the page and keep 15%, no mater if you have one link or many.

Yes link position on the page does alter the link juice passed, but still 85% of pagerank still flows out though the links.

"how to PageSculpt navigational" links..." nobody does this any more, for so many good reasons. "

I would have to ask what those good reasons are?
internal linking is very important, test have shown that while google has changed many things, PageRank still works much the same as it did when Google published its algorithm long ago.
PageRank does amass on pages, there is no doubt about that.

[AndyKuiper]

Link equity doesn't "amass" on pages, unless there is link equity sent there, either internally, or externally. If you no-follow a link (either by tag or other ways) from the home page (where the majority of most sites have the most link equity) the page you no-followed the link to will only get link equity from other internal (or external) pages that link to it.

If you're suggesting that no-following a link "keeps" more link equity on a page, you are incorrect. As I mentioned earlier to Kimberly:

---> All followed links on a page pass link equity, and will reduce the link equity on the page the link is on.
---> All no-followed links will not pass link equity, **however they will reduce the amount of link equity on a page the same as if the no-followed link were a followed link. **

Keep in mind, we are talking about navigational links, which the search engines treat differently than links within content. This whole conversation is sort of ridiculous; "how to PageSculpt navigational links..." nobody does this any more, for so many good reasons.

*Kimberly, As I mentioned earlier, "Responses you receive to your questions here, may be correct"... and some may be just nonsense. Learn about how link equity flows, as I suggested, and you'll be able to discern the facts from the nonsense.

[AlanMosley]

yes but that link juice circulates around the website and amasses on certain pages. the pages with the most links. What is important is that it ends upon the pages you want to rank.
http://thatsit.com.au/seo/tutorials/a-simple-explanation-of-pagerank

[AndyKuiper]

"I would suggest having a real link to your contact page from your homepage..."
I suspect 90%+ of backlinks and social signals (link equity) lands on Kimberley's home page, so this sounds like a lot of work for almost no return. However, as you mentioned, she does seem to really want do this

[AlanMosley]

I did not want to get to technical, but you seem to really want do this., I will show how to do this with jQuery in a way that search engines will not find.

I would suggest having a real link to your contact page from your homepage so that your address and contact details are found.

From every other page do something like this
Contact Us

then you need some javascript, you will need jquery

$(document).ready(function () {   $("[data-contact-page]").click(function () { document.location = "/contactpage.html";     });
});

[AndyKuiper]

You are spending waaaaay too much time on this I, and my clients, rank extremely well without worrying about link equity being lost from navigational links to a contact page. Removing one 'extra' set of navigational links may result in a tiny bit of link equity gain for the page. However Kimberly, what is much more important, would be for you to do some web research around "link architecture for SEO", and "siloing for SEO". Learning about all of this from a more macro standpoint will allow you to truly understand the why's and wherefores so much more than seeking advice about the micro aspects of all of this. Responses you receive to your questions here, may be correct (and often are), however they may just confuse you if you don't have a better understanding of how link equity flows on web pages.

It's clearly awesome that you care and are conscientious enough to seek the right way of dealing with link equity

However I get the feeling from your questions, that you would be much happier and considerably more adept, if you really understood how all of this link equity business worked. If you don't get the whole picture, it may be like that you could be making small changes that share a resemblance (hopefully not), to rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Andy

@ThompsonPaul - My SEO Company is in Calgary, a stones throw from your place... a small World indeed

Here's what Matt has to say about no-follow on internal links:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVOOB_Q0MZY

[kimmiedawn]

I absolutely do appreciate the longer explanations Paul, so don't stop!;) I'm one of those people who HAS to know the why, not just the what. And, Andy, I laughed too.

So let me ask some specific advice: if the homepage has a header linking to pages we desire to rank well, and the footer also has links to those pages PLUS links to a bunch of area-specific pages (i.e. Town A Keyword, Town B Keyword, Town C Keyword) which aren't remotely as important to rank, should I remove the links to those area pages from the footer? Will that increase the link equity going to the more important pages?

The odd thing is that the two pages that rank better than the others are not linked to from the header or footer at all. I know competitiveness of the keywords plays into that but it can't be coincidental.

[AlanMosley]

Paul is correct, most web sites have this problem, there is not a lot you can do about it because most of the time you need a contact page link on every page.

but don't think of it as one way, remember link juice flows back out of the contact page. The page rank calculations are done many times not once, until the page rank settles on the pages it does. For this reason I have to disagree that internal links can only pass a little pagerank, the more external links you have the more pagerank the internal links spread , so you are correct the way you sculpt your links is very important.

[AndyKuiper]

@ThompsonPaul ...makes sense, I agree with you, it does appear that Kimberley would benefit from a thorough, reasoned response. And I suspect, if I were in her shoes, your kind of response would be a lot more helpful.

[ThompsonPaul]

I had to laugh, Andy. I essentially needed 7 paragraphs to say what you said in 1 sentence: "yup, ignore the WMT report"

I'd been back 'n forth in another question with Kimberly too though, and she'd indicated she was interesting in learning the background "whys & wherefores" to her questions as well, so that's why I went on a bit on your succinct solution.

P.

[AndyKuiper]

@ThompsonPaul - what an awesome answer!... 5 thumbs up

[ThompsonPaul]

Just step back and think about this logically, Kimberly. OF COURSE the contact page and consultation page are going to have the most internal links. They are the primary call-to-action pages for the website so SHOULD be mentioned on every page, so visitors can become customers. Pretty much every well-designed website out there will have their primary call-to-action pages as the most-linked.

Remember, pages rank for search terms. Just because a Contact page has lots of internal links pointing to it doesn't mean it will rank for anything other than the term "Contact Us". Because that's all the page is about. And having it rank for Contact Us in no way affects any other pages' ability to rank for their target terms.

Now, if you use that report in reverse - to discover that a critical page has few other internal pages linking to it - then you have an architectural problem with your site. You'd need to figure out to get other, related, influential pages linking to the underserved page if possible. But again, remember: internal links can only pass a bit of the internal value your pages already possess. Only new incoming external links can bring in incremental additional value to a site. It's those external links that bring in new value to move up the SERPS and attract new traffic. On-page optimisation can only take you so far..

Regarding no-follow, we're back to a simple functionality that too many have tried to abuse for a purpose for which it wasn't designed. (or at least something it no longer accomplishes due to a change by Google).

There are essentially only two reasons to add a no-follow to a link:

1. you don't trust the destination of a link (e.g. the link has been created by a user on your site, not by you as site owner - links in comments are a perfect example of this)
2. you have a transactional relationship with the site that is the destination of the link (e.g. they paid you for the link, you traded links with them, they provided you guest-post content in exchange for the link etc.)

Since neither of these should ever apply to links within your own site, it's almost never a good idea to have internal no-follow links. (And as someone else mentions, applying no-follow doesn't "save" any link influence for other links, it just throws it away. This is the change Google made a year or so after no-follow was first introduced.)

Lastly, and to wrap up another long-winded answer Just because an SEO or Analytics tool reports a particular metric doesn't mean it's important. You must filter the information provided through your own experience and expertise to decide if and how it is relevant. That is what makes SEO both Art and Science.

Hope that all makes sense?

Paul

[AndyKuiper]

Correct Kimberly, "just totally ignore the fact that Webmaster Tools is showing the most unimportant pages (rankwise) as the highest linked internally"

[kimmiedawn]

Thanks everyone for setting me straight -it's amazing how old misinformation just won't die. So, should I just totally ignore the fact that Webmaster Tools is showing the most unimportant pages (rankwise) as the highest linked internally? It's really hard for me to accept that it's not giving the wrong signal.

[AndyKuiper]

If you are trying to conserve link juice by using the no follows, it won't work. This type of thing was utilized shortly after no-follows were introduced, the practice was referred to as 'PageRank sculpting'. The search engines changed the way they dealt with no-followed links "with regard to link equity" as a result of page sculpting.

---> All followed links on a page pass link equity, and will reduce the link equity on the page the link is on.
---> All no-followed links will not pass link equity, **however they will reduce the amount of link equity on a page the same as if the no-followed link were a followed link. **

So your hypothesis, about not passing link equity to internal pages that really don't need it (contact, etc.) is a good one. However, you won't "save" the link equity on the page that has the link... followed or no-followed.

And, you are also correct in deciding to not use the no-followed links in this manner. I wouldn't bother using no-follow links for the purposes you've described. As for navigational linking, I wouldn't worry to much about link equity, as the search engines are getting better and better at determining the importance, or lack thereof, of links based on their location within a page. If you feel you might have too many nav links, perhaps eliminating a nav section might be a solution.

You may want to search around the term PageRank sculpting, as there may be more information provided to you this way.

Andy

[kimmiedawn]

Nishada, you mentioned adding nofollow to the page.

Is another possibility to just no-index, follow the contact page and the consultation page? But they will still show as the top linked pages in Google Webmaster Tools. Does that matter?

There has to be a best solution here - I myself don't know what it is.

[kimmiedawn]

The Internal Links section of Google Webmaster Tools shows consultation.asp as the top-linked page (1309 links). Contact.asp is not far behind at #4 (713 links). Neither needs to rank. There are hundreds of other pages that do.  Am I confused to think that by decreasing the number of links to these pages, I will allow other pages to rank higher?

So if nofollow is not the best idea, should I just decrease the number of links?

[AlanMosley]

If a page has 5 links, the page rank will be split between those 5 links and will flow to the pages they point to. There are some modifiers to this, but general its 20% per link.

if you no-follow one of those links, 20% of your page rank will be lost. It will be wasted. it is better that your contact page gets it. If you have a link back to your home page from your contact page. you will get some back.
how pagerank works http://thatsit.com.au/seo/tutorials/a-simple-explanation-of-pagerank

[Nishadha]

You generally add nofollow to tell search engines not to consider that link to rank search results. So I think it's about whether you want some internal page to rank in search results. You probably don't want your contact page to rank in search engines so I guess it's okay to add no follow to that page.