Should I add rel=nofollow ?

[Superberto]

Say I have an article that includes a list of many websites with ressources for the articles topic.

From a SEO perspective, should I add nofollow to them? some of them? all of them?

[donford]

HI Alberto,

Keep in mind I have not seen your page. I am talking in general specifics. The over all point is if you have a link to another site which is there for reference the user there is no reason to not make it an actual link. Any reason you can think of not to make it a link would also be a reason to remove it.

If you feel you have too many links on a specific page then you probably do! Pick the most pertinent ones and axe the others.

There are ways to maximize link juice and page authority by using some more advanced SEO tactics, See Rand's post about link sculpting. I will say this is some advanced level planing and not something you would just single out one page to do.

Remember SEO stands for Search Engine Optimization. White hat SEO deals with how you can best present your page to search engines with out frustrating your users. When you purposely make a change that negatively effects your users and possibly tricks search engines to rank you better you have crossed into grey or black hat SEO. Something that will eventually bit you in the ass.

The choice is of course yours, and if you would like me to look at the page in question you can PM me a link I will be happy to do so. I do stand by everything I said in all my replies while speaking in general terms.

Don

[Superberto]

I agree from a user point of view, it should be a link. The links are all relevant, and high PR sites. But from a pure SERP/SEO point of view, it would be more beneficial to not link them (pain text), isn't that so?

thanks

[donford]

Actually no I wouldn't recommend that.

The reason is if the link is helpful it should be a link right? From a users point of view do you not find it frustrating to see a link that is not a link?

My suggestion is to evaluate each site you're linking to, if they deserve the link leave it in. Otherwise simply remove the link.

The reason behind my suggestion is the way the internet and page rank / authority is supposed to work. When a web master find a link to a site that is beneficial to their sites users, then they link to them. This generates page authority to the linked site but also helps the web master serve their users. In turn it also associates the web masters site with the linked site.

The web has taken many twist and turns since the original method of passing link juice was developed. Tools such as robots.txt, nofollow noindex, and disavow have been added to deal with the changing environment. But, the core of the system still remains.

Hope this make sense,

Don

[Superberto]

so would you recommend puting those websites in plain text (no link at all)? That seems to be the best option, from an SEO point of view, right?

[donford]

If you mean a link like:

www.google.com

VS

www.google.com

Then yes, because the first one is not technically a link.

[Superberto]

thanks of the answer. Question: If I just put the links in plain text, would that increase the linkjuice that is passed in my internal links, since I'm not passing any to those external sites?

[donford]

HI Alberto,

Understanding the purpose of the NOFOLLOW tag is what would make your decision. In general you should NOFOLLOW.

Edit for Reference: Google NoFollow Tag

• Untrusted Content (like user generated un-moderated)
• Paid Links Or Paid Advertisements
• Links to Pages That Serve No Search Engine Value (sign up, registration, etc..)

In your case you have "resources" which in theory adds value to the page and the users experience. A single page with resource links is not going to hurt your site at all. Without seeing the exact page I would lean to say it would be fine as follow links. That being said, you want it to be tasteful non-spammy and indeed a boon to the user experience and not just a big list of garbage.

Hope this helps,

Don