simonmc
msg:3402091 | 3:02 pm on Jul 23, 2007 (gmt 0) |
If the link is pointing to a page that is in the supplimental index then it will not make any difference. The link is not followed so Google does not care for the links destination and has no knowledge about the content of the page the link is pointing to (no knowledge from this link at least). The only thing that it will count for is on page text at the page that the link is placed on. Simon
|
Bones
msg:3402120 | 3:35 pm on Jul 23, 2007 (gmt 0) |
I've got a page that's had a Wikipedia link since December, and that page remains in the supplemental index. So from my experience I would say nofollow links wouldn't help you escape.
|
bcc1234
msg:3402412 | 8:47 pm on Jul 23, 2007 (gmt 0) |
Yep. That makes sense. nofollow means no passing PR, and low PR is the main reason for the supplemental index according to G. So if no PR boost then no help getting out of the supplemental index. Just wanted to confirm. Thanks.
|
jakegotmail
msg:3402455 | 9:21 pm on Jul 23, 2007 (gmt 0) |
beanstalk inc. did a study 1 month ago, stating it did: (hope they don't mind me quoting it) "The first rel="nofollow" test is complete and the results are as expected. To avoid the results getting tainted we were unable to provide the specifics as to how the test was being run. Well, that's not the case anymore. What we wanted to determine is whether a link to a website that had the rel="nofollow" attribute attached passed on anchor text weight. To determine this we built a few links to the Beanstalk homepage from a few forums that automatically added rel="nofollow" to all links. The anchor text we used for these links was bsi#*$! (<-won't let me show the word they used for some reason) knowing that the keyword itself fit into two criteria: it didn't appear anywhere else and it held no value to anyone. As of this morning we are now seeing the Beanstalk homepage among the Google results for this phrase despite the fact that that the term appears nowhere on it and there are no links pointing to it with that keyword that do not contain the rel="nofollow" attribute."
|
g1smd
msg:3402571 | 11:34 pm on Jul 23, 2007 (gmt 0) |
Matt Cutts posted (on someone elses blog) just last week that they have now fixed that "problem".
|
Halfdeck
msg:3402585 | 11:54 pm on Jul 23, 2007 (gmt 0) |
Nofollows used to pass anchor text but Matt did say that's no longer the case and besides you're getting off topic :)
|
|
