homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.167.173.250
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 211 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 211 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 > >     
Learning About PR Sculpting: internal links with rel=nofollow
tootricky




msg:3798145
 10:32 am on Dec 2, 2008 (gmt 0)

< Note: this thread begins with posts that were split out
from another thread: Experiments in keyword rich links to Home [webmasterworld.com] >

Could you say that the introduction of the nofollow attribute has allowed Google to implement more strict borders for over optimisation? Now we can nofollow "home" links without removing them as a user feature and Google has left us no excuse to have over optimised sites!

Nofollow is a blessing and a curse!

[edited by: tedster at 9:27 am (utc) on Dec. 10, 2008]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]

 

BradleyT




msg:3811330
 3:55 pm on Dec 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Enigma,

Before nofollow people could use JavaScript, image links, or redirects to not pass link juice.

whitenight




msg:3811331
 3:55 pm on Dec 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

I feel I'm a Certifiable NoFollower.

lol not going for the easy punchline...

Pageone,

Since this thread was directly related to CAIN's testing thread, you might want to go back re-read that one and then read this one through again.

I leave all sorts of hidden clues for the "WANTABES SEO" (is that like a Japanese SEO society?!) for maximum leverage of YOUR test. =p

pageoneresults




msg:3811345
 4:19 pm on Dec 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Okay, if I were to look at this from how I've come to understand it, if I were using Fragment IDs as part of a <ul> at the top of the page, you know, like a Table of Contents, I believe I should be tagging all of those links with nofollow that use the #, yes?

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.example.com/topic#Heading1">Heading 1</a>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.example.com/topic#Heading2">Heading 2</a>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.example.com/topic#Heading3">Heading 3</a>

Would the above be seen as three duplicate links? And, is the implementation of nofollow correct in this instance? Of course I'm going to leave the root level page link as dofollow wherever it appears in context. But, all the links with Fragment IDs are going to be tagged with nofollow. Yes?

Man, I feel like such a noob! I am, I am! I'm still learning each and every day. My brain hurts!

enigma1




msg:3811354
 4:30 pm on Dec 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Before nofollow people could use JavaScript, image links, or redirects to not pass link juice.

Sure jscripts too. I talked of forms because they worked on both cases even when active content is blocked and you may still had to provide a navigation method.

tootricky




msg:3811378
 5:11 pm on Dec 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Right, mind if I pose some questions to get this going again. (nofollow=NF)

1) For a page where 2 of X numbers of links point to the same page:
i) Does NFing one affect the other?
ii) Where both use the same anchor, is there a diffence to which one you NF?
iii) Where varied anchor, does the NF link affect relevancy passed to destination page from the normal link

In my experience if both are identical links (same anchor text) then I tend not to add NF. One may be in the footer, one my in the content but I would keep both. I have seen no measurable difference in nofollowing in this situation although I have not tested it thoroughly.


2) Theme Siloing where you have a structure
Group 1 -> SubGroup 1A
Group 1 -> SubGroup 1B
Group 2 -> SubGroup 2A
Group 2 -> SubGroup 2B
Group 3 -> SubGroup 3A
Group 3 -> SubGroup 3B
Group 3 -> SubGroup 3C
Group 4 -> SubGroup 4A
i) Within a SubGroup, would you have the nav menu
A) Display all Groups and Subs, all followed
B) Display all Groups and Subs, NF everything but the related Subs
C) Display Subs in current Group, plus other Groups (not subs), NF the other Groups
ii) Is NFing ALL links that move UP the structure, except a link to HOME from the END page of the sculpted chain the way to go? (alluding to TooTricky)
iii) Inline internal links to other themed sections- NF or follow? Why?

i. Out of these choices I would choose B): You want to push more page rank to the Subgroups and....

A) Would give each group equal weight (excluding external linking factors)
C) Would give more pagerank to the Main Groups (but only in the instance you provide, if each main category had more subs, this would change the situation drastically)

ii. I haven't tested this on second tier pages, but my gut feeling is that creating tunnels like this where PR can only flow downwards would probably damage the PR flow of site. In fact only on the end branches of a sites structure would I recommend noofllowing most links apart from links that point back up the directory structure.

iii. Again not tested but my gut tells me that non excessive inline links to other relevant sections would do absolutely no harm to the PR flow: Inter linking is the norm, nofollowing is the exception and it's the exception that one has to be careful with.

3) Not sure I understand the situation completely to comment.

4) Nofollow always unless there is some useful content that you want the page to rank for.


Okay, if I were to look at this from how I've come to understand it, if I were using Fragment IDs as part of a <ul> at the top of the page, you know, like a Table of Contents, I believe I should be tagging all of those links with nofollow that use the #, yes?

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.example.com/topic#Heading1">Heading 1</a>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.example.com/topic#Heading2">Heading 2</a>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.example.com/topic#Heading3">Heading 3</a>

From what I have seen in similar situations, nofollowing links with fragment ids in them has absolutely no effect. I believe in fact that Google completely ignores fragment ids, so I don't bother.

I have just run a report on a site of about 1000 pages with a typical directory structure:

Home > Parent Category > Sub Category > Product

I performed some link sculpting a month ago and haven't touched the content of the site at all since (been working on back end stuff instead). I performed some siloing and third tier push (as described above) introduced a breadcrumb to pass value back up through the directory structure. Although the ranking for the main generic keywords has not improved the much longer tail keywords have improved significantly.

This site test tells me that my sculpting has forced Page Rank down through the directory structure to other pages that need the PR to rank.

tedster




msg:3811546
 8:59 pm on Dec 19, 2008 (gmt 0)

Before nofollow people could use JavaScript, image links, or redirects to not pass link juice.

Image links have always passed PR - the query-independent part of link juice. It's just that with an image link there's no anchor text to pass on query-dependent link juice. And if there is an alt attribite, then some query specific pop is also there, although it's not as strong as visible anhor text.

pageoneresults




msg:3812735
 2:24 pm on Dec 22, 2008 (gmt 0)

From what I have seen in similar situations, nofollowing links with fragment ids in them has absolutely no effect. I believe in fact that Google completely ignores fragment ids, so I don't bother.

Huh? Now I'm a bit confused. I understand that the bots stop at the Fragment ID. Since that is the case, now I'm left with a list of "absolute" links that all lead to the same URI since the Fragment ID is stripped.

Why wouldn't you bother with these types of "repetitive" links?

Shaddows




msg:3812755
 3:01 pm on Dec 22, 2008 (gmt 0)

P1R, the single greatest thing I have learnt on these board is that even if someone has a better grasp of something than you do, it does not mean they have perfect knowledge or are always right.

And this would seem to be a blatant case of self-referencing, and an ideal candidate for nofollow.

In referencing another page though, would you follow the first and NF the rest?

pageoneresults




msg:3812760
 3:06 pm on Dec 22, 2008 (gmt 0)

In referencing another page though, would you follow the first and NF the rest?

You would think that would be the default method but I'm finding that is not the case. Since I use SOC (Source Ordered Content), I'm able to keep those inline links that are "in context" as dofollow and then nofollow all the other references.

Would you follow the first and NF the rest?

From my understanding, I want to keep the most relevant as dofollow. Whether that is the first or the last all depends on my structure. In most instances, it is going to be the first in source due to my SOC implementations.

Robert Charlton




msg:3813131
 2:28 am on Dec 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

4) Boilerplate text (contact us, T&C, about etc)
A) NF always
B) Follow on Home, NF otherwise
C) Follow on NoIndex Pages, NF otherwise
D) Something else

You don't necessarily want to keep these pages out of the index, but you do want to avoid pouring a lot of PR into them.

If I wanted the pages to be indexed but not to rank, my inclination would be to NF from Home, possibly NF from most subpages which get a fair amount of PR, and to dofollow from a lower level page (or pages).

The boilerplate page where I hesitate to do this is the Privacy Policy. Does Google expect a Privacy Policy page to be prominent? How prominent?

Also, with regard to, say, the About page, it's a page that's often very possible to optimize productively.

Receptional Andy




msg:3813241
 8:30 am on Dec 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

I believe in fact that Google completely ignores fragment ids

As a side note, Google have been testing "jump to" links in SERPs recently - to sections of a page (picked up via fragment IDs). I imagine nofollow could prevent that from happening. I doubt they get their own link juice, but just for reference.

pageoneresults




msg:3813618
 9:53 pm on Dec 23, 2008 (gmt 0)

Google have been testing "jump to" links in SERPs recently.

RA, do you have links to any topics on that? I want to do some further digging on this Fragment ID thing. :)

And what? Did we exhaust this topic? Heck, I'm still going through pages that I looked at a few days ago just making sure and adding a few more rel="nofollow" for good measure. Ya'll got me hooked now. Shame on me. You know, I'm going to have to rescind a few of my articles about the nofollow attribute. I've not been real fond of it up until this point in me tenure.

tootricky




msg:3818005
 7:07 pm on Jan 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

P1R, Shaddows is spot on: I had in mind that you were talking about non self referenceing links with fragment ids, rather than ones pointing to itself. I personally nofollow self referencing links with fragment ids ("top" links for example).

And I had no idea about fragment ids in SERPs: It sounds very interesting actually!

I guess this topic will pickup when people are back from the holidays.

pageoneresults




msg:3818013
 7:21 pm on Jan 2, 2009 (gmt 0)

I guess this topic will pickup when people are back from the holidays.

When it does, I vote that we split it again. This has been one of my fav topics to date. Whenever you can convince me to change my ways, that marks a historical point in my career. :)

When topics get this deep, there are only a few who are going to venture into the conversation.

nealrodriguez




msg:3869791
 4:42 pm on Mar 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

i actually used a pr calculator i found to come up with a way to use nofollow to shoot most of the pr shared among my pages to the home page where i had a conversion funnel, like i wrote here: [webmasterworld.com...]

i pointed spic and span - dofollow - links from the homepage to every page; and every page would only link to the homepage with a clean cut, uncorrupted, chaste hyperlink; they would link to every other page with the nofollow attribute. i did this because pr on the homepage was @ 3 while the rest of the pages in the top directory had a pr of 5. i increased the pr of the homepage to a toolbar 5, and it's spot on the se's went from top of pg 2 to middle of page one for some pretty broad terms.

now the site was fairly small - less than 50 pages; so this was done in less than a day.

just my 2 lincolns.

btw: i didn't go campaigning for any 3rd party links, and the site was in a niche almost only filled with competitors that did not link to each other.

disclaimer: i don't know if this technique would continue to work, as this was performed over 2 years ago. i've gotten better @ having other sites point traffic-driving links to my sites over the last few years to have to use this caliber of cross-linking anymore.

sandboxsam




msg:3870839
 5:25 pm on Mar 15, 2009 (gmt 0)

How does Google treat the on page value of the text string associated with the link that is nofollowed?

Is the content in the text string lost? Does it still add to the content of the page it is on?

Robert Charlton




msg:3871036
 11:14 pm on Mar 15, 2009 (gmt 0)

How does Google treat the on page value of the text string associated with the link that is nofollowed?

I assume you're talking about the anchor text of the nofollowed link.

If it hasn't been referenced in this discussion already, there's an interesting set of tests that Miamacs did on various aspects of the rel="nofollow" attribute, which he describes in this post...

[webmasterworld.com...]

The post cites these aspects of Google's behavior related to nofollowed links, using as a test a text link with anchor text containing "a unique phrase of otherwise common words"...

- [Google] Brought up the page with the link on it for an exact phrase query ( between quotes ), the phrase is unique, no other results.
- The source page with the link on it does *not* rank at all for the phrase without quotes
....
- The anchor text is treated as text and is indexed.

nealrodriguez




msg:3873538
 6:09 pm on Mar 18, 2009 (gmt 0)

- [Google] Brought up the page with the link on it for an exact phrase query ( between quotes ), the phrase is unique, no other results.
- The source page with the link on it does *not* rank at all for the phrase without quotes
....
- The anchor text is treated as text and is indexed.

it's like the other side of the coin of the rule that states that a link to a page will tell the arachnid what the page linked to is about not the one from which the link is pointed; that said, anchor text in a "nofollowed" link may more precisely define what a page on which the link is published is about. looks like an anomaly:

the result of the matrix trying to balance itself ;)

fishfinger




msg:3873594
 7:07 pm on Mar 18, 2009 (gmt 0)

Very interesting.

Just so I'm sure that I have this clear, am I correct in thinking that NF links to anchor points on the same page (for instance an FAQ page where the Q is an anchorlink to the A ) will

- release extra PR for the rest of the site, but...
- effectively 'de-index' the content of the anchorlink to an extent i.e. it will still count as text on the page, but will definitely NOT receive extra ranking juice (I'm not assuming that there is any there in the first place mind) for being included in a link?

tedster




msg:3873613
 7:23 pm on Mar 18, 2009 (gmt 0)

From what I can see, links to the same url (both page fragment identifiers and other types) are currently ignored, whether nofollowed or not. Page fragments are certainly not indexed or returned in the SERPs.

sandboxsam




msg:3874239
 2:04 pm on Mar 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

Thanks Robert Charlton,

Can you help me understand, why if the "anchor text is treated as text and is indexed" then why is that same NOFOLLOWed anchor text "The source page with the link on it does *not* rank at all for the phrase without quotes" ?

How does that make sense?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- [Google] Brought up the page with the link on it for an exact phrase query ( between quotes ), the phrase is unique, no other results.
- The source page with the link on it does *not* rank at all for the phrase without quotes
....
- The anchor text is treated as text and is indexed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks

nealrodriguez




msg:3874300
 2:49 pm on Mar 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

How does that make sense?

i don't think it does make sense; i just think it's the opposite effect of what a followed link should do, like i wrote above:

it's like the other side of the coin of the rule that states that a link to a page will tell the arachnid what the page linked to is about not the one from which the link is pointed; that said, anchor text in a "nofollowed" link may more precisely define what a page on which the link is published is about.

it's the smith to the neo in the 'nofollow' matrix.

and if this is the intended outcome, why wont it appear for keywords without quotes?

where's the oracle when we need her?

Robert Charlton




msg:3874581
 8:03 pm on Mar 19, 2009 (gmt 0)

My emphasis...
Can you help me understand, why if the "anchor text is treated as text and is indexed" then why is that same NOFOLLOWed anchor text "The source page with the link on it does *not* rank at all for the phrase without quotes" ?

You're leaving out one important point noted as part of the test, that the anchor text was...

My emphasis...
..."a unique phrase of otherwise common words"...

I myself wouldn't necessarily expect such a phrase to rank without quotes (and, if it did, I'd be assuming that other factors on the page and off the page were helping it rank).

With quotes, of course, since the common words were uniquely ordered, it was a unique phrase, and here I'd expect the page to rank if the anchor text were indexed.

Since the phrase in quotes did rank, I think the test demonstrated that the anchor text in fact was indexed.

I don't feel that this says anything about whether the anchor text of a nofollowed link receives the anchor text algo boost that we commonly assume. I can imagine the test turning out the same either way.

As miamacs said in his post, it's "not much of a test, but it's better than nothing." I wouldn't know how to test for the anchor text boost, but I think the phrase test was pretty clever.

snickles121




msg:3876565
 9:10 pm on Mar 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

< moved from another location >

I have found in the past that using more than 2 no follow codes in a single webpage will penalize keyword rankings in Google for that particular page. Has anyone else seen this problem or use more than 2 no follow codes per page or just want to comment on this?

I believe this penalty is in place because Google may think you are hiding something. Thats my opinion.

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 9:20 pm (utc) on Mar. 22, 2009]

Robert Charlton




msg:3876583
 9:28 pm on Mar 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

...using more than 2 no follow codes in a single webpage will penalize keyword rankings for that particular page....

If this is true, then there are some very major sites that are in considerable trouble. I don't think that Google penalizes for more than 2 nofollows on a single page.

What you saw may well have been a coincidence, or perhaps you made some other changes at the same time you made your nofollow changes.

Robert Charlton




msg:3876585
 9:38 pm on Mar 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

PS to the above....

snickles - I'm assuming by "more than 2 no follow codes", you're talking about more than two rel="nofollow" links.

snickles121




msg:3876612
 10:23 pm on Mar 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

Yes, I am referring to rel="nofollow"

It is possible it could be a coincidence, but its someting worth looking at if you experience a drop in google rankings after adding this coding.

Footnote: This happened a few years back too.

tedster




msg:3876632
 11:00 pm on Mar 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

using more than 2 no follow codes in a single webpage will penalize keyword rankings...

If this were to be true, then any blog post with more than one nofollowed comment link would be penalized.

So let's not start any myths. I suggest that something was missing from your analysis of those "penalties". Just because two things occur at the same time doesn't mean that one causes the other.

nealrodriguez




msg:3876639
 11:21 pm on Mar 22, 2009 (gmt 0)

using more than 2 no follow codes in a single webpage will penalize keyword rankings for that particular page

i have definitely used more than 2 'nofollow' attributes on a page, and the page has kept its pr, indexed positioning. moreover, it has concentrated all of its link weighting to the one page that i linked without a 'nofollow;' and this has been my experience across over 40 pages on which i structured with the same schema.

JS_Harris




msg:3910655
 11:57 pm on May 10, 2009 (gmt 0)

I have a site designed to be one in which people will not click on many links or see other pages, they tend to land on the page that tells them what they want to know and then they tend to close their browser and go follow the instructions (often after using the print feature).

Before making any changes the site was the typical index + 12 categories + 300 articles where the articles are reached from the category pages and everything links to index and category. (standard wordpress layout).

I made the following changes, the site LOOKS the same but nofollow sculpting was used...

- The index page now links to the 12 categories and to 12 hand chosen articles only.
- The category pages link to the index and to 12 articles only, they no longer link to category pages.
- The articles link to the index page and to 8 other articles only (using a fairly accurate similar articles feature).

The end result is that the index page and articles are seen as much more important and the category pages have been de-valued greatly, which is what I wanted.

What I DIDN'T expect is that now EVERY article in Google serps has a 2nd entry below the article that is always the index page. I don't mind the double listings but the 2nd link should be to something similar, not always the index page and before making these changes similar articles often appeared together in Google.

I'm inclined to think that the index page is now viewed as too important and that I can perhaps add links to more articles from the index page to lower its value but before I do... are there any other reasons the index page might be dominating the 2nd entry position in the serps?

[edited by: tedster at 1:13 am (utc) on May 11, 2009]
[edit reason] moved from another location [/edit]

acimag




msg:3912954
 9:04 pm on May 13, 2009 (gmt 0)

< moved from another location >

I have no started doing this yet. But I have an ecommerce site and I want it to crawl as many links as it can.

However On each row the image is clickable the title is clickble and so is the buy now button.

Using the rel="nofollow" on everything but the text would that still allow the page to get indexed?

has anyone has any experience with this?

I don't want google reading that much or triple crawling if it doesn't have to.

any views?

[edited by: Robert_Charlton at 9:11 pm (utc) on May 13, 2009]

This 211 message thread spans 8 pages: < < 211 ( 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved