| 11:39 pm on May 13, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Anybody? Don't want to make drastic changes before I've consulted you guys.
| 12:06 am on May 14, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'm sure I'm off target here with this whole reply but...
You're going to take away the larger-size image pages and just show thumbnails? Didn't the larger pictures have any value? If not, why were you showing them?
I'm assuming that the large-size pictures do have value. I'm also assuming that they are thin in content.
In light of the Panda thing, I would noindex,follow the large-picture pages and just leave everything alone.
Your internal linking stays the same and link juice flows.
You still get link juice flow from anyone linking to the large-image pages.
Unless Google images was an important visitor source, the pages couldn't have been ranking in the SERP's anyway, so the noindex doesn't hurt anything.
Less chance for a Panda penalty by removing thin content pages from their index.
| 12:26 am on May 14, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Thank you Broadway for a great reply. The whole format of the site is a relic from the dark ages, eg 2005. I had grand ideas about filling each image page with content. Naturally I never got around to it so its just the images and navigation that are present.
I'm trying to streamline my site following a recovery from a Google filter. The site has come back onto the front page at 7th (previously number 1 for its main key phrase) so I'm attempting to make alterations to the site structure do regain some rankings before I embark on a link campaign.
| 3:56 am on May 14, 2011 (gmt 0)|
I'm no expert on internal linking, so I would want someone else to chime in, but..
You do need an internal linking structure that is understood and crawlable by the bots.
But as far as internal linking and the importance of keywords in it and such, I think that (especially in regards to menus and footers) got devalued by Google years ago.
I think of on-page internal linking (especially menus and submenus) as a way of declaring to the bots which pages are related and their relative hierarchy (the whole siloing thing).
But with your image pages, aren't they like spokes from a single hub? I'm not sure they're playing a role in making a sharp, clear hierarchy obvious to the bots (because they probably link to lots of different points on your website). I don't see the downside of getting rid of these pages and their linking.
There is that phenomenon where hanging more and more pages off a hub page increases it's PR (at least it did 10 years ago) but 1) I'm not so sure that's so valid or important any more 2) These are no-content pages, and Google knows that, so would they even really add PR anyway (does PR like this even exist any more?).
Hopefully someone else will state an opinion and can give you more/more authoritative information.
Congratulations on #7.
| 11:22 am on May 14, 2011 (gmt 0)|
Many thanks Broadway. I agree they probably complicate the navigation. Although many of them are in Google, none rank for the image subject. I could also accomplish exactly the same thing with the usual thumbnail format.
I'm concerned that Google might burn me again so maybe its time to say goodbye to them, whether by noindex or just removal.