Forum Moderators: open
This is very common. Every page linked from every page is not advisable and I think also annoying for users.
However I think it is good to link on every page to "products" "services" "about us" "contact us" "sitemap" and so forth.
I wouldn't have more than 100 links on any page, never mind them all.Why not? If you can do it so your users can still navigate easily. My site map (which is only on one page but is linked to from every page) has over 200 links in this format.
My Region Keyword 1 [webmasterworld.com]
My Region Keyword 2 [webmasterworld.com]
It's quite user friendly and I'm rather certain Google has no problem handling and following well over 100 links per page. I believe a site map is good for search engines, but if i have any page on my site that every other page links to, it's going to be simple and the user has to be the first consideration.
Posters are advising from speculation not from actual practice.
How would you know? Are you not speculating about me?
I actually had a site penalised because of this. There were a lot more than 100 links but I am positive it was the cause.
Google's Design and Content Guidelines:
- Offer a site map to your users with links that point to the important parts of your site. If the site map is larger than 100 or so links, you may want to break the site map into separate pages.
- Keep the links on a given page to a reasonable number (fewer than 100).
These are big enough reasons for me not to tempt fait again.
You are of course free to do as you like - I merely stated that I would not risk that practise myself. This is only my opinion, I am not stating it as fact.
In a more competitive arena, however, it is often far better to sharpen the PR up on a number of pages at the expense of pages that you know can't be expected to compete well.
A flat linking structure doesn't achieve this.
DerekH
Yes, you could well dominate a minority field like this, because you're essentially spreading your PR pretty much uniformly round the pages so that any page is as equipped as any other page to be a good match for a particular search term.
In a more competitive arena, however, it is often far better to sharpen the PR up on a number of pages at the expense of pages that you know can't be expected to compete well.
A flat linking structure doesn't achieve this.
I have no disagreements with that statement, very true. We believe it is smarter and easier to target 1,000 of non "money terms" than simply 10 phrases google has already identified somewhere as being difficult to rank for (ie "money terms"). Keep in mind it is completely feasible and plausible to develop a list of 1,000 different combinations of phrases for your top ten phrases, not everyone types in your topic as simply one word... The trick is to develop a list that is still on topic for all your weaker phrases, this is a much much stronger strategy (and predictable results-wise) than going after the top ten terms for your particular industry. In this regard a flat link structure is essential. Its like hunting with a sniper scope and a single bullet, or shotgun full of buckshot, guess its your choice which weapon to pick and what your hunting... (if you follow my metaphor)
I find a lot of people ask a question in the search box, and with a bit of time and effort your can gather some very effective phrases.
As for site maps my biggest concern would be the users rather than the search engines. But then I like to believe if you do something for the right reasons then the search engines will recognise that, but that’s not always the case going by some stories.
But then I like to believe if you do something for the right reasons then the search engines will recognise that, but that’s not always the case going by some stories.
Wake up people we are talking about machines and algorhytms, not benevolant gods, or angelic wishes.. These are cold dead emotionaless, scripts that cannot read human ethics or prayers. Simply know the system, know what does and does not work, and follow the results.
It looks incredibly tacky to have hundreds of text links at the footer of every page linking internally. When I find a site like that I say "goodbye."
They have keyword rich anchor text.
Some pages have several hundred links (all on topic)
I will report back on the outcome
Some pages have several hundred links (all on topic)
I dont recommend that, there is a fine line between what google (and..yes..end users) considers a relevant amount of inter-links and blatant spam.
