Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
I own two sites, one that gets good traffic, and a newer one that's still too young to rank well in Google.
If I placed a link to my new site in my old site's navigation, would Google penalize me for it?
I'm not trying to artificially boost PR, just trying to "advertise" my new site on my old one. But I could understand that Google might see it as spam.
So if I just link from the old to the new, with no backlinks to the old that would create a "ring", would I be jeopardizing my rankings in Google?
Use rel=nofollow and then you'll have no problem.
Other than that link I look for ways to link to related pages. Look at ways to can link from inner pages on one site to the related inner pages on the new site. This gives the new site a boost without looking spammy and it is even helpful to your visitors.
Where people get into trouble, I think, is when they do massive interlinking between sites.
Has anyone seen KW benefit in interlinking sites?
Yes, when it's done in moderation between domains of some substance -- and when there is also a healthy profile of inbound links from domains that are not related.
I work with several businesses that take this approach, and the keyword influence of the anchor text is clear. I've also seen some over-the-top keyword stuffing in the anchor text in some cases. It's obviously done for ranking purposes and that kind of practice looks like it can trip a filter or penalty (as it can within a single domain.)
There are some good reasons for breaking up loosely related content over several domains -- for instance, so the focus for each sub-topic is stronger for the end user, the design and navigation can be better tailored for each purpose, and the maintenance and tracking can be more easily accomplished. And in situations like that, some moderate domain interlinking for the users also makes sense, and does not seem to cause Google troubles.
In these cases, there is no attempt to hide the common ownership of the domains - in fact, it is right out there, not only in the WhoIs info, but also in page footers, "about" pages etc.
In these cases, there is no attempt to hide the common ownership of the domains - in fact, it is right out there, not only in the WhoIs info, but also in page footers, "about" pages etc.
This is the way that I do it. Even if I have a domain with privacy set, Google knows that it's mine because I tell them that it's mine with their webmaster tools.
Sure, they aren't going to count my links from my own sites as being as important as external links, but they will still count for something. And this way, I'm not going to look like I'm trying to hide anything from them.
Google knows that this is the way that most sites are launched. I give some one way links from a couple of my sites. I do not make a huge interlinking network, and I don't link to one site from all my other sites, just a couple of them, in appropriate places.
So it looks like one link between sites of language A and language B per page as a means to translate should be OK then.
Is it a problem if one site links all of it's pages to the home page of the other site?
[edited by: Whitey at 2:05 am (utc) on Oct. 9, 2006]
Is it a problem if one site links all of it's pages to the home page of the other site?
I work with sites that do this and are thriving. They use exactly the same code on every page -- that is, it's part of the template, and not in the body copy.
That said, I have heard from people here that they added this kind of linking to an established and feel it gave them big problems. So I should probably add that the sites I am talking about did it from the day of launch, not as a later addition.
They use exactly the same code on every page -- that is, it's part of the template, and not in the body copy.
Just clarifying ........
What if it's varied linking on every page pointing to to the other sites home page.
e.g.
Blue Widget > Home
Red Widget > Home
That said, I have heard from people here that they added this kind of linking to an established and feel it gave them big problems.
Do you know if they managed to reverse this successfully?
I hate to say it, because of how abused the term has become lately, but it is a matter of trust.
I hold the copyright on the code for a very trusted, authoritative non-commercial site, and there is a link to my personal home page from every page on the site. Those ROS links haven't hurt me. In fact they made a huge difference in the ranking of my personal ramblings.
On the other hand, I did a ROS link from a much less trusted commercial site to another commercial site. It caused a pretty quick loss of focus and reduced rankings. But I still think that it was a good move long term while I build up other links.
Remember, there are a lot of legitimate reasons to have ROS links, and Google knows this. It is also a common spam tactic and google knows this as well.
You decide what you want to do.
< For more discussion about overdoing keywords in anchor
text, see this thread: The Power of Text Navigation [webmasterworld.com] >
