eHow links in Google Webmaster Tools

[chrisv1963]

Although eHow links to references are hidden with a javascript, Google seems to detect them.

The list of links to my site in WMT shows
1029 links from eHow.com
1001 links from eHow.co.uk

The question is: Do these links have any value?

How about Wordpress links? WMT lists 852 Wordpress links.
Do these have any value? Many Wordpress pages copied content from my site (entire pages) and then link back to me. If I file DMCAs and get the pages removed, I lose my links too.

[Robert Charlton]

Can't comment on whether these links give you any value, but I think that, if they do, it's a lot less than a straight href link.

With regard to their appearing in Webmaster Tools, Google also detects and reports on nofollowed links, but those reports are for informational purposes only.

See this thread (among others) for earlier discussion....

rel=nofollow links are showing up in WebmasterTools - Why?
http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/3897453.htm [webmasterworld.com]

[netmeg]

FWIW I have a client who sells a product to which someone linked in a particular eHow article, and it has been our highest converting referrer for the past two years.

So you might not get SEO juice from it, but check and see if you're getting any traffic.

[Content_ed]

WMT has always shown NOFOLLOWED links of different varieties.

[bhartzer]

It's always been my belief that if the link can be clicked on or visited by a human then there's a chance that Google will count it or give it some sort of weight.

I'm definitely seeing certain links from sites with nofollows be worth something--so if a nofollow link can "count" for something, then why can't a javascript link count?

[FranticFish]

Can you give an example of the Javascript? I've checked a number of eHow.com pages and all their 'Resources' links look like standard a=href links, just 'nofollowed'.

[chrisv1963]

Can you give an example of the Javascript? I've checked a number of eHow.com pages and all their 'Resources' links look like standard a=href links, just 'nofollowed'.

You are right, they changed it back to nofollow. When and why did they do this?

With the amount of information they "borrow" from other sites it should be dofollow.

[Robert Charlton]

You are right, they changed it back to nofollow. When and why did they do this?

Perhaps, with the scrutiny they've gotten, they got word that the javascript arrangement looked like it was trying to game Google, as opposed to the nofollow attribute, which is only trying to game sources of the material they rewrite.

This particular policy, of not giving linking credit to sources, bugs me more than anything else about what they're doing.