Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Using Nofollow Tag On Your Own Internal Links?
Posted 25 September 2005 - 07:11 AM
Can you use nofollow as you've laid it out? Certainly.
However at some point it gets down to splitting hairs to the point that it's counter-productive. Not so much as the search engines are concerned, but in how much time and effort you're having to devote to something that will have little, if any bearing.
Posted 25 September 2005 - 07:29 AM
Thanks for the welcome. Point well taken and if it required alot of time and effort I would certainly agree. But how much time can it take to add
rel="nofollow" to a handful of links on your home page? maybe 5 minutes? If it was a long and arduous task I would certainly agree wholeheartedly.
And I agree that you might not get much of a boost from this tactic, but every little bit helps!
Posted 25 September 2005 - 07:32 AM
No biggie for a single page or a handful of pages. Not worth the effort if you're talking about having to edit 100's or 1,000's of pages.
Just my personal opinion of course.
Posted 25 September 2005 - 08:37 AM
Yeah some people have a way of making nonsense sound sensible.
Posted 25 September 2005 - 09:33 AM
You mean some people is "Google"?
Posted 25 September 2005 - 10:52 AM
I rather doubt that's who Jill was referring to in this case.
Posted 25 September 2005 - 01:59 PM
Is Google doing it so they won't bleed PR? I can't imagine why they'd care about that.
A number of people view the campaign to get people to use nofollow as an example of the search engines passing the buck. They can't tell a valuable link from one that's garbage, so their results get skewed by garbage links. Their response to that is to ask webmasters to take care of the problem.
But that has nothing to do with PR, which doesn't mean much of anything anyway these days. If you want to add nofollow to your own internal links, feel free, but it's not really going to help you. The pages you're cutting off from the flow are linking back to the home page, right? If you're causing the links to them not to count, then the links from them are going to be worth less. It's a zero-sum game.
Posted 25 September 2005 - 02:10 PM
My bet is on the latter, but feel free to test that theory and see how it works for you!
Posted 25 September 2005 - 02:39 PM
Posted 25 September 2005 - 02:53 PM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 03:37 AM
Second, If you look at some of the links that Google has in the Katrina relief page using the NOFOLLOW tag, I find it hard to believe that Google does not "trust" some of those sites including goverment sites and bushclinton relief fund. So that theory that using the NOFOLLOW tag imparts 'mistrust" of a site doesn't hold water ...with me anyhow.
Third, maybe it's is my newness and not having been around long enough to see Googles evil side, but I find it hard to believe that Google would penalize you for something that they endorse. They say that a link using the nofollow tag will not get any credit. That does not mean it will be penalized.
Fourth, I understand that the NOFOLOW tag is fairly (april 2005)new and was originally ceated by Google to thwart off Bolg spam, but it is quite obvious that its use has been extended and accepted by Google. And please I mean no disrespect to anyone in here, but being the former US Marine that I am, I call them like I see them, and it is also quite obvious to me anyhow, by reading the feedback on this thread that few knew of its extended use and acceptability. Sometimes new concepts take awhile to catch on especially when it comes to Google and people can be paranoid to try something new for fear of a drop in rank. Sorry for the long post.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 03:59 AM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 04:26 AM
You have to remember that Google, like any SE, automates its spidering of the web; in general, it does not send people to sites to determine whether a site is trustworthy (e.g., Google "likes" a site) -- though I quite imagine that they have a rather large seed core of sites deemed trustworthy (CNN, Adobe, etc.). Otherwise, it's almost all done automatically or, more specifically, programmatically. In more plain terms: no search engine has enough staff to monitor billions of websites, let alone pages.
On another note, I was pretty active in the WordPress forums at the time that nofollow was introduced. It was hailed by most everyone there as the great solution to comment spam. Anyone who, like me, ventured a word of caution about its actual implementation and interpretation by the SEs now and in the future was looked upon as pro-spam and maybe even some kind of major spammer (which is pretty funny if you know me, but I digress). There was even an unidentified person posting threatening remarks towards anyone who questioned the intent and viability of nofollow.
At any rate, with all due respect, the folks participating in the WordPress forums are not SEOs; many have only operated a blog, and they don't really understand SEO pretty much at all. In general, they think that PageRank is "how your page ranks".
Think about it: many bloggers link to other sites like crazy, and to friends' sites because that's who they know and like -- which, of course, can be a huge problem for search engines (note how fast Yahoo and MSN.com leaped upon Google's nofollow bandwagon; ever see those three big competitors agree to anything so fast?). What I mean is: did no one ever consider that perhaps the SEs, who were touting nofollow to bloggers as the Holy Grail that would end all their blogspam problems, might really want bloggers to participate in inhibiting their own ability to boost each other's search engine rankings?
No matter. My concern has always been what the use of nofollow communicated about the page it was on, let alone the whole site. At the very least, it communicates that "this link is junk" or even "I have no idea what I'm linking to; I don't know and I don't care". Or even: "I don't monitor comments on my blog, and the people who comment here are untrustworthy". Indeed.
Bottom line: however nofollow is interpreted by SEs today (and we have no guarantee that they all interpret it the same way), that could always change. It was pretty masterful the way they spun it, though.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 04:44 AM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 04:48 AM
In any case, I reserve the right to change topics at any time, as I am unfortunately wont to do. LOL
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users