Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Using Nofollow Tag On Your Own Internal Links?
Posted 26 September 2005 - 06:38 AM
But using it on your own site isn't going to help you with anything either. That's what I meant about the nonesense comment.
If there are pages on your site that you don't want/need indexed, that's fine, then simply use robots.txt and exclude them. But there's ZERO need to exclude them because you're concerned with PageRank issues. If they're not important pages, simply bury them deeper in the site, or whatever.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 09:31 AM
That is a good summation of how PageRank is earned from incoming links (but understand that this is not the only way you get PageRank -- a document's damping factor also contributes PageRank).
That is not necessarily true. Google takes many other factors into consideration, and people have no way of knowing how much PageRank affects any particular search result.
One document can rank highly for many searches and poorly for many others. Its PageRank is usually irrelevant to the rankings because Google looks first at relevance.
REL=NOFOLLOW is useful for limiting where you cast your PageRank votes. In fact, that is precisely what it was designed to do. But some unscrupulous people have been using REL=NOFOLLOW on all their outbound links.
What they don't understand, and what you should understand, is that if Google finds no outbound links distributing PageRank on a document, it evenly distributes that document's PageRank to ALL other documents.
There is no way to NOT confer PageRank.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 09:56 AM
There is no way to NOT confer PageRank.
Why are you linking to sites you wouldn't recommend? Why would you send site vistors to a site that you wouldn't vote for?
If you want to link to pages you don't trust, use nofollow. The engines have never said they wouldn't count those links, only that they would recognize that you don't trust them. Matt Cutts in March said at that time, they would not follow a nofollow link, but that they reserved the right to change how they treated nofollow links at any time. Yahoo said they weren't sure how they were going to treat them, only that they recognized the attribute as a vote of no confidence.
If you can't stand the idea of recommending and voting for other sites, you really shouldn't bother to link out at all.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:15 AM
Business is war, make no doubt about it, and if there are things that I can do to give myself an edge, (even the small edge that it might be) and it is legal and ethical, then by all means I would want to utilize every weapon at my disposal.
I would never link to another site and use the nofollow. You are all 100% correct in that if you didn't trust the site why include it.
Sure there are other ways to accomplish the same thing. Nofollow just happens to be a very easy method. I am not familiar with jump links.
If Google changed their view of nofollow then javascipted links would suffice. Remember "keep it simple stupid"...well nofollow follows that advice!
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:19 AM
As to this:
I personally couldn't disagree more with that statement. But that's a personal opinion, of course. I think the worst thing any business can do is have the attitude that business is war and that their competitors are their enemies.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:32 AM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:35 AM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 10:48 AM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:38 AM
The piece of the picture that you're missing, among other things, is that the pages you link to also pass PageRank and reputation back to the home page and other pages.
Rather than trying to hide your contact pages from search engines, you can actually use them to support your other important pages, with links. If you're just dying to "funnel PageRank" the best way to do that is by adding links, not hiding them.
I won't even get started on how many people will use the "search site" function in their search toolbar.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:40 AM
You are in no way giving yourself any kind of competitive edge by using REL=NOFOLLOW on your own documents.
Those internal pages help Google, Yahoo!, and other search engines identify the most important parts of your Web site. They are natural content. They ARE important and you should treat them as important.
But that is all I think I need or will say on the subject today.
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:44 AM
Until this post I start see the word of "abuse", I agree use vs. abuse worth to discuss, but should be in an other thread?
I think it is upon who you asked. Google put hurricane resource page without viewed content?
I think Google tried to stay away an other "Official Google Bomb" or super PR boost. Since hurricane resource page receive link from Google home page (PR10),
hurricane resource page will become PR9 soon and pass high PR over all link on pages, nofollow will block the PR transfer/leak.
for similar case check following links
only diff is this time The home page of total of 36 plus google English sites PR leak.
My 2.0 cents
Posted 26 September 2005 - 11:47 AM
Posted 26 September 2005 - 12:51 PM
And if you have lots of other "natural content" pages and continually add pages they should clearly make up for any lost PR potential for blocking a few contact pages.
I keep waiting for the argument that will change my mind on using nofollow..LOL...so far no dice...but this has been interesting!
Posted 26 September 2005 - 02:03 PM
You won't find one because the bottom line is that it won't make one bit of difference to your site whether you use it or not. So just use it if it will make you feel like you're somehow being proactive!
Posted 26 September 2005 - 02:17 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users