Hi - newbie here! Please be patient with me.
I use iframe menus on all my pages of my websites so I can quickly add new pages without having to update the menus on every page. I have a sitemap page on each site for human and inhuman visitors as well as an XML one.
I received an ipad for Christmas, and noticed that the fly out items on the menus were very hard to click on an ipad, so to solve the issue I've started putting a full list of pages at the bottom of each page so that humans can see all the content on the site, and can easily navigate to them.
My question is, would Google see this as an overuse of internal linking? If so it would be unfair, as I'm trying to make it easier for the site visitors, not robots! But then, Google isn't fair!
Any opinions?
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE!

www.CustomReportSharing.com
From the folks who brought you High Rankings!
More SEO Content
International SEM | Social Media | Search Friendly Design | SEO | Paid Search / PPC | Seminars | Forum Threads | Q&A | Copywriting | Keyword Research | Web Analytics / Conversions | Blogging | Dynamic Sites | Linking | SEO Services | Site Architecture | Search Engine Spam | Wrap-ups | Business Issues | HRA Questions | Online Courses
Navigation
Started by
trishH
, Mar 15 2012 08:37 AM
5 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 15 March 2012 - 08:37 AM
#2
Posted 15 March 2012 - 08:53 AM
My question is, would Google see this as an overuse of internal linking?
No. You're entitled to link to your pages as much and anywhere you want to within your own site. It's not a concern for Google. They likely just ignore any duplicate links anyway.
#3
Posted 15 March 2012 - 01:58 PM
Mmmm navigation in Iframes.
Be careful, it's my understanding that an Iframe is retrieved and stored as a separate standalone file and it's contents are not stored as part of the Page that calls it up.
Be careful, it's my understanding that an Iframe is retrieved and stored as a separate standalone file and it's contents are not stored as part of the Page that calls it up.
#4
Posted 15 March 2012 - 05:37 PM
Well, I wonder if the real problem with iframes is that Bing won't necessarily crawl them the way Google does.
And while some people concluded that my test in December showed that Google was passing PageRank through the iFrame SRC element, that test wasn't structured to provide that kind of granular data. Someone else ran a test looking for PageRank flow through iFrames (I forget who) after my test but that's still only one example.
People should be careful about assigning or assuming much value flows to or from iFramed pages that don't participate in the normal link structure -- at least until more case studies have been shared.
And while some people concluded that my test in December showed that Google was passing PageRank through the iFrame SRC element, that test wasn't structured to provide that kind of granular data. Someone else ran a test looking for PageRank flow through iFrames (I forget who) after my test but that's still only one example.
People should be careful about assigning or assuming much value flows to or from iFramed pages that don't participate in the normal link structure -- at least until more case studies have been shared.
#5
Posted 21 March 2012 - 11:19 AM
The way I see it, the crawls are more efficient, as everything is already networked like a site-map. Thru linking this way adds benefit to the on page SEO
If Jill is right, which is more probable than my theory, then you're fine.
If my theory is valid, then it's beneficial to have the site-map like concept.
Either way, you won't lose!
Disclaimer: I'm not an expert
If Jill is right, which is more probable than my theory, then you're fine.
If my theory is valid, then it's beneficial to have the site-map like concept.
Either way, you won't lose!
Disclaimer: I'm not an expert
#6
Posted 21 March 2012 - 12:45 PM
Duplicate links doesn't make the crawling more efficient. Why would it?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users








