Do Nofollows still work for Sculpting?
-
Before answering this, let me explain my goals. I know that Google made a change a couple years ago that discounts the amount of Page Rank passed to dofollow links when there is a nofollow link present on the page.
My goal is to keep the most page rank possible on my home page and pass a specified amount of Page Rank to 7 out of 10 of the pages linked to from my home page. I realize that creating 3 of the outgoing links as no follow links is not going to increase the Page Rank being sent to the other 7 pages.
My question is will my home page be able to retain the Page Rank that would have been used by the three nofollow links or is that Page Rank value just lost when I implement a nofollow?
-
Even then though, why would you want to use a nofollow if every nofollow decreases your page rank value? Even if you are using it in a forum context or for an ad it looks like this would still kill your Page Rank. Would it be better to wrap the links you don't want to pass Page Rank to in an iframe or java script?
-
I agree. I don't use nofollow.
There are a few valid reasons to use it.. on paid ad links, on forums to discourage spammers, and linking to sites that you don't trust or want to support with pagerank flow.
-
Hmm, if the Page Rank dies completely why would any one use a no follow? It seems as if everyone would never want to use a no follow again.
-
The latest from Matt Cutts is not to use No Follow on internal links (which is how it was used for sculpting) but to only use it on external links you don't necessarily trust / want PR flowing to.
-
According to the most recent word that I have read from Google, when you nofollow a link the pagerank that should have flowed into it dies.
So, if you want to preserve the pagerank of your site you should link to those three pages only where necessary and have links on those pages that will allow pagerank to flow back into other pages of your website.
Today the best way to conserve pagerank is to avoid linking to unimportant pages as much as possible - and when you link to them be sure that they link out to important pages.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Link to webdesign bureau in footer on follow or nofollow
As we are growing fast, more and more websites go online. When they do, we always put a link in the footer which says: ‘Webdesign by Conversal’. But this is creating a substantial amount of backlinks to our root domain with the same anchors. Recently, we’ve moved our websites to different servers to spread the risk of a server crashing. I think Google now sees the backlinks through different IP’s as artificial, not natural, while Semrush and Moz are giving us a toxic score. What is your advice on this? Will we need a ‘no-follow’ attribute to each link on every website? Or could we better write a small case article for each client, where we can link to in the footer?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | conversal0 -
Does Google take notice of nofollow links?
Does Google take any notice of nofollow links, they seem to count for something but don't know how much.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman10
Any experience?1 -
Client has moved to secured https webpages but non secured http pages are still being indexed in Google. Is this an issue
We are currently working with a client that relaunched their website two months ago to have hypertext transfer protocol secure pages (https) across their entire site architecture. The problem is that their non secure (http) pages are still accessible and being indexed in Google. Here are our concerns: 1. Are co-existing non secure and secure webpages (http and https) considered duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VanguardCommunications
2. If these pages are duplicate content should we use 301 redirects or rel canonicals?
3. If we go with rel canonicals, is it okay for a non secure page to have rel canonical to the secure version? Thanks for the advice.0 -
Nofollow links & nofollow blog comments - Should I remove
Hello, One of my website has quite a lot (~1000) nofollow blog comment links. Is it worth getting them removed if they are nofollow, could they be dragging the metric of my website down. Does anyone have any experience of this? The site only has about 5 follow links, something seems to be dragging the domain metrics down. Thanks Rob
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tomfifteen0 -
Google isn't seeing the content but it is still indexing the webpage
When I fetch my website page using GWT this is what I receive. HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jacobfy
X-Pantheon-Styx-Hostname: styx1560bba9.chios.panth.io
server: nginx
content-type: text/html
location: https://www.inscopix.com/
x-pantheon-endpoint: 4ac0249e-9a7a-4fd6-81fc-a7170812c4d6
Cache-Control: public, max-age=86400
Content-Length: 0
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:29:38 GMT
X-Varnish: 2640682369 2640432361
Age: 326
Via: 1.1 varnish
Connection: keep-alive What I used to get is this: HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:00:24 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.23 (Amazon)
X-Powered-By: PHP/5.3.18
Expires: Sun, 19 Nov 1978 05:00:00 GMT
Last-Modified: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:00:24 +0000
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate, post-check=0, pre-check=0
ETag: "1365696024"
Content-Language: en
Link: ; rel="canonical",; rel="shortlink"
X-Generator: Drupal 7 (http://drupal.org)
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:og="http://ogp.me/ns#"
xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
xmlns:sioc="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#"
xmlns:sioct="http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#"
xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"> <title>Inscopix | In vivo rodent brain imaging</title>0 -
Link exchanges of specific blogs work if relevant?
Hello, I've always wondered if I have a tech blog and wrote about "why Droid phones are better than Iphones", i would need more links pointed to my specific blog. Doing so, i find another blog that's reputable with high domain authority that talks about the SAME blog/subject. Is it wise and good for SEO if i contact the blogger and have each other reference each other's blog with the anchor text link as the brand name in our respective blogs? It's a typical link exchange, but this is more niche. Would this help my efforts? And would Google accept our good faith linking to a great article vice versa. Thanks, Shawn
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Shawn1240 -
Site Interlinking - footer and menu - whether to nofollow/remove
Hello, We've got a bunch of interlinking going on between the following sites: nlpca(dot)com thewealthymind(dot)com shop.nlpca(dot)com dynamicspinrelease(dot)com These are all owned and operated by the same people. Some linking is in the footer and some is in the menu or header. Could you take a look and tell me which interlinks you'd recommend nofollowing and which you'd recommend deleting entirely? We can always place a home page single link to replace those sitewides we delete or nofollow. I'm thinking we should delete everything in the footers and nofollow those in the menu or headers, placing a single dofollow link on the home page when deleting/nofollowing a sitewide link.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0 -
Old pages still crawled by SE returning 404s. Better to put 301 or block with robots.txt ?
Hello guys, A client of ours has thousand of pages returning 404 visibile on googl webmaster tools. These are all old pages which don't exist anymore but Google keeps on detecting them. These pages belong to sections of the site which don't exist anymore. They are not linked externally and didn't provide much value even when they existed What do u suggest us to do: (a) do nothing (b) redirect all these URL/folders to the homepage through a 301 (c) block these pages through the robots.txt. Are we inappropriately using part of the crawling budget set by Search Engines by not doing anything ? thx
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | H-FARM0