Nofollow tags
-
So on the homepage, should all the links like privacy, contact us, etc...be rel="nofollow" ?
I want to get a better handle on passing as much link juice on homepage to important internal pages as I can, and want to get it right.
Thanks in advance.
-
What about 12 outbound links to external client sites not related to your service.
-
unfortunately, if you can't place a NOINDEX meta tag due to limitations of the CMS then you probably won't be able to place a rel=nofollow either... leaving you with a disallow in your robots.txt.
-
what if you can't place noindex into the html head (limitation of the cms) would a exclude in the robots be enough on its own? (or at least better than nofollow links to the page)
-
simply exclude or 'disallow' the file path in the Robots.txt. Then place NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW meta tag on those pages (in the HTML head before the body). If you have important links on those pages then use the meta tag NOINDEX, FOLLOW. I hope this helps... please ask for clarification if you need.
-
Yes - follow the link in my expanded answer above... the ink points to Matt Cutts original article from February 2009 explaining how/when/why the change was made.
-
"They changed this (I think in 2009) to : If you had 10 links on a page and 5 were nofollowed each link would still only pass on 1 PR point. The remaining 5 points essentially disappear into thin air."
R u 100% sure about this? any sources to back this up?
Thanks
-
You are "over my head" lol.
So for sitewide contact, privacy, etc...what is the best thing to do?
Thanks!
-
Haha! For some reason I didn't see the other post... thought I was the only responder.
Be well!
-
Anthony, I never said I disagree with you. I did not see your answer at first, I must have opened the thread before you posted your answer. reading your answer now yes, we are in agreement.
-
I'm confused about what you are disagreeing with me about... there is the meta NOFOLLOW tag that is placed at the page level and the more granular rel=nofollow attribute at the link level. They are not interchangeable but simply give more macro or micro control over links on a page. If you read my answer carefully you will see that we are in complete agreement over link decay using the rel=nofollow attribute on individual links.
-
No you should not.
When the nofollow tag first came out you could "sculpt" page rank by saying which pages you can pass it on to, this is no longer the case. Google made a change a few years back to stop people from doing this. An example would be:
When nofollow first came out: If you page had 10 links on it, each link would pass on 1 point of page rank (PR). If you nofollowed 5 of these links then each link without the nofollow tag would then pass on 2 points.
They changed this (I think in 2009) to : If you had 10 links on a page and 5 were nofollowed each link would still only pass on 1 PR point. The remaining 5 points essentially disappear into thin air.
So by adding nofollow to internal pages you are wasting your PR, rather let it be passed on to your less important pages which will return a certain amount back to the top level if you linking structure is correct. Only use nofollow for external links which you don't want to pass on PR to e.g. If it could be considered a bad neighbourhood etc. This may not be 100% how it works but the basic concept is correct, there are extensive explanations of this on Matt Cutts blog.
-
First there was the NOFOLLOW meta tag for page-level exclusion and then Google adopted the more granular rel=nofollow attribute for individual links on a page. I find that too many SEOs overuse the rel=nofollow attribute when there is a much more elegant solution available. The reason for this is now myth formerly known as the abused tactic called PageRank sculpting. I had a well-known culture/nightlife site in NYC as a client that had placed literally thousands of rel=nofollow attributes on links throughout the site... granted this does not seem to be your problem but I digress...
To illustrate my point, Matt Cutts discusses how rel=nofollow attributes affect how Google passes PageRank to other parts of your site (or more precisely how nofollows decay the amount of link juice passed). In the case of a few pages or even large directories, etc, I would do the following:
- Disallow crawling of less valuable pages via Robots.txt
- Use the meta exclusion NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW tag at the page level - unless these pages pass valuable link juice/anchor text to other parts of the site then use NOINDEX, FOLLOW (page is not indexed but important links are followed)
- Also, leave these pages out of your XML sitemap(s) - although you may want leave them in the HTML sitemap and place a granular rel=nofollow at link-level in the case of a 404 error page for usability purposes or required privacy statement for landing pages.
Saving your Googlebot crawl budget for only high value pages is a great way to get more of those pages in the Google index providing you with more opportunity to promote your products, services, etc. Also, limiting the number of rel=nofollows used and allowing link juice (or Page Rank) to flow more freely throughout your site will prove beneficial.
-
There was a time I would have said yes. Nowadays its hardly worth the trouble.
However, if its easy to implement, why not? You might get some marginal benefit out of it.
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
-
Is This a Misuse of Structured Data (JSON Recipe Tag on Collection Pages)?
I've noticed that many food blogs use the "recipe" tag to rank collection pages in carousels. For example, for the search term "Zucchini Recipe," Gaumenfreundin is in the first position in the carousel with a page that contains multiple recipes. This makes sense if the user intent is plural (e.g., "recipes") - but in the singular? According to Google's guidelines, the recipe tag is intended for individual recipes. Google even states that it is a misuse if only the ingredients are listed without the steps. So, isn't it against the guidelines to tag a collection page (even additionally) with the recipe tag? This practice is already common in the US market. Is Google aware of this and possibly tolerating it because it sometimes makes sense to present multiple recipes to the user? For example, "Zucchini Recipe" - the user might not yet know exactly what they want to cook with zucchini. Or do you think Google will take action against this practice in the future?
On-Page Optimization | | chueneke0 -
SEO results/title tags/desktop vs. mobile
I am trying to figure out why my title tags comes up different between desktop and mobile search results. Desktop returns my title tag as written, but on mobile I get something completely different. It's related to the site, but not anything I can read, as coded in the site (i.e. not the title tags, meta, or anywhere else). Has anyone else experienced this? My title tag is 64 characters - I know it's a little bit over, but would that cause such a weird issue as a completely different title in the search results?
On-Page Optimization | | tallyhodesign0 -
Does name of town in title tag help if queries don't include the town name?
Hi. Wanted to know if targeting local traffic online and the search volume of KWs in the area do not include the local names (according to KW planner) does it still help to keep the town names in the title tag? does google deliver local results based on location names in title tag if query didn't mention it?
On-Page Optimization | | Morris770 -
Using H3-4 tags in the footer or sidebars: good or not?
Howdy SEOmoz fans! Is it considered a good / bad / neutral practice to include H tags in the footer, as a mean to group a few links? Take http://www.seomoz.org/ for instance: - Voted Best SEO Tool 2010! = H2
On-Page Optimization | | AxialDev
- Looking for SEO consulting? = H3
- Product and Tools = H3 Company = H3 etc. I often see the same principle applied to sidebars. I feel like because they don't contribute to the actual content structure and because they are repeated from page to page, we should avoid them, but I have nothing to back my intuition. [+] Perhaps they are helpful for usability (screen readers) and thin added value (i.e. category names that carry more weight than if they weren't headers). What do you think? Thanks for your time.1 -
How to handle wordpress tags
Hi fellow SEO mozzers, I am getting 'duplicate content' errors when our site is crawled, mainly down to our WordPress blog and how we have handled tags. Currently, they are being crawled and as such are regarded as duplicate pages. I have read several different articles on how to handle tags. Some suggest noindex the tag URL's. Others suggest to optimize them and allow them to be indexed since Google has confirmed they won't penalize a WordPress site for having archive pages that publish and point to the same content. It will select the best link to represent the cluster of links. Over the past few months, nearly 4% of our WordPress traffic have been referred by tag pages listed in search engines. Initially I was going to noindex the tag pages, but going on the above info I wonder should I leave them as they are? Or is the issue that having duplicate content will lead to inefficient crawling? Any views/opinions on how best to handle this?
On-Page Optimization | | efink0 -
Fixing Wordpress Title and Description Tag Placement
I know how important the title and description tag are and I know it is important to have them place at the top of the code. However, when I view the source on a Wordpress template, I see it looks messy. Here is an example of what the source looks like. Is there a plugin or an adjustment to be made so the code is cleaner? To get rid of spaces and blank lines in code. Or should I just not worry about the way the code looks? Notice the first example has a break after the <title>, then after the title there is this</p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><strong><em><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /> </em></strong></p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><strong><em> </em></strong>then the description? Can that be moved?</p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"> </p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><br /></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr" lang="en-US"></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><br /></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span> </span><head profile="http://gmpg.org/xfn/11"></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><br /></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span> </span><title></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><br /></span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span> </span>tite text goes here <span> </span></title> " /> Here there are no breaks after <title>and the <title> is directly above the description</p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"> </p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"></span></p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"> </span><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr" lang="en-US"></span></p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><head profile="http://gmpg.org/xfn/11"></span></p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" /></span></p> <p style="color: #5e5e5e;"><span style="color: #5e5e5e;"><title>tite text goes here</title>
On-Page Optimization | | hfranz0 -
Title tag - shorter = better?
Is it true that the shorter the Title tag is the more powerful the keywords in it are?
On-Page Optimization | | echo1
I know that the main keywords have to be at the beginning of the title but, having more words in your Title could dilute the effectiveness of your main keywords? Ex: Dallas limo service | Private car by SelectLimousine. Could the fact that I have a second part of my title affect the first part by diluting its value? I would like to rank first for Dallas car service but also for Dallas car service and Dallas limousine service. Is this good practice?0 -
How many meta tags are appropriate?
How many meta tags are appropriate? There is a page that ranks above me that has many more than I do. It has (I have removed the content of each to give a description of the type of content): I only use meta tags for keywords and description, robots. Should I have more? Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | scanlin0