Spammy link for each keyword
-
Some people believe that having a link for each keyword and a page of content for each keyword (300+ words) can help ranking for those keywords. However, the old approach of having "restaurant New York", "restaurant Buffalo", "restaurant Newark" approach has become seen as a terrible SEO practice. I don't know whether this was because it's spammy or because people usually combined it with thin content that was 95% duplicate.
Which brings us to;
Why does such a major company have the following on the site (see the footer);
- Aberdeen Takeaway
- Birmingham Takeaway
- Brighton Takeaway
- Bristol Takeaway
- Cambridge Takeaway
- Canterbury Takeaway
- Cardiff Takeaway
- Coventry Takeaway
- Edinburgh Takeaway
- Glasgow Takeaway
- Leeds Takeaway
- Leicester Takeaway
- Liverpool Takeaway
- London Takeaway
- Manchester Takeaway
- Newcastle Takeaway
- Nottingham Takeaway
- Sheffield Takeaway
- Southampton Takeaway
- York Takeaway
- Indian Takeaway
- Chinese Takeaway
- Thai Takeaway
- Italian Takeaway
- Cantonese Takeaway
- Pizza Delivery
- Sushi Takeaway
- Kebab Takeaway
- Fish and Chips
- Sandwiches
Do they know something I don't?
[unnecessary links removed by staff]
-
I meant it still reads the link as "Newcastle" rather than "Scrap Car Newcastle" (i.e. it doesn't inherit information from the parent list-item - i.e. Scrap Car) but the point about the actual landing page being optimised for "scrap car Newcastle" being enough is a good one and seems to be the best approach.
-
Where have you heard it can not?? Google can read all the code on the site including simple code like this, it's mainly heavy javascript or heavy flash they struggle to read, but they are getting really clever at reading parts of that now
-
Yeah... which is why I wanted to know why a major brand like Hungryhouse thought it was okay. The answer is "they're wrong" I guess.
-
as per my previous reply above, its too many exact anchor links which is causing the over optmimzation problem... remember these are site wide links, so every page has this anchor text, so again if there is 1000 pages then thats 1000 internal exact anchors causing you to get hit by google latest over optimization penalty (AKA PENGUIN)
-
I would be very carefull the mis-use of no follow can land you in trouble... looking at your screen shot talking about the menu, the word scrap cars is repeated over and over which there is no need, remove the scrap car from the menu, BUT keep on the landing page title as scrap my car in bolton (and then optimize your phrases in the meta tags) then this would be better, why not have Scrap Car Locations instead of Location
You are falling into the trap of over using internal anchors, as if there is 1000 pages, thats 1000 internal exact anchors saying scrap car bolton etc
same applies if you do within the footer site wide links as per hungry house, they just need to change it like justeat.co.uk have it, then hey presto ALL GOOD AGAIN (provided external links are not also over used
-
Do you know about "Penguin" link overoptimization problems?
-
I agree it does look like a schoolboy error... but do you think you'd avoid overoptimisation if they only use this style of footer on the homepage. Just taking the homepage on its own, they've used the word "takeaway" 54 times for (amusingly) 3% keyword density.
Hungryhouse don't appear to be ranking anywhere near as much as their budget (TV adverts, newspaper, etc.) so I'd imagine they've probably been penalised somehow.
-
That's indeed the right question
-
Yes, that's the question! Similar problem on a client site.
I'm optimising the menu system for a scrap car recycling company. Unless I stick in a nofollow, the anchor text in each link in this navbar will be the "description" Google takes for the page. I'm trying to optimise each of the location pages so I might not need to do this.
-
So, here's the question..... Is the big list of anchor text links in the original post on this page dangerous for hungryhouse?
-
Having a landing page for each area is good for as long as it serves a purposes for users who are looking for something in that area, look at this company http://www.just-eat.co.uk/ they are flying with all their results at the top of the engines for all their takeaway town keyphrases... look at the difference between the two sites, espcially at the footer they have less links and no exact anchors used, they just mention the big towns without the keyphrases before it... this is biggest school boy error hungry house has done... and by having exact anchors in the footer like this will result with too many internal exact anchors, causing you to hit over optimization area!
TUT! TUT!
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
-
Keyword Stuffing and Product Reviews
Hello Fellow Mozzers! I am pretty new the SEO world and have been tasked with improving our companies SEO with no prior knowledge of anything to do with SEO as of about 5 months ago. So far, I have been fairly successful (May be luck). There is a product page on our website that has moved from Rank 8-9 all the way up to Rank 3, on a high volume keyword, which increased our traffic to that URL by 500%! I was very proud of this accomplishment until tragedy struck... We suddenly dropped to Rank 6. It doesn't look like we've lost any Backlinks to this URL. My suspicion is that we got penalized for Keyword Stuffing since we recently changed from have multiple pages for a specific product's reviews to having them all on one page (To decrease the number of URLs our Site has). Many of these product reviews have the Keyword in them making us have over 30 of this specific keyword on our page. Could this be a valid suspicion? Should we go back to having different URLs for reviews and Disallow them for Robots?
On-Page Optimization | | LaceyVapeWild0 -
Link flow for multiple links to same URL
Hi there,
On-Page Optimization | | doctecs
my question is as follows: How does Google handle link flow if two links in a given page point to the same URL? (do they flow link individually or not?) This seems to be a newbie question, but actually it seems that there is little evidence and even also little consensus in the SEO community about this detail. Answers should include source Information about the current state of art at Google is preferable The question is not about anchor text, general best practises for linking, "PageRank is dead" etc. We do know that the "historical" PageRank was implemented (a long time ago) without special handling for multiple links, as e.g. last stated by Matt Cutts in this video: http://searchengineland.com/googles-matt-cutts-one-page-two-links-page-counted-first-link-192718 On the other hand, many people from the SEO community say that only the first link counts. But so far I could not find any data to back this up, which is quite surprising.0 -
Search Console shows structure keywords more significant over content keywords. What is wrong?
Search Console shows non content related - website structure keywords as:
On-Page Optimization | | Yaz-
"categories, account, facebook,..." as top significant keywords. And after those comes the website's content keywords.
These words come from the header as I can notice. Am I repeating the content keywords less? Is there a way to adjust this? I am sure this affects my Adsense targeting.
What am I doing wrong? Any suggestions?0 -
Too many page links warning... but each link has canonical back to main page? Is my page OK?
The Moz crawl warns me many of my pages have too many links, like this page http://www.webjobz.com/jobs/industry/Accounting ...... has 269 links but many of the links are like this /jobs/jobtitles/Accounting?k=&w=3&hiddenLocationID=463170&depth=2 and are used to refine search criteria.... when you click on those links they all have a canonical link back to http://www.webjobz.com/jobs/industry/Accounting Is my page being punished for this? Do I have to put "no follow" tags on every link I do not want the bots to follow and if I do so is Roger (moz bot) not going to count this as a link?
On-Page Optimization | | Webjobz0 -
Internal and Link Juice Analysis - Too Many Links Error
Howdy! I have an analysis question related to internal links/link juice. Here is the general link set up of our site: 1. All Site Pages (Including Home Page): We have drop down "mega" menus in the header of everypage linking to various sub-categories on the site. So, because of this, in our header, we have a few hundred links to various pages on our site and these show up on every page of the site. 2. Product Pages: Header pages as mentioned above, but on top of that, we list out the keywords for that particular product and each keyword is linked back to our search results pages for that particular keyword. In General Moz is telling us we are having between 200-300 links on each product page. Currently, our Search Results pages are ranking higher and showing up in search more than our actual product pages. So, based on the above info, here are some thoughts: 1. Should we ajax in the Header links so that they aren't showing up for the search engines? Or, should we ajax them in only on all pages that are not the Home Page? 2. Should we get rid of the keyword links back to the Search Results pages that are on the product pages? What effect would these changes "actually" have? Does this just improve crawling? Or are there other positive results that would come of changes like these? We have hundreds of thousands of products, so if we were to make changes like these, could we experience negative results? Thanks for your help! Craig
On-Page Optimization | | TheCraig0 -
Why I am ranking for irrelevant keywords
My website is e-commerce and used to rank for all industry related keywords like buy widgets, cheap widgets, online widgets in top10. And suddenly my website was hacked and to resolve this hacking issue i have re-write all my dynamic urls into static pages after that new pages are indexed and ranking well. But after few months i have notice few changes in keywords ranking going down. But suddenly after Google Algo (EMD/Panda) update on Sept 27 i lost all my positions. And then according to Google guidelines i have worked on over optimization and low quality pages. I have removed all tones of low quality pages from SERP and simultaneously worked on url re-write. But i have notice small percent of changes in keyword positions like when Google Algo (EMD/Panda) is rolled out i lost my keyword positions from 1st page to 200 page and after working on over optimization and low quality pages the keywords are came back to 100 pages. Recently i have notice that my web pages ranking for irrelevant keywords. For example, let's say i used to rank for home page for these keywords; buy widgets, cheap widgets, online widgets but now am ranking for different inner pages say (guide pages). Can any one suggest me whats wrong..
On-Page Optimization | | BipSum0 -
Can Your Site Get Penalized For Keyword Stuffing On An 'Untarged' Keyword?
My site has dropped since the EMD/Panda 20 roll out and I am looking for reasons why. I am looking at Keyword Stuffing as one potential problem. My web site is on the topic of WordPress Security with that being the main keyword I want to target. Now I can limit the number of occurrences of 'wordpress security' to below the recommended 15, but it is impossible to do this for 'wordpress' without severely compromising the user experience. I've got other content on topics such as WordPress Backup and WordPress Security Plugins etc, so obviously the word 'wordpress' is bound to appear frequently. Is there a risk that Google will penalize me for Keyword Stuffing on 'wordpress' and thus pull down the site or page for other keywords? Or would it simply mean I won't be able to rank for 'wordpress' (which I am quite happy about)? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | andersvin0 -
Internal Links - more the merrier?
I have just recently spoken to an SEO consultant who is pushing the opinion that more internal links would be better for me. They are particularly focused oin aligning a large number of content articles that I have developed over the years, and getting more keyword focus, and more links (inpage within site) onto these pages. I have to agree on a certain level that maybe this large base of unique content is unedr utilised. What is the general opinon, more internal links are better?
On-Page Optimization | | Jurnii0