Internal anchor text
-
Hello,
I am wondering how to deal with internal anchor text.
I read here and there that it shouldn't be too optimised but I also read that this is how google understands what my page is aout.
I have breadcrumbs with my main keyword in the anchor text and can't change that it is automatic.
In other words if i have 10 breadcrumb going to my top page with the keyword can I be penalised ?
-
Sorry for the late answer but it really depends.
If your site is about bikes and host news about tour de France and the giro and so on then you may not need to add bike tour for Bordeaux because you're already talking about France bike tour. But you're a traveling company you may have a page about France and Bordeaux respectively, so it may be needed to include those keywords just because the breadcrumb has to be unique, otherwise it may be confusing.
So in most cases I would say that one instance of your money keywords should be fine, usually at the higher levels. Ex:
bike tours - France - bordeaux
home - bike tours France - bordeauxI suppose that everything below a bike tours France will be bike tour related.
but as I told you before there may be exceptions.
I hope I haven't confused you!
-
Does it mean that the breadcrumb
Home > France > Bordeaux bike tour
is better than
Home > Bike tours in France > Bordeaux bike tour
-
Interested this lsigraph, didn't know about it but a great tool to find internal linking ideas and avoid over optimisation.
Thank you,
-
There are places where variation is not only allowed but also recommended, ex. external backlinks, internal links from other pages, etc. You may want to use call to actions or LSI keywords. You can use this tool to find interesting LSI terms: https://lsigraph.com/
about the breadcrumb I would keep it always the same. Breadcrumbs purpose is not for optimizing anchors but to give users a navigational support so if I were you I would always keep them descriptive but never over optimized.
-
Got it for the breadcrumbs and for the links in the contact can I also write "red leather boots" 10 times out of 10 links or is it better to have 8 that say "red leather boots" and the other 2 that says "check those leather boots" and "cool boots".
Thank you,
-
You have to be natural. That is the key. If the page you're linking is about "red leather boots" then the anchor should reflect that. What you have avoid is forcing things.
Example of a good breadcrumb
Home > Shoes > Red Leather BootsNow an over optimized one
Home > Boots > Red > Red Leather BootsYou are repeating words that do not add any value, same things happens with URLs many people repeat their product in the folder then in the URI of the page.
My recommendation would be to keep it optimized but without forcing anything. If you are in doubt if Google will like it or not, think about your users. Will they like this link showing that text or will it be too redundant? there you got the answer
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
-
Can cross domain canonicals help with international SEO when using ccTLDs?
Hello. My question is:** Can cross domain canonicals help with international SEO when using ccTLDs and a gTLD - and the gTLD is much more authoritative to begin with? ** I appreciate this is a very nuanced subject so below is a detailed explanation of my current approach, problem, and proposed solutions I am considering testing. Thanks for the taking the time to read this far! The Current setup Multiple ccTLD such as mysite.com (US), mysite.fr (FR), mysite.de (DE). Each TLD can have multiple languages - indeed each site has content in English as well as the native language. So mysite.fr (defaults to french) and mysite.fr/en-fr is the same page but in English. Mysite.com is an older and more established domain with existing organic traffic. Each language variant of each domain has a sitemap that is individually submitted to Google Search Console and is linked from the of each page. So: mysite.fr/a-propos (about us) links to mysite.com/sitemap.xml that contains URL blocks for every page of the ccTLD that exists in French. Each of these URL blocks contains hreflang info for that content on every ccTLD in every language (en-us, en-fr, de-de, en-de etc) mysite.fr/en-fr/about-us links to mysite.com/en-fr/sitemap.xml that contains URL blocks for every page of the ccTLD that exists in English. Each of these URL blocks contains hreflang info for that content on every ccTLD in every language (en-us, en-fr, de-de, en-de etc). There is more English content on the site as a whole so the English version of the sitemap is always bigger at the moment. Every page on every site has two lists of links in the footer. The first list is of links to every other ccTLD available so a user can easily switch between the French site and the German site if they should want to. Where possible this links directly to the corresponding piece of content on the alternative ccTLD, where it isn’t possible it just links to the homepage. The second list of links is essentially just links to the same piece of content in the other languages available on that domain. Mysite.com has its international targeting in Google Search console set to the US. The problems The biggest problem is that we didn’t consider properly how we would need to start from scratch with each new ccTLD so although each domain has a reasonable amount of content they only receive a tiny proportion of the traffic that mysite.com achieves. Presumably this is because of a standing start with regards to domain authority. The second problem is that, despite hreflang, mysite.com still outranks the other ccTLDs for brand name keywords. I guess this is understandable given the mismatch of DA. This is based on looking at search results via the Google AdWords Ad Preview tool and changing language, location, and domain. Solutions So the first solution is probably the most obvious and that is to move all the ccTLDs into a subfolder structure on the mysite.com site structure and 301 all the old ccTLD links. This isn’t really an ideal solution for a number of reasons, so I’m trying to explore some alternative possible routes to explore that might help the situation. The first thing that came to mind was to use cross-domain canonicals: Essentially this would be creating locale specific subfolders on mysite.com and duplicating the ccTLD sites in there, but using a cross-domain canonical to tell Google to index the ccTLD url instead of the locale-subfolder url. For example: mysite.com/fr-fr has a canonical of mysite.fr
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danatello
mysite.com/fr-fr/a-propos has a canonical of mysite.fr/a-propos Then I would change the links in the mysite.com footer so that they wouldn’t point at the ccTLD URL but at the sub-folder URL so that Google would crawl the content on the stronger domain before indexing the ccTLD domain version of the URL. Is this worth exploring with a test, or am I mad for even considering it? The alternative that came to my mind was to do essentially the same thing but use a 301 to redirect from mysite.com/fr-fr to mysite.fr. My question is around whether either of these suggestions might be worth testing, or am I completely barking up the wrong tree and liable to do more harm than good?0 -
Content Internal Linking ?
Should we internally link new content to old content using anchor tags (keywords) related to pages from all new blogposts or should be keep rotating the blogposts like link from some blog posts & not from others. What ratio should we maintain. Right now i keep 2 links maximum from a 300 words posts or 3 in 500 words posts maximum. But linking from each new blog posts will be good?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | welcomecure0 -
Which automatic redirects to use in International SEO
Hi, I need help with international SEO redirects. I'm going to have intelligencebank.com/au for Australian visitors and intelligencebank.com for the rest of the world. I would like to automatically redirect aus users that land on .com to .com/au and vice versa for non-australian users. 1. Which automatic redirects should I use: a) java script because it will allow US based google bots to crawl my /au website (bots won't read javascript so they won't be redirected) b) http redirects c) 301 redirects d) 302 redirects e) anything else? a) Should I still use rel alternate even though I only use english? b) if I should add rel alternate, can I still keep my existing rel canonical tags that are use to avoid duplicate content (I use a lot of utm codes when advertising)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | intelligencebank0 -
Using a lot of "Read More" Hidden text
My site has a LOT of "read more" and when a user click they will see a lot of text. "read more" is dark blue bold and clear to the user. It is the perfect for the user experience, since right below I have pictures and videos which is what most users want. Question: I expect few users will click "Read more" (however, some users will appreciate chance to read and learn more) and I wonder if search engines may think I am hiding text and this is a risky approach or simply discount the text as having zero value from an SEO perspective? Or, equally important: If the text was NOT hidden with a "Read more" would the text actually carry more SEO value than if it is hidden under a "read more" even though users will NOT read the text anyway? If yes, reason may be: when the text is not hidden, search engines cannot see that users are not reading it and the text carry more weight from an SEO perspective than pages where text is hidden under a "Read more" where users rarely click "read more".
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
Making anchor text look more natural
Hi there, I have recently been approached by a company looking to do some SEO work for them, having had a look at their link profile, they had being using a lot of exact match anchor and have seen a drop in the rankings, no surprise there. I was thinking of asking the website where they have placed these links and changing them, so there is a mixture of exact, phrase, brand etc, what do you think? would this be best practice? or just leave these as they are and start building fresh links? Kind Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Paul780 -
Anchor Text Diversification – Branded VS Non Branded – What is the best approach… if any?
Our organization competes in the Drug & Alcohol Treatment Category… very competitively I must say. While we create content for long-tail keywords, we focus on linking (blogging + Press Release + Acquisition, etc…) as the main strategy to increase relevancy for 4 major keywords. (Alcohol Rehab, Drug Rehab, Alcohol Treatment, and Drug Treatment)… all these terms have their respective landing pages, and we try to provide a good flow of new links coming to these pages on a weekly basis… Lately we have been acquiring more links than we anticipated… not a bad thing since they are from reputable websites… however I am a bit concern regarding the Anchor Text distribution of these links. Example Let’s say I get 100 links to my ‘Alcohol Rehab’ page – what is an appropriate percentage for the anchor text distribution? For example: Branded Links 20 - Keyword: St Jude Retreats
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dhidalgo1
Exact Match Links 70 - Keyword: Alcohol Rehab
Broad Links 10 - Keyword: Rehab Is this an ok distribution, or should I change things around? Hope you guys can help! Thanks!!!!0 -
Undocumented anchor-text API result
Regarding the anchor-text api, there is no definition for *imr on the wiki:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sycorr
http://apiwiki.seomoz.org/w/page/13991127/Anchor Text API ie. http://lsapi.seomoz.com/linkscape/anchor-text/google.com?Scope=phrase_to_page&Cols=2048&Sort=domains_linking_page&Expires=1329770786.46868 returns "[{"apuimr":5.422834471373288e-12},{"apuimr":4.785130890652429e-13},{"apuimr":2.922901387480201e-09}]" What is *imr?0 -
Removed Internal Rel=NoFollows from power internal page - how long till reflected in Google?
I just started with a client, who has an internal page (not the homepage) that gets about 70% of all total links to the site and ranks #1 for a highly competitive keyword. For some reason, the first set of links, including the first anchor text link to the homepage are nofollowed. I removed the nofollows yesterday. Today, The internal page has already been reindexed in Google showing the followed anchor text link to the homepage Should I expect a jump in link juice pointing to my homepage immediately with a corresponding rankings boost? Homepage is #8 for target term. I hope this makes sense. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MattAaron0