Hot answers tagged nofollow
13
No, it will not help. What you're doing is trying to serve up different content to Google then to your users. That's definitely against Google's terms of service and is a great way to get banned.
There's nothing wrong with outbound links. If you don't want a site to get credit for the link to their site if you are concerned it is spam or otherwise low ...
11
No, there's no point in trying to sculpt PageRank this way, as Matt Cutts makes clear in the linked blog post.
The only reasons to put rel="nofollow" on those pages are if they are paying for the links (could get you penalized in search results) or if you don't trust those sites to not be in "bad neighbourhoods" and harm your reputation by linking to them.
6
NO!! Doing this is SEO suicide. Menu links are great way to channel PageRank to your important pages. Using nofollow would essentially keeping PR from those pages and, even worse, throwing away PR as PR is still "sent" to those links. It's just not used when calculating those page's PR. Don't use nofollow on any internal links unless you don't want search ...
6
The only time that it is mandatory to use rel="nofollow" on a link is if the link is sponsored. If somebody paid you for the link, or if the link is part of an exchange, Google might penalize your site for NOT including a rel="nofollow" on it.
You should also apply nofollow to links that are created by your users without review. Otherwise, they have ...
6
<ul>
<li><a href="<?=site_url('terms');?>" rel="nofollow">Terms</a>|</li>
<li><a href="<?=site_url('privacy');?>" rel="nofollow">Privacy</a>|</li>
<li><a href="<?=site_url('disclaimer');?>" rel="nofollow">Disclaimer</a>|</li>
<li><a ...
5
Disqus has a blog post about how using there tool helps, http://blog.disqus.com/post/9956511178/disqus-research-how-comments-drive-traffic.
In the comments, Rob Webb asks the Disqus team about the SEO drawbacks of using Disqus because of the JavaScript not being seen by search spiders. The response from Disqus says that they aren't even sure if there are ...
5
rel=nofollow does not help with SEO. It was created by Google to combat link spam. Links that have that attribute pass no PageRank and do not count as a backlink in any major search engine. Google may acknowledge that it found a link with nofollow but that link will have no value.
Source
How does Google handle nofollowed links?
In general, we don't ...
5
SEO myths get dumber and dumber with time...
The ratio of nofollow and dofollow links is definitely not a factor because:
It is an indication of nothing. Really, how does this ratio indicate anything about the page quality? Or page's relevance? It doesn't.
"Appearing organic" is such a stupid term. Organic is organic. Everything else is not. Search ...
5
I wouldn't bother and you don't need to look any further then this page to see why. Look at the links to the other StackExchange sites in the footer of this page. It's on every page of every site in the network. If something like this was a problem you can be sure StackExchange, who has direct contact with Google about SEO issues, wouldn't do it.
4
Linking out, unless linking to a "bad neighbourhood" (spam, malware etc), will NOT get you penalized.
Only add rel=nofollow to links that you can't vouch for, or that are paid links.
Other than that, there is nothing to worry about.
EDIT - for people who can't accept #1
http://www.dailyblogtips.com/linking-out-google-pagerank/
...
4
The practice of hoarding "link juice" isn't a valid practice anymore. Google got wise to the whole "PageRank sculpting" game and amended their algorithm accordingly. Any PR that would have passed via a given link, were it not nofollowed, is effectively thrown away.
The only likely exception to this is where users are able to post unmoderated links, for ...
3
Should? No.
Why would you nofollow your own links to your own site?
If you don't want the tag pages indexed(different thing), that's your own choice and you can add the directive as a meta tag on the relevant page template, or you can just do it via robots.txt.
Do you have:
a tag cloud somewhere on your site, like a page dedicated to it, or
a giant ...
3
You're actually using the wrong directive. Meta nofollow doesn't do what you think:
Originally, the nofollow attribute appeared in the page-level meta tag, and instructed search engines not to follow (i.e., crawl) any outgoing links on the page.
What you want is the noindex directive:
To entirely prevent a page's contents from being listed in the ...
3
According to Google:
In general, we don't follow them. This means that Google does not
transfer PageRank or anchor text across these links. Essentially,
using nofollow causes us to drop the target links from our overall
graph of the web. However, the target pages may still appear in our
index if other sites link to them without using nofollow, or ...
3
The answer is you should allow links that are trusted to not have the rel no follow tag. There are a couple of reasons:
Your link juice is always divided between all the links on your page including, the links with the rel no follow tag. The link juice just isn't sent to through the links to the external sites with the no follow tags. The point of rel no ...
3
According to Matt Cutts links to quality external sites is part of Google's algorithm.
Not to mention, if every site did this imagine what the state of search engines would be like? Quality of search results would suffer tremendously. Be a good webmaster and help the search engines do a better job.
3
Nofollow doesn't stop Google from crawling pages, it stops any 'link juice' being passed to those pages.
Robots.txt is what you want to prevent google from crawling pages.
http://www.robotstxt.org/robotstxt.html
3
Yes, they will try to post the form. Anyway, the approach you're using could potentially have problems if someone else links to the page. If you don't want a page to be crawled by a responsible bot (like Google/Bing etc) then you should use the robots.txt file to disallow them from crawling it. If you don't have access to robots.txt you can do a similar ...
3
What he is referring to is the HTML markup of the page. The nofollow keyword goes into a rel attribute on a tag, usually an <a> tag with an href like so: <a href="/link" rel="nofollow">link</a>. So he is suggesting that if you don't want search engines parsing through your javascript and looking for links you can do this:
<script ...
3
Matt Cutts recommends against it (and in on other posts/videos as well). Plus Stack Overflow is a very different beast then the average website. I wouldn't say that everything they do is appropriate for all sites. And since he also said linking to external sites can be a positive ranking factor, unless you have a very good reason to do it i would not do this ...
2
All of the major search engines have acknowledged support for rel="nofollow"
From Wikipedia:
While all engines that use the
nofollow value exclude links that use
it from their ranking calculation, the
details about the exact interpretation
of it vary from search engine to
search engine.
Google states that their engine takes
"nofollow" ...
2
Is my juice leaking?
From your last question I think that maybe your ideas might be confused regarding link juice leaking.
According to my understanding of this Matt Cutts' article (that I suggest you to read):
Your link juice leaks out because of any link you place on your page, even if the link uses the rel="nofollow".
The only difference using ...
2
There's no reason not to do both. You could consider requiring an Http-Referer from within your site too - the only bot I've seen which sends referrer headers isn't actually a spider but a distributed attempt to exploit the ASP.Net Viewstate oracle padding vulnerability.
I have one directory which I do this on. The .htaccess for that directory is
...
2
To stop search engines and other robots from requesting certain URLs, you need to disallow those URLs in your robots.txt file.
Adding the rel="nofollow" attribute to links might not actually stop robots from following those links — it just tells search engines that those links should not be considered as endorsements of any kind, e.g. because they ...
2
You can set the rate at which Googlebot crawls your website in Google Webmaster Tools.
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=48620
This is how you should limit Googlebots access not by denying it access. Because noindex pages they will still visit causing hits on your server. Robots.txt disallow may work but be careful you ...
1
Whether it uses AJAX depends on if you are using the Universal Code version, which is a JavaScript snippet, or installing it on some other platform, like a WordPress plugin. If you install it on a platform that runs it on the server then the comments won't be invisible.
Links in comments have "nofollow" added by Disqus.
1
I think it could affect your own rankings.
Lets say you have a blog which is fairly popular and has reasonable page rank, you disable no follow in the comments. Up pop all sorts of the usual spam/malware links, if you start linking to these pages (which you will be without no follow), some of which contain malware, it seems logical that google will punish ...
1
Neither should actually be necessary. The 'extension' at the end of a file or URL is practically meaningless - it gives a hint to the filetype but obviously files can be named anything you like. On the web, the way to specify a file type is in the mime type, given through the Content-type HTTP header. For example, a JPEG image has the mime type image/jpeg.
...
1
Adding that meta tag will prevent search engines from crawling your entire site, so you should avoid that! Adding pages to the sitemap should allow them to be crawled and indexed (since you are not telling search engines to ignore the actual pages). But if you have no links to them on your own site (as search engines see it) then they will not rank well, or ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
