Comments on: The PageRank control myth and the nofollow-for-SEO myth http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/ Algorithm analysis, Web community relationship analysis, SEO practices and techniques, industry news, etc. Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:48:35 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: seo http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-1038 seo Sun, 06 Jul 2008 11:51:50 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-1038 I would agree and it isn't something we do on our website or any of our clients, and yes PageRank really isn't that of an important factor but so many poeple do I would agree and it isn’t something we do on our website or any of our clients, and yes PageRank really isn’t that of an important factor but so many poeple do

]]> By: Michael Martinez http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-1037 Michael Martinez Sat, 05 Jul 2008 18:34:03 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-1037 Using "rel='nofollow'" on your internal links as you propose remains a very bad idea. No one in the SEO community is able to execute it well enough to have any positive effect on their PageRank (which is not critical to search engine results ranking success). The <a href="http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=96569" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Google Webmaster Guidelines on NoFollow</a> offer absolutely no justification for shooting yourself in the foot by nofollowing important internal pages or trying to sculpt PageRank. Googlers have repeatedly come out on record over the past few months advising people NOT to try this. Using “rel=’nofollow’” on your internal links as you propose remains a very bad idea. No one in the SEO community is able to execute it well enough to have any positive effect on their PageRank (which is not critical to search engine results ranking success). The Google Webmaster Guidelines on NoFollow offer absolutely no justification for shooting yourself in the foot by nofollowing important internal pages or trying to sculpt PageRank.

Googlers have repeatedly come out on record over the past few months advising people NOT to try this.

]]> By: seo http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-1032 seo Fri, 04 Jul 2008 22:17:26 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-1032 I really used to be against the no follow if you think your webpage is not important then why have it there in the first place? But after reading Google webmaster guidelines my option has changed and it will affect your PageRank according to Google, also if it’s a paid link it should have a no follow. I know things have changed since this article was written. I really used to be against the no follow if you think your webpage is not important then why have it there in the first place?

But after reading Google webmaster guidelines my option has changed and it will affect your PageRank according to Google, also if it’s a paid link it should have a no follow.
I know things have changed since this article was written.

]]> By: Michael Martinez http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-379 Michael Martinez Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:11:41 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-379 <strong>brill</strong>: "I’m working on a site that has 2 global navigations… I was going to nofollow the left nav and have the dhtml top menu be the focus for google. I don’t want to duplicate the links but the website owner feels the left nav helps with usability. Would this be an instance where it (nofollow) would be applicable?" <strong>Michael</strong>: If Google sees two links to the same destination on one page, it should treat them as if they are one link. So using <em>nofollow</em> won't preserve any PageRank and doing what the client wants is not going to hurt him. I can only think of one type of page I would use <em>nofollow</em> on, and that is only because Matt Cutts pointed out problems that can be caused in a post on his blog well over a year ago. If you have a calendar application that contains hundreds or thousands of empty pages, while it might seem like a good idea to let search engines crawl and index those virtual pages, it would probably cause more trouble than it's worth. I don't use <em>nofollow</em> on internal links. There is no search optimization benefit for doing so despite all the sham advice being given out to the contrary. People have proposed the use of <em>nofollow</em> as a solution for problems that are created by poor internal linkage. Screwing up your internal linkage even more isn't going to fix it. brill: “I’m working on a site that has 2 global navigations… I was going to nofollow the left nav and have the dhtml top menu be the focus for google. I don’t want to duplicate the links but the website owner feels the left nav helps with usability. Would this be an instance where it (nofollow) would be applicable?”

Michael: If Google sees two links to the same destination on one page, it should treat them as if they are one link. So using nofollow won’t preserve any PageRank and doing what the client wants is not going to hurt him.

I can only think of one type of page I would use nofollow on, and that is only because Matt Cutts pointed out problems that can be caused in a post on his blog well over a year ago. If you have a calendar application that contains hundreds or thousands of empty pages, while it might seem like a good idea to let search engines crawl and index those virtual pages, it would probably cause more trouble than it’s worth.

I don’t use nofollow on internal links. There is no search optimization benefit for doing so despite all the sham advice being given out to the contrary. People have proposed the use of nofollow as a solution for problems that are created by poor internal linkage.

Screwing up your internal linkage even more isn’t going to fix it.

]]> By: brill http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-377 brill Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:06:12 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-377 I'm working on a site that has 2 global navigations... I was going to nofollow the left nav and have the dhtml top menu be the focus for google. I don't want to duplicate the links but the website owner feels the left nav helps with usability. Would this be an instance where it (nofollow) would be applicable? I’m working on a site that has 2 global navigations… I was going to nofollow the left nav and have the dhtml top menu be the focus for google. I don’t want to duplicate the links but the website owner feels the left nav helps with usability. Would this be an instance where it (nofollow) would be applicable?

]]> By: Michael Martinez http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-206 Michael Martinez Fri, 07 Sep 2007 06:26:20 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-206 <blockquote>I wonder about the google webmaster control panel, does it show 100% of all links?</blockquote> Googlers say it won't report all links. They also say that it won't show you which links pass value and which links don't pass value.

I wonder about the google webmaster control panel, does it show 100% of all links?

Googlers say it won’t report all links. They also say that it won’t show you which links pass value and which links don’t pass value.

]]> By: Justin-Goldberg http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-203 Justin-Goldberg Fri, 07 Sep 2007 05:13:42 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-203 dodito, as hittail has proven to me, your site was already in line to rank for that term. Every site has it's own keyword stream that it can rank for. Plus noone in the world can see every link, from the public search engine data. I wonder about the google webmaster control panel, does it show 100% of all links? dodito, as hittail has proven to me, your site was already in line to rank for that term. Every site has it’s own keyword stream that it can rank for.

Plus noone in the world can see every link, from the public search engine data. I wonder about the google webmaster control panel, does it show 100% of all links?

]]> By: dodito http://www.seo-theory.com/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/comment-page-1/#comment-190 dodito Wed, 05 Sep 2007 17:10:29 +0000 http://seo-theory.com/wordpress/2007/08/31/the-pagerank-control-myth-and-the-nofollow-for-seo-myth/#comment-190 I have noticed that one of our pages with ONE rel=nofollow link pointed to it, and ONE internal link (from a page that may even still be in "supplemental" whatever that may mean exactly right now) so if not orphan than pretty close to it, ranks in the top 10 for some combination of keywords that are very competitive. It was also not a single topic page (so 30 times the keyword combination on it).. it WAS relevant however to the keyword combination. I am not so sure if pagerank has all that much to do with ranking well (apart from the whole supplemental index issue..) However I do know.. that (unless you know how to be a good spammer) a lot of common sense approaches: who links to you, how, where, and why, etc.. as well as internal linking as well as content.. should get you pretty far. Are the guys that link to you picky or not etc. You know.. I would even take a rel=nofollow link in gratitude. Frankly, we don't even have the time nor the resources to try to "tweek" the results like that (as in rel=nofollow on our own page to "steer pagerank"), or every time invent a new scheme or a new model to adjust to Google. Personally I prefer to add some more value to the site.. and have people notice and link to us.. deep, not deep, their anchor text, or our own anchor text whatever makes them happy, our visitors happy, and our partners happy, will make us happy. In fact it makes life simple.. I see SO many pages (also .edu and .gov) sites since july not being cached anymore by google, that I have a feeling, things have become really tight in the useful link building area, which forces you to "start "at home" first" even more, both from the perspective of having a very solid site, and from the perspective that a solid site would receive some links from pages/people that are really picky and "matter".. More fun.. and.. we just got a link from several university libraries, about.com and some bloggers. I have noticed that one of our pages with ONE rel=nofollow link pointed to it, and ONE internal link (from a page that may even still be in “supplemental” whatever that may mean exactly right now) so if not orphan than pretty close to it, ranks in the top 10 for some combination of keywords that are very competitive. It was also not a single topic page (so 30 times the keyword combination on it).. it WAS relevant however to the keyword combination.

I am not so sure if pagerank has all that much to do with ranking well (apart from the whole supplemental index issue..) However I do know.. that (unless you know how to be a good spammer) a lot of common sense approaches: who links to you, how, where, and why, etc.. as well as internal linking as well as content.. should get you pretty far. Are the guys that link to you picky or not etc. You know.. I would even take a rel=nofollow link in gratitude.

Frankly, we don’t even have the time nor the resources to try to “tweek” the results like that (as in rel=nofollow on our own page to “steer pagerank”), or every time invent a new scheme or a new model to adjust to Google.

Personally I prefer to add some more value to the site.. and have people notice and link to us.. deep, not deep, their anchor text, or our own anchor text whatever makes them happy, our visitors happy, and our partners happy, will make us happy.

In fact it makes life simple.. I see SO many pages (also .edu and .gov) sites since july not being cached anymore by google, that I have a feeling, things have become really tight in the useful link building area, which forces you to “start “at home” first” even more, both from the perspective of having a very solid site, and from the perspective that a solid site would receive some links from pages/people that are really picky and “matter”..

More fun.. and.. we just got a link from several university libraries, about.com and some bloggers.

]]>