I heard that for better PR of the homepage the site needs to be structured like this :
the homepage links to all pages, and every single page links to the homepage.
the homepage links to second level pages and they links to third level pages, and every single page links to only one upper level page.
my questions is :
1. is it right ?
2. if site designed that every page links to all pages (with sidebar etc.), is it smart to make all extraneous links rel=nofollow ?
Not really - PageRank (PR) is a
factor of incoming links. What you
have described above is more of a PR
distribution recommendation.
rel=nofollow for PR sculpting has
been debunked, by Google, as a
wasted practice. You should only use
nofollow on links that you can't
vouch for. This normally means not
no-following your own internal
links.
If you want to increase the PR of your homepage, the only REAL way of doing this is by getting backlinks to that page. from other sites.
This is vaguely right in theory. In my long practice of doing SEO, I almost came up with this rule of thumb: "to get good Page Rank (say what you will about it not mattering) you have to worry less about SEO and more about making your business as good as it can be. If that happens, the high-quality links and higher page rank will come.
Regarding the no-follow tag - it is 95% obsolete. I would not focus on it. Only google ever paid attention to it, and they have their own internal metrics which decide whether a link should be followed or not.
You should cross-link your pages, but not excessively, and try to make your site look natural to the search engines.
Related
I have a site with an input text.
User types the name of a city, hits enter and it's linked there.
my sitemap.xml looks like this:
<urlset>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/rome.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/london.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/newyork.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/paris.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/berlin.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/toronto.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/milan.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/edinburgh.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/nice.html</loc></url>
<url><loc>http://www.example.com/boston.html</loc></url>
...
</urlset>
My question is:
Will I be penalized (from a SEO point of view) because my links only appear on the sitemap.xml instead as in a list of anchors in the html page.
Note: the anchor approach was excluded because I have about 5,000 listed cities
It won't be penalised. Google themselves say the primary purpose of a sitemap is "a way to tell Google about pages on your site we might not otherwise discover."
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/156184?hl=en
You are rare in that you are using the sitemap correctly to help Google find your pages.
Often SEOs just add one for the sake of it, rather than taking the time to identify and using it to fix potential crawling errors.
The only negative aspect for SEO I can think of is that page rank will not flow between your pages if there is no direct link.
No, you will not be penalized. The sole purpose of sitemaps is to tell search engines where to find your content. That content may or may not be available through hyperlinks on your website.
Should one apply rel="nofollow" attribute to site links that are bound for secure/login required pages?
We have a URI date based link structure where the previous year's news content is free, while the current year, and any year prior to the last, are paid, login required content.
The net effect is that when doing a search for our company name in google, what comes up first is Contact, About, Login, etc., standard non-login required content. That's fine, but ideally we have our free content, the pages we want to promote, shown first in the search engine results.
Toward this end, the link structure now generates rel="follow" for the free content we want to promote, and rel="nofollow" for all paid content and Contact, About, Login, etc. screens that we want at the bottom of the SEO search result ladder.
I have yet to deploy the new linking scheme for fear of, you know, blowing up the site SEO-wise ;-) It's not in great shape to begin with, despite our decent ranking, but I don't want us to disappear either.
Anyway, words of wisdom appreciated.
Thanks
nofollow
I think Emil Vikström is wrong about nofollow. You can use the rel value nofollow for internal links. The microformats spec and the HTML5 spec don't say the opposite.
Google even gives such an example:
Crawl prioritization: Search engine robots can't sign in or register as a member on your forum, so there's no reason to invite Googlebot to follow "register here" or "sign in" links. Using nofollow on these links enables Googlebot to crawl other pages you'd prefer to see in Google's index. However, a solid information architecture — intuitive navigation, user- and search-engine-friendly URLs, and so on — is likely to be a far more productive use of resources than focusing on crawl prioritization via nofollowed links.
This does apply to your use case. So you could nofollow the links to your login page. Note however, if you also meta-noindex them, people that search for "YourSiteName login" probably won't get the desired page in their search results, then.
follow
There is no rel value "follow". It's not defined in the HTML5 spec nor in the HTML5 Link Type extensions. It isn't even mentioned in http://microformats.org/wiki/existing-rel-values at all. A link without the rel value nofollow is automatically a "follow link".
You can't overwrite a meta-nofollow for certain links (the two nofollow values even have a different semantic).
Your case
I'd use nofollow for all links to restricted/paid content. I wouldn't nofollow the links to the informational pages about the site (About, Contact, Login), because they are useful, people might search especially for them, and they give information about your site, while all the content pages give information about the various topics.
Nofollow is only for external links, it does not apply to links within your own domain. Search engines will try to give the most relevant content for the query asked, and they generally actively avoid taking the website owners wishes into account. Thus, nofollow will not help you here.
What you really want to do is make the news content the best choice for a search on your company name. A user searching for your company name may do this for two reasons: They want your homepage (the first page) or they more specifically want to know more about your company. This means that your homepage as well as "About", "Contact", etc, are generally actually what the user is looking for and the search engines will show them at the top of their results pages.
If you don't want this you must make those pages useless for one wanting to know more about your company. This may sound really silly. To make your "About" and "Contact" pages useless to one searching for your company you should remove your company name from those pages, as well as any information about what your company does. Put that info on the news pages instead and the search engines may start to rank the news higher.
Another option is to not let the search engine index those other pages at all by adding them to a robots.txt file.
I'm working on improving the site for the SEO purposes and hit an interesting issue. The site, among other things, includes a large directory of individual items (it doesn't really matter what these are). Each item has its own details page, which is accessed via
http://www.mysite.com/item.php?id=item_id
or
http://www.mysite.com/item.php/id/title
The directory is large - having about 100,000 items in it. Naturally, on any of the pages only a few items are listed. For example, on the main site homepage, there are links to about 5 or 6 items, from some other page there links to about a dozen different items, etc.
When real users visits the site, they can use search form to find item by keyword or location - so there would be a list produced matching their search criteria. However when, for example, a google crawler visits the site, it won't even attempt to put a text into the keyword search field and submit the form. Thus as far as the bot is concern, after indexing the entire site, it has covered only a few dozen items at best. Naturally, I want it to index each individual item separately. What are my options here?
One thing I considered is to check the user agent and IP ranges and if the requestor is a bot (as best I can say), then add a div to the end of the most relevant page with links to each individual item. Yes, this would be a huge page to load - and I'm not sure how google bot would react to this.
Any other things I can do? What are best practices here?
Thanks in advance.
One thing I considered is to check the user agent and IP ranges and if
the requestor is a bot (as best I can say), then add a div to the end
of the most relevant page with links to each individual item. Yes,
this would be a huge page to load - and I'm not sure how google bot
would react to this.
That would be a very bad thing to do. Serving up different content to the search engines specifically for their benefit is called cloaking and is a great way to get your site banned. Don't even consider it.
Whenever a webmaster is concerned about getting their pages indexed having an XML sitemap is an easy way to ensure the search engines are aware of your site's content. They're very easy to create and update, too, if your site is database driven. The XML file does not have to be static so you can dynamically produce it whenever the search engines request it (Google, Yahoo, and Bing all support XML sitemaps). You can find out mroe about XML sitemaps at sitemaps.org.
If you want to make your content available to search engines and want to benefit from semantic markup (i.e. HTML) you should also make sure your all of content can be reached through hyperlinks (in other words not through form submissions or JavaScript). The reason for this is twofold:
The anchor text in the links to your items will contain the keywords you want to rank well for. This is one of the more heavily weighted ranking factors.
Links count as "votes", especially to Google. Links from external websites, especially related websites, are what you'll hear people recommend the most and for good reason. They're valuable to have. But internal links carry weight, too, and can be a great way to prop up your internal item pages.
(Bonus) Google has PageRank which used to be a huge part of their ranking algorithm but plays only a small part now. But it still has value and links "pass" PageRank to each page they link to increasing the PageRank of that page. When you have as many pages as you do that's a lot of potential PageRank to pass around. If you built your site well you could probably get your home page to a PageRank of 6 just from internal linking alone.
Having an HTML sitemap that somehow links to all of your products is a great way to ensure that search engines, and users, can easily find all of your products. It is also recommended that you structure your site so more important pages are closer to the root of your website (home page) and then as you branch out gets to sub pages (categories) and then to specific items. This gives search engines an idea of what pages are important and helps them organize them (which helps them rank them). It also helps them follow those links from top to bottom and find all of your content.
Each item has its own details page, which is accessed via
http://www.mysite.com/item.php?id=item_id
or
http://www.mysite.com/item.php/id/title
This is also bad for SEO. When you can pull up the same page using two different URLs you have duplicate content on your website. Google is on a crusade to increase the quality of their index and they consider duplicate content to be low quality. Their infamous Panda Algorithm is partially out to find and penalize sites with low quality content. Considering how many products you have it is only a matter of time before you are penalized for this. Fortunately the solution is easy. You just need to specify a canonical URL for your product pages. I recommend the second format as it is more search engine friendly.
Read my answer to an SEO question at the Pro Webmaster's site for even more information on SEO.
I would suggest for starters having an xml sitemap. Generate a list of all your pages, and submit this to Google via webmaster tools. It wouldn't hurt having a "friendly" sitemap either - linked to from the front page, which lists all these pages, preferably by category, too.
If you're concerned with SEO, then having links to your pages is hugely important. Google could see your page and think "wow, awesome!" and give you lots of authority -- this authority (some like to call it link juice" is then passed down to pages that are linked from it. You ought to make a hierarchy of files, more important ones closer to the top and/or making it wide instead of deep.
Also, showing different stuff to the Google crawler than the "normal" visitor can be harmful in some cases, if Google thinks you're trying to con it.
Sorry -- A little bias on Google here - but the other engines are similar.
i have build an e-commerce site, and I'm slowly looking into SEO. My question is simple, should i nofollow pages like "terms and conditions", "deliveryterms", "contact page". The reason I'm asking, is that my Terms and Conditions are ALOT alike the other sites out there, and i think it would be 80% duplicate content - furthermore these sites are not relevant (in my opinion) compared to my product pages.
On my site i also have some DIY-guides, which i won't nofollow, since it's original content and very relevant to my site. So I'm only talking about pages like the above mentioned.
Should i or should i not nofollow pages like this (only pages with very limited unique content)? What are the pros and cons of doing one or the other?
Matt Cutts (Search/Quality group in Google) does not recommend Page Rank Sculpting (includes use of no-follow) in general, but he does say
There may be a miniscule number of pages (such as links to a shopping cart or to a login page) that I might add nofollow on, just because those pages are different for every user and they aren’t that helpful to show up in search engines.
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/
No. Nofollow is to block spam and abuse. If you block pages that you know aren't spam, like you own internal pages, you are abusing nofollow and breaking the Internet. Or, more importantly to you, you are harming your own SEO efforts. By using nofollow to your own pages you are sending PageRank to those pages anyway but since those pages essentially doesn't exist that PageRank is lost. Addironally, internally links count as votes just like incoming links from other sites do and the anchor text from internal links also help with SEO. By blocking those pages any links on those pages can't help you rank better.
Do not use nofollow on internal links. Also, do not use nofollow on external links that you control.
a friend of mine told me that the company he works at are redoing their SEO for their large website. Large == both number of pages and traffic they get a day.
Currently they have a (quote) deeply nested site , which i'm assuming means /x/y/z/a/b/c.. or something. I also know it's very unRESTful from some of the pages i've also seen -> eg. foo.blah?a=1&b=2&c=3......z=24 (yep, lots of crap in the url).
So updating their SEO sounds like a much needed thing.
But, they are going flat. I mean -> totally flat. eg. /foo-bar-pew-pew-abc-article1
This scares the bollox out of me.
From what he said (if i understood him right), each - character doesn't mean a new heirachial level.
so /foo-bar-pew-pew-abc-article1 does not mean /foo/bar/pew/pew/abc/article1
A space could be replace by a -. A + represents a space, but only if the two words are suppose to be one word (whatever that means). ie. Jean-Luke will be jean+luke but if i had a subject like 'hello world, that would be listed ashello-world`.
Excuse me while i blow my head up.
Is this just mean or is it totally silly to go completly flat. To mean, I was under the impression that when SEO people say keep it as flat as possible, they are trying to say keep it to 1 or 2 levels. 4 is the utter max=.
Is this me or is a flat heirachy a 'really really good thing' for seo ... for MEDIUM and LARGE sites (lots of resources, not necessairly lots of hits/page views).
Well, let's take a step back and look at what SEO is supposed to accomplish; it's meant to help a search engine identify quality, relevant content for users based on key phrases and terms.
Take, for example, the following blog URLs:
* http://blog.example.com/articles/2010/01/20/how-to-improve-seo/
* http://blog.example.com/how-to-improve-seo/
Yes, one is deep and the other is flat; but the URL structure is important for two reasons:
URL terms and phrases are high-value targets for determining relevance of a page by a search engine
A confusing URL may immediately force a user to skip your link in the search results
Let's face it: Google and other search engines can associate even the worst URLs with relevant content.
Take, for example, a search for "sears kenmore white refrigerator" in Google: http://www.google.com/search?q=sears+kenmore+white+refrigerator&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a.
Notice the top hit? The URL is http://www.sears.com/shc/s/p_10153_12605_04665802000P , and yet Google replaces the lousy URL with www.sears.com › Refrigerators › Top Freezers. (Granted, 2 results down is the true URL.)
If your goal for SEO is optimized organic relevance, then I would wholeheartedly recommend generating either key/value pairs in the URL, like www.sears.com/category/refrigerators/company/kenmore (meh), or phrase-like URLs like www.sears.com/kenmore/refrigerators/modelNumber. You want to align your URLs with the user's search terms and phrases to maximize your effort.
In the end, if you offer valuable content and you structure your content and site properly, the search engines will accurately gather it. You just need to help them realize how specific and authoritative your content is. :)
Generally the less navigation to reach content the better. But with a logical breadcrumb strategy and well thought out deep linking the excess of directory depth can be managed and not hurt seo and the visibility in search.
Remember that Google is trying to return the most relevant link and the best user experience, so if your site has 3 urls coming up for the same search term and it take 2 or 3 exits to find the appropriate content, Google will read that as bad and start lowering all of your urls in SERPs.
You have to consider how visitors will find your content - not navigate it. Think content discovery and just navigation.
HTH
Flat or deeply nested really shouldn't affect the SEO. The key part is how those individual pages are linked to will determine how they get ranked. I did write some basic stuff on this years ago see here, but essentially if pages are not buried deeply within a site, i.e. it takes several clicks (or links from Google's perspective) then they should rank fairly much the same in either case. Google used to put a lot more weight on keywords in URL's but this has been scaled back in more recent algorithm changes. It helps to have keywords there, but its no longer the be-all and end-all.
What you/they will need to consider are the following two important points:
1) How will the URL structure be perceived by the users of the site? Will they they be able to easily navigate the site and not have to rely on the URL structure in the address bar?
2) In making navigational changes such as this its vitally important to set-up redirects from old url's. Google, hates 404's and they should either put in 410 (Gone) HTTP responses for pages are no longer valid or 301 HTTP response for permanent redirects (with new url).
In making any large changes such as this you can save loads of time getting the site indexed successfully by utilising XML sitemaps and Google's webmaster console.