Internal and external links and the rel="nofollow" attribute

[kgun]

1. Background.

It is by now fairly well know that webmasters shall put the rel="nofollow" attribute on links that they do not want to pass pagerank to like sold links. (Link brokerage is still an industry).

2. rel="nofollow" on all external links.

Why not handle all links the same and put rel="nofollow" on all? Or alternatively, only follow stable semantic external links. That is, you divide the external links in two subsets.

• One that you regard as stable and semantic and are followed. Example: Central bank websites.
• One that you are more uncertain about and that are nofollowed.

3. rel="nofollow" on some internal or intra site / mininet links. Follow all semantic intra navigation links.

Is that an other possibility? In other words, you only pass pagerankt to internal semantic links, since those are the only links under your control.

4. Conclusion.

How will Google especially and other search engines generally treat the following link model.

1. All external links carry the rel="nofollow" attribute.
2. Only intra site / mininet links are followed.

Alternative link model:

1. All external links exept a stable semantic subset carry the rel="nofollow" attribute.
2. Only intra site / mininet links are followed.

Related WPW thread: http://www.webproworld.com/search-en...tml#post403724

Related information:

<cite>
Question: I have reported sites that clearly have paid links (e.g. the backlink page says "Advertising" above the link), but Google does not seem to take action. Why would that be the case? These are .orgs who are clearly selling their .org juice.

Google’s Answer: While paid links and spam reports are being taken very seriously by Google, the results may not be seen immediately for users or even not at all. This does not mean no action is being taken on the offending sites. Also, the TLD of the sites should not be a factor being taken into account. For this reason reporting both, web spam and PageRank passing link selling makes sense and contributes in an important way to the quality of Google's index.

Translation, partly based on .gov/.edu response: Google treats all top level domains the same, so a .org would have no more juice than a .com or .info. Further, clearly marked paid links (ones on pages labeled “Advertising”) are not necessarily violations of Google’s guidelines. If the links you reported were found to be nofollow links, then no action would be necessary. But keep trying to sabotage the competition. Business is war.

Question: Is it true that the fewer the links FROM your website, the more influence they have on the sites receiving those links?

Google’s Answer: PageRank is split up over the links from a page, but I would recommend not concentrating on this (as you won't be able to "measure" and act upon it anyway) and instead making your site as usable as possible for your visitors.

Translation: Yes, the more you link the more the link juice passed on is diluted, but don’t go trying to figure out the formula in order to game the system. We’ll figure you out. We’re Google.
</cite>
Source: Google answers some tricky questions.

[chandrika]

We’ll figure you out. We’re Google.

If only Google had added the line..."Resistance is futile".... they may have got a part in the next star trek movie!

[kgun]

Yes, and

Business is war.

and I am kgun

Use Google translate to translate my site DigitalStart, hvor du starter ditt søk eller din surfing på nettet. (note the footer of that site) and read how Norwegian government are improving web security by introducing MinID, that IMO is a more secure model than OpenID.

If online security is done correctly, it can be more secure than traditional offline security.

Related thread: http://www.webproworld.com/internet-...tml#post407777

My next buy is a new laptop with no connection to the internet

[Dubbya]

If only Google had added the line..."Resistance is futile"

[newsblaze]

If all outgoing links had rel="nofollow" that would destroy the value of links in google's algorithm.
If you set all your outgoing links to nofollow, then why would anyone ever trade links with you, unless they were your friends, wanting to help you, but not wanting any help back. (as far as google search is concerned)
If all outgoing links, on all websites were set to nofollow, the PageRank system would disappear.

[kgun]

If all outgoing links had rel="nofollow" that would destroy the value of links in google's algorithm.

You think that the anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine still constitute the heart of the SE.

If you set all your outgoing links to nofollow, then why would anyone ever trade links with you, unless they were your friends, wanting to help you, but not wanting any help back. (as far as google search is concerned)

Did you read the posts in the links behind my first post?

If all outgoing links, on all websites were set to nofollow, the PageRank system would disappear.

Would you miss it?

To fully understand my post you have to thoroughly read at least this http://www.webproworld.com/search-en...tml#post403724 thread.

[SemAdvance]

<cite>
Question: I have reported sites that clearly have paid links (e.g. the backlink page says "Advertising" above the link), but Google does not seem to take action. Why would that be the case? These are .orgs who are clearly selling their .org juice.

Actually it would be impossible for an algorithm to determine the intent of the link seller so therefore impossible to regulate algorithmically.

Text Link As is still a PR6 last I checked and Google has known for a while they sell links. (they were a 6 but are now a 7)

I personally never use the attribute and notice no change in PR or ranking results.

So much for falling in line with what a silly SE wants....

;->

Remember Google is the worlds largest purveyor of propaganda man has ever known....the US Government could take a lesson from Google, and they spew a ton themselves.....

[kgun]

Actually it would be impossible for an algorithm to determine the intent of the link seller so therefore impossible to regulate algorithmically.

That has always been my point, too.

Remember Google is the worlds largest purveyor of propaganda man has ever known....the US Government could take a lesson from Google, and they spew a ton themselves.....

I have personally upgraded Yahoo my first favourite SE. I prefer to be earnest, not consciously being evil.

[Terry Van Horne]

Question: I have reported sites that clearly have paid links (e.g. the backlink page says "Advertising" above the link), but Google does not seem to take action. Why would that be the case? These are .orgs who are clearly selling their .org juice.

Clearly? Why because they charge membership fees and label ads so users know that they are not written by the org? Trying to determine others intent is unfair. Also look at the FCC decisions regarding labeling ads around results and pages with results. That stuff has to be labelled as advertising unless the ORG writes it. I believe Matt has mentioned the FCC decisions as one of the reasons paid blogging is a problem. So it may be that the Ad label is a positive not a negative.

[jawn_tech]

They (Google) say that Yahoo now supposedly joined in the borg collective to adhere to nofollow.

Yet, when doing a Yahoo backlink search, the results still show links to a site that come from a nofollow link.

Without knowing Yahoo's algorithmic nature of crawling, indexing and ranking very well, it brings up the question of exactly HOW google and others follow the nofollow rule. Clearly in Yahoo's case, a nofollow could merely diminsish the ranking value, but not stop the flow of spidering and indexing.

My question is, does Google adhere to nofollow the same way? Because they rubberstamped Yahoo as being one of the SE's that "supports the initiative". And by saying that, they're essentially saying that whatever Yahoo's method is, it's fulfilling their purpose of nofollow.