Comments on: Sculpting PageRank using rel=”nofollow” for Link Architecture http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/ I'm one of those SEO dudes that doesn't spam and I'm into Social Media, basically I'm a web geek. Wed, 20 Aug 2008 07:18:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: John Illnes http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-15717 John Illnes Thu, 10 Apr 2008 08:05:24 +0000 http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-15717 The official claim is that links with the rel=nofollow attribute do not influence the search engine rankings of the target page. In addition to Google, Yahoo and MSN also support the rel=nofollow attribute. i think it helps indexing.... The official claim is that links with the rel=nofollow attribute do not influence the search engine rankings of the target page. In addition to Google, Yahoo and MSN also support the rel=nofollow attribute.

i think it helps indexing….

]]> By: Dave http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-15638 Dave Sun, 30 Mar 2008 20:28:24 +0000 http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-15638 Matt was very clear about the usage of the nofollow a while ago : quote : The nofollow attribute is just a mechanism that gives webmasters the ability to modify PageRank flow at link-level granularity. There's no stigma to using nofollow, even on your own internal links; for Google, nofollow'ed links are dropped out of our link graph; we don't even use such links for discovery. http://www.seomoz.org/blog/questions-answers-with-googles-spam-guru Dave Matt was very clear about the usage of the nofollow a while ago :

quote : The nofollow attribute is just a mechanism that gives webmasters the ability to modify PageRank flow at link-level granularity.
There’s no stigma to using nofollow, even on your own internal links; for Google, nofollow’ed links are dropped out of our link graph; we don’t even use such links for discovery.

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/questions-answers-with-googles-spam-guru

Dave

]]> By: Rao S. Thotakura http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-14590 Rao S. Thotakura Fri, 07 Mar 2008 17:29:56 +0000 http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-14590 I agree that low ranked pages should not be served as a result of search operation. I'm wondering if the attribute value "nofollow" a W3C approved link type. If not, how is Google using it to determine what result page is relevant and what is not? I agree that low ranked pages should not be served as a result of search operation. I’m wondering if the attribute value “nofollow” a W3C approved link type. If not, how is Google using it to determine what result page is relevant and what is not?

]]> By: Jonathan Dingman http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-14588 Jonathan Dingman Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:54:56 +0000 http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-14588 Tony, I've actually brought this up to current Google and ex-Google (Xooglers) employees about usage of nofollow on the google.com domain. The basic response was "pagerank flow control" -- which goes completely against their guidelines. The guidelines have been published for quite a while now. But I'm still wondering why they haven't updated them because nofollow doesn't do a darn thing for a human. Nofollow does not matter for anyone but robots, which is not how "we're supposed to design a website" Just a bit frustrating that Google says one thing, then does another. Iamshimone, I wasn't referring to cloaking nearly as much, but mostly the first part of the statement. <strong>Make pages for users, not for search engines.</strong> That's the part we should be looking at, I feel. Tony,

I’ve actually brought this up to current Google and ex-Google (Xooglers) employees about usage of nofollow on the google.com domain. The basic response was “pagerank flow control” — which goes completely against their guidelines.

The guidelines have been published for quite a while now. But I’m still wondering why they haven’t updated them because nofollow doesn’t do a darn thing for a human. Nofollow does not matter for anyone but robots, which is not how “we’re supposed to design a website”

Just a bit frustrating that Google says one thing, then does another.

Iamshimone,

I wasn’t referring to cloaking nearly as much, but mostly the first part of the statement.

Make pages for users, not for search engines.

That’s the part we should be looking at, I feel.

]]> By: iamshimone http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-14557 iamshimone Thu, 06 Mar 2008 23:36:19 +0000 http://tonyadam.com/blog/using-relnofollow-within-your-internal-link-architecture/#comment-14557 I agree with Tony. rel=nofollow is not cloaking as both the user and search engine see the same 1 page. Cloaking is when you actually create and deliver 2 separate pages. One for the search engine and one for the user. What I'm not certain about is the purpose of hiding useless pages from search engines using nofollow. The purpose of a search engine is to return relevant results. I can't remember the last time (if any) that I ran a search and the results returned sitemap, contact, and help pages. I agree with Tony. rel=nofollow is not cloaking as both the user and search engine see the same 1 page. Cloaking is when you actually create and deliver 2 separate pages. One for the search engine and one for the user.

What I’m not certain about is the purpose of hiding useless pages from search engines using nofollow. The purpose of a search engine is to return relevant results. I can’t remember the last time (if any) that I ran a search and the results returned sitemap, contact, and help pages.

]]>