16 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
16 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Nofollow/Dofollow? Please explain somebody

by Charlotte Jay
13 replies
  • SEO
    • |
I'm getting a little confused when it comes to these links. Someone care to explain them properly?
#explain #nofollow or dofollow
  • Profile picture of the author CaesarSEO
    No Follow - doesn't give any value. Search engines will consider them as regular text. Not effective.
    Do Follow - is normal valuable backlink. Effective.


    In terms of traffic source, no follow are still valuable.
    In terms of seo, no follow are pretty much useless.

    But there are people who believe that no-follow links still give value to SEO, and I'm one of the people who do believe so.

    Isac
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229237].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author arttse
      Isac

      You realise you've contradicted yourself?

      Originally Posted by ca3s4r View Post

      No Follow - doesn't give any value. Search engines will consider them as regular text. Not effective.
      Do Follow - is normal valuable backlink. Effective.


      In terms of traffic source, no follow are still valuable.
      In terms of seo, no follow are pretty much useless.

      But there are people who believe that no-follow links still give value to SEO, and I'm one of the people who do believe so.

      Isac
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229366].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author CaesarSEO
        Originally Posted by arttse View Post

        Isac

        You realise you've contradicted yourself?
        Yes I do. hehe

        The upper part is the description of the no-follow links considered in general, also officially by google, wiki etc....

        The last part is the description of the no-follow links as my own opinion.
        Signature
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229374].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
          Banned
          Originally Posted by ca3s4r View Post

          The upper part is the description of the no-follow links considered in general, also officially by google, wiki etc....
          It really isn't, Isac. Wiki, possibly (I've never looked because I set no store at all by their opinion of such a controversial and contested issue) but Google doesn't say that anywhere: not on their site, not in their blog, not in Matt Cutts' blog, not in their "webmaster tools" information, etc. etc.

          And absolutely none of the SEO books I've ever read takes anything even close to that view.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229387].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author CaesarSEO
            Originally Posted by Alexa Smith View Post

            It really isn't, Isac. Wiki, possibly (I've never looked because I set no store at all by their opinion of such a controversial and contested issue) but Google doesn't say that anywhere: not on their site, not in their blog, not in Matt Cutts' blog, not in their "webmaster tools" information, etc. etc.

            And absolutely none of the SEO books I've ever read takes anything even close to that view.
            I think it's Matt Cutts who said that, read it many times Alexa, can't point you to a direct source though.
            Signature
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229532].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author arttse
      Isac

      The contradiction relates to these 2 comments written by you.

      Originally Posted by ca3s4r View Post


      In terms of seo, no follow are pretty much useless.

      But there are people who believe that no-follow links still give value to SEO, and I'm one of the people who do believe so.

      Isac
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3264897].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author 247Copywriter
    http://www.warriorforum.com/search.php?searchid=7131541
    Signature
    --->----->----->----->-----> MarkAndrews IMCopywriting <-----<-----<-----<-----<---
    http://www.IMCopywriting.com
    Mark@IMCopywriting.com
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229249].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Charlotte Jay
    Nice explanation Isac. Thanks for helping out the dummy
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229253].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Alexa Smith
      Banned
      No-follow and do-follow backlinks give different value to different marketers, according to their pre-existing beliefs on the subject.

      I have the Firefox add-on which displays, with a right-click, which links on any web-page are no-follow and do-follow, but I stopped using it over a year ago, because I get the same value from either.

      In my opinion, the theory that "no-follow links are of no value" is totally mistaken.

      This view has been confirmed, for me, by reading (among other things) the textbook "SEO For Dummies", wherein the subject's explained in great detail.

      One very popular and very widespread view among people involved professionally in the SEO business (though also unproven, I think, and just a "belief") is that no-follow links count exactly the same as do-follow links other than not passing on any value through the page-rank of the page on which they appear. My own belief, from my own experience and from the opinions of the few people whom I most trust and rely on for such subjects, is that "no-follow links" are actually worth more than this theory would appear to suggest.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229306].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author EliteIM
    No Follow link was actually first started by the Google Anti-Spam team. They were trying to develop a mechanism against spammy links generated by webmasters to boost rankings like mass blog comment postings etc.

    There is actually a good description of the same at Wikipedia. To summarize, Google neither considers it in its ranking algorithm, or indexes the page linked via the no followed anchor text.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229314].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author MikeFriedman
      Originally Posted by EliteIM View Post

      No Follow link was actually first started by the Google Anti-Spam team. They were trying to develop a mechanism against spammy links generated by webmasters to boost rankings like mass blog comment postings etc.

      There is actually a good description of the same at Wikipedia. To summarize, Google neither considers it in its ranking algorithm, or indexes the page linked via the no followed anchor text.

      Consider the source.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229476].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author paulgl
        Nofollow does not pas PR or anchor text. That's it.

        Whatever else one wants extrapolate from a nofollow link is
        purely speculation. I for one speculate that nofollow can be a valuable
        SEO tool, in the long run, and short term, twitter being a case in
        point. It can lead to targeted traffic, targeted traffic can lead to
        link bait, authority, etc.

        You do have the people who think nofollow does nothing. Not true.
        It has nothing to do with crawling or indexing. In fact, nofollow is
        a misnomer.

        People who are hung up on avoiding nofollow are the first ones to
        want to spam useless places assuming google likes those links
        better, just because they don't have the nofollow attribute.
        Insanity, as not having a nofollow link does mean the link will
        ever count for shinola.

        Get real links, on real sites, that have real traffic, no matter what.

        Paul
        Signature

        If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229507].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author faceblogger
    nofollow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Signature

    no sig

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[3229327].message }}

Trending Topics