Does Google count links on a page or destination URLs?
-
Google advises that sites should have no more than around 100 links per page. I realise there is some flexibility around this which is highlighted in this article:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/questions-answers-with-googles-spam-guru
One of Google's justifications for this guideline is that a page with several hundred links is likely to be less useful to a user.
However, these days web pages are rarely 2 dimensional and usually include CSS drop--down navigation and tabs to different layers so that even though a user may only see 60 or so links, the source code actually contains hundreds of links. I.e., the page is actually very useful to a user.
I think there is a concern amongst SEO's that if there are more than 100ish links on a page search engines may not follow links beyond those which may lead to indexing problems.
This is a long winded way of getting round to my question which is, if there are 200 links in a page but many of these links point to the same page URL (let's say half the links are simply second ocurrences of other links on the page), will Google count 200 links on the page or 100?
-
Mark, did these responses answer your question?
-
Google will only count the first instance of the link as Barry has pointed out. If you link to the same page, but different sections on that page, the # out the link.
Link: Link Text
Anchor on the page: <a name="anchor-on-pagee">Link Description</a>
SEOmoz has some blogs on this also.
-
So top nav and sidebar nav duplicates for example.
Hard to tell; generally Google will only count anchor text of the first link to a certain page - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/results-of-google-experimentation-only-the-first-anchor-text-counts - so we could surmise that the second example on a page definitely isn't counted as a full link.
Also here's some info from a recent YouMOZ post - http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/the-nature-of-the-100link-limit-of-google
I also think Google can often differentiate repeated nav links and doesn't value them as much, but I don't have anything to back that up with.
Basically, I think you'll be alright as Google will filter them before deciding which to crawl.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Does redirecting a duplicate page NOT in Google‘s index pass link juice? (External links not showing in search console)
Hello! We have a powerful page that has been selected by Google as a duplicate page of another page on the site. The duplicate is not indexed by Google, and the referring domains pointing towards that page aren’t recognized by Google in the search console (when looking at the links report). My question is - if we 301 redirect the duplicate page towards the one that Google has selected as canonical, will the link juice be passed to the new page? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lewald10 -
Should I apply Canonical Links from my Landing Pages to Core Website Pages?
I am working on an SEO project for the website: https://wave.com.au/ There are some core website pages, which we want to target for organic traffic, like this one: https://wave.com.au/doctors/medical-specialties/anaesthetist-jobs/ Then we have basically have another version that is set up as a landing page and used for CPC campaigns. https://wave.com.au/anaesthetists/ Essentially, my question is should I apply canonical links from the landing page versions to the core website pages (especially if I know they are only utilising them for CPC campaigns) so as to push link equity/juice across? Here is the GA data from January 1 - April 30, 2019 (Behavior > Site Content > All Pages😞
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Wavelength_International0 -
How to stop URLs that include query strings from being indexed by Google
Hello Mozzers Would you use rel=canonical, robots.txt, or Google Webmaster Tools to stop the search engines indexing URLs that include query strings/parameters. Or perhaps a combination? I guess it would be a good idea to stop the search engines crawling these URLs because the content they display will tend to be duplicate content and of low value to users. I would be tempted to use a combination of canonicalization and robots.txt for every page I do not want crawled or indexed, yet perhaps Google Webmaster Tools is the best way to go / just as effective??? And I suppose some use meta robots tags too. Does Google take a position on being blocked from web pages. Thanks in advance, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Internal Links - Different URLs
Hey so, In my product page, I have recommended products at the bottom. The issue is that those recommended products have long parameters such as sitename.com/product-xy-z/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co&srcType=dp_recs The reason why it has that long parameter is due to tracking purposes (internally with the dev and UX team). My question is, should I replace it with the clean URL or as long as it has the canonical tag, it should be okay to have such a long parameter? I would think clean URL would help with internal links and what not...but if it already has a canonical tag would it help? Another issue is that the URL is different and not just the parameter. For instance..the canonical URL is sitename.com/productname-xyz/ and so the internal link used on the product page (same exact page just different URL with parameter) sitename.com/xyz/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co&srcType=dp_recs (missing product name), BUT still has the canonical tag!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ggpaul5620 -
Does it make sense to create new pages with friendlier URLs then redirect old pages to new?
Hi Moz! My client has messy URLs. does it make sense to write new clean URLs, then 301 redirect all old URLs to the new ones? Thanks for reading!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DA20130 -
Does linking to a div pass value to the base url?
hi, because of how my site is laid out, in many cases, it makes sense from a user experience standpoint to link to a specific id rather than to the base url (and the top of the page). for internal links on my site, will linking to http://domain.com/page/#div pass the same link value as linking to http://domain.com/page/ ? or am i shooting myself in the foot with this approach? thanks, Moz buddies!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RGS_Energy0 -
Google showing me a 404 link from an external source?
In my list of 404 errors from Google webmaster I have one with the "linked from" section showing an external link. This seems like a broken link (which obviously I will try and fix to get the link juice) but why would Google recognize it as a 404? From Google: | URL: | www.broken URL | | | Error details | In Sitemaps | Linked from | | <colgroup><col></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theLotter
| http://externalwebsite.com |
| | |0 -
Does Google WMT download links button give me all the links they count
Hi Different people are telling me different things I think if I download "all links" using the button in WMT to excel, I am seeing all the links Google is 'counting' when evaluating my site. is that right?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | usedcarexpert0