Is this still considered true about INTERNAL anchor text? "Penguin seems to be targeting overly aggressive anchor text (both internally and externally), especially from low-quality sources."
-
Recently I've heard a few people say now it's okay to be aggressive with internal linking. So a link from mydomain.com/news to mydomain/widgets can use spammy anchor text like "best green widgets in California" that are an obvious problem for links coming in from external site.
Which is accurate?
-
Here's Matt Cutts on the subject:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ybpXU0ckKQ
Basically he's saying that you are perfectly ok to have exact match anchored internal links. But, if it becomes really obvious that you're overdoing it to try to manipulate Google then you're at risk for a manual penalty.
Look at wikipedia. They are the perfect example of a site that has a LOT of exact match anchors. And they do pretty well.
-
Me either. Previously you asked, "Is there any difference in Google's treatment of aggressive anchor text between internal and external?" Externally, if every link pointing to your 'green widget' page or home page said, 'green widget' you'd likely get penalized by Google. Internally, linking to your page as such navigationally and in context like EGOL mentioned is fine. So there's a major difference right there. I don't think it's a question of 'being aggresive with it' just that you can refer to your own pages more precisely within the context of your own site.
-
Im not sure we're communicating. I am well aware of how aggressive anchor text from external links causes problems with Google.
I need to get an idea of how approximately how much leeway there is for internal anchor text. I was told by two people I respect that internal anchor text can be much more aggressive.
-
Read: http://moz.com/blog/most-important-link-penalty-removal-tool-your-mindset. Very much so. Google knows what a natural link profile looks like so well that you're best bet is gaining external links as naturally as possible. Sites with super high percentages of anchor text links, followed links, and conversion page specific links are running red flags in front of Google's eyes. Take Eric's advice from above. Cheers!
-
Thanks for reply. Is there any difference in Google's treatment of aggressive anchor text between internal and external?
-
Like EGOL mentions, going after unnaturally long links--and the type of copy that falls afield of some of the Adwords policy--is likely to cause issues in your work to aggressively link internally. What is fine is remaining factual and linking to your 'green widgets' page with the link, 'green widgets'. Just look at Wikipedia's level of internal linking...
Leave the best of stuff to review sites or pages.
-
I use anchor text like "green widgets" in persistent navigation and in paragraph text on all of my sites and have no problems.
Now, if you are using chest-thumping anchor text like... "best green widgets in California"... then you might be asking for it.
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
-
Will "internal 301s" have any effect on page rank or the way in which an SE see's our site interlinking?
We've been forced (for scalability) to completely restructure our website in terms of setting out a hierarchy. For example - the old structure : country / city / city area Where we had about 3500 nicely interlinked pages for relevant things like taxis, hotels, apartments etc in that city : We needed to change the structure to be : country / region / area / city / cityarea So as patr of the change we put in place lots of 301s for the permanent movement of pages to the new structure and then we tried to actually change the physical on-page links too. Unfortunately we have left a good 600 or 700 links that point to the old pages, but are picked up by the 301 redirect on page, so we're slowly going through them to ensure the links go to the new location directly (not via the 301). So my question is (sorry for long waffle) : Whilst it must surely be "best practice" for all on-page links to go directly to the 'right' page, are we harming our own interlinking and even 'page rank' by being tardy in working through them manually? Thanks for any help anyone can give.
On-Page Optimization | | TinkyWinky0 -
Internal Linking Question(s)
Is it unwise to link internally to a page more than once on the homepage. I am reading that it is considered spammy. I am also reading that it passes PR twice to the internal page instead of just once... Which is it? Is there a way to stop passing PR to the "contact us" page. I watched an older video that Matt Cutts suggested a nofollow. Now I read that this strategy is a no no? Which is it? Thanks! 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | JML11790 -
"On Page" report says 2 rel canonical urls-how do I fix that?
I am reviewing my On Page scores and I'm not getting a perfect score bk of this notice: No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Number of Canonical tags</dt> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> <dd>HOW do I fix that?</dd> <dd>I am using Platinum seo plugin which I have checked "Use canonical urls" and the page in question is</dd> <dd>http://adderalldosage.net/general-adderall-dosage/</dd> </dl>
On-Page Optimization | | ccare7230 -
How are your "Service Area" pages handling Penguin/Panda?
We just got a new client because of recent Penguin/Panda changes. A national "SEO" firm decided it was a good idea to set up a page for each service town or county they serve with nothing but duplicate content. Needless to say, on the week of the 23rd, their rankings tanked from 1st page (it's not a competitive niche) to 4th. I'm not bringing this up to brag, but rather because it got me thinking... How are your geographically targeted "service area" pages doing? Have the recent changes caused you to rethink your geographic targeting in any way?
On-Page Optimization | | BedeFahey0 -
How do I Avoid Excessive Internal Links on an eCommerce site?
I think I'm getting dinged for this on Term Target because the page is full of products, which have links to their product page, but I'm not sure.
On-Page Optimization | | PageLogic0 -
Rel="canonical" on home page?
I'm using wordpress and the all in one seo pack with the canonical option checked. As I understand it the rel="canonical" tag should be added to pages that are duplicate or similar to tell google that another page (one without the rel="canonical" tag) is the correct one as the url in the tag is pointing google towards it. Why then does the all in one seo pack add rel="canonical" to every page on my site including the home page? Isn't that confusing for google?
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
What image attribute should carry "anchor text" for internal linking
Newbie question: an internal link generally should carry keyword anchor text, so if the link is actually an image, what image attribute should contain the equivalent of the anchor text
On-Page Optimization | | k3nn3dy30 -
Should I make All My "Non-Money" Pages No-Follow?
I'm branching out here from my novice seo status . . . In an effort to channel page rank to the pages I wish to rank for should I make all my non-money pages no-follow. Pages like "contact us", "about us", "application", etc. It seems to make sense to make these no follow so the page rank flows to the pages I wish to rank for. Am I on the right track?
On-Page Optimization | | leaseman0