200 mozpoints : Removal of "nofollow" from first custom URL on profile but first link is nofollow...

[Bigb06]

Hello,

I try to help Moz community and hope to get 200 mozpoints a day

When I analyze a profile from a member with more than 200 mozpoints, I see two links to custom URL link : one is added nofollow on a blank image, and one follow with anchor text.

But it appears that the tests show that in this case the second link is not taken into account... Why not remove the first link so ?

Here is the code:

xxx:

http://www.example.com/

[OlegKorneitchouk]

Why wouldn't the second link be followed? Do you have any studies to cite "tests show that in this case the second link is not taken into account"?

[Bigb06]

Yes here : http://blog.axe-net.fr/ancre-de-lien-nofollow-dofollow-test-seo/ (in french)

if there are two links to the same URL on a give webpage, only the first link is taken into account, so in the moz profile webpage, the first link is nofollowed. And it's really strange to have two links, one nofollow and one follow?

[OlegKorneitchouk]

I'm checking out the results and it looks like the the page C doesn't rank for any of their link anchor texts so I'm not sure how they came to a conclusion.

From what I understand...

3 pages each have 2 links to page C. Each link has a unique anchor text that isn't found on Page C.:

1. 2 dofollow
2. 1 nofollow, 1 dofollow
3. 1 dofollow, 1 nofollow

Then searching for the specific anchor texts that were linked should show Page C in search results. I don't see page C ranking for any of the anchor texts tested.

Am I missing something?

[Christy-Correll]

Hi Nicolas,

Thanks for your question! The first "link" goes to an "invisible" icon, which was the easiest way back in the day this code was written, err... updated to keep our code from breaking without having to mess with the CSS when adding custom URLs to this section of the user profile. If you look at the rest of the code for this section, you will see that each social profile is linked to both an icon and the profile name in the same manner, except that the social icons are not just placeholders. (That is, they are real and visible icons.) In each case, the icon link is always no-follow, and the text link is the real link, regardless of whether it is followed or no-followed.

Why link to icons at all? Well, some folks click on icons for profile links instead of the anchor text in social profiles, so it's set up that way for usability.

When a community member earns 200 MozPoints, the no-follow attribute on the link to their first custom URL is removed (that is, the real link), while the no-follow attribute to the "invisible" icon remains in place, as it is only a placeholder.

I hope that helps answer your question. Let me know!

Christy

[OlegKorneitchouk]

I think his question is more "why nofollow the icon? google only considers the first link to a domain per page (which in this case is the nofollow icon) which cancels out the 2nd dofollow link"

I don't think this is the case but he cited a French case study that supposedly affirms that statement. Based on the translated version of the article, I don't think there was anything to support it but I could be misunderstanding.

Any French SEOs want to delve in?

[Bigb06]

Hello Christie,

Ok for the layout, but why do you keep the first link nofollowed ?

Studies reveal that only first link attribute and anchor text are taken into account... So it could be fair that the first link be followed also (or remove it and correct CSS layout... with CSS rules!)

[Christy-Correll]

Hi Nicolas,

The short answer is that we keep the first link nofollowed (instead of removing it and updating the CSS) because we need to use our development resources on higher priority projects that have greater benefit for our community at this time (and do not believe that the value of the second link is negated by virtue of the first one).

The study that you cited was conducted in 2009, right? While I tend to agree with Oleg's opinion of this particular study (and offer the same disclaimer as well as challenge), Matt Cutts, former head of webspam for Google, released this video a couple of years ago confirming that this is how anchor text used to work. As Cutts says, though the algorithm has changed a lot since then -- and has changed even more since 2014. (By the way, Moz's studies conducted around the same time that Cutts references in the video (2007-2009) confirm what Cutts says about how anchor text used to work.)

[Bigb06]

Ok thanks Christie for your answer. It's curious no one even ask this question before.

[Christy-Correll]

Happy to help, Nicolas!