Welcome to the Q&A Forum

In Google Adwords if the destination URL is changed then it resets the history for that keyword and the campaign. Was Wondering if simply adding the utm_ parameter in Adcenter would have the same result...

I need Google Analytics to correctly parse PPC campaign key words from Bing.

unfortunately, if you can't place a NOINDEX meta tag due to limitations of the CMS then you probably won't be able to place a rel=nofollow either... leaving you with a disallow in your robots.txt.

simply exclude or 'disallow' the file path in the Robots.txt. Then place NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW meta tag on those pages (in the HTML head before the body). If you have important links on those pages then use the meta tag NOINDEX, FOLLOW. I hope this helps... please ask for clarification if you need.

Yes - follow the link in my expanded answer above... the ink points to Matt Cutts original article from February 2009 explaining how/when/why the change was made.

Haha! For some reason I didn't see the other post... thought I was the only responder.

Be well!

I'm confused about what you are disagreeing with me about... there is the meta NOFOLLOW tag that is placed at the page level and the more granular rel=nofollow attribute at the link level. They are not interchangeable but simply give more macro or micro control over links on a page. If you read my answer carefully you will see that we are in complete agreement over link decay using the rel=nofollow attribute on individual links.

First there was the NOFOLLOW meta tag for page-level exclusion and then Google adopted the more granular rel=nofollow attribute for individual links on a page. I find that too many SEOs overuse the rel=nofollow attribute when there is a much more elegant solution available. The reason for this is now myth formerly known as the abused tactic called PageRank sculpting. I had a well-known culture/nightlife site in NYC as a client that had placed literally thousands of rel=nofollow attributes on links throughout the site... granted this does not seem to be your problem but I digress...

To illustrate my point, Matt Cutts discusses how rel=nofollow attributes affect how Google passes PageRank to other parts of your site (or more precisely how nofollows decay the amount of link juice passed). In the case of a few pages or even large directories, etc, I would do the following:

• Disallow crawling of less valuable pages via Robots.txt
• Use the meta exclusion NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW tag at the page level - unless these pages pass valuable link juice/anchor text to other parts of the site then use NOINDEX, FOLLOW (page is not indexed but important links are followed)
• Also, leave these pages out of your XML sitemap(s) - although you may want leave them in the HTML sitemap and place a granular rel=nofollow at link-level in the case of a 404 error page for usability purposes or required privacy statement for landing pages.

Saving your Googlebot crawl budget for only high value pages is a great way to get more of those pages in the Google index providing you with more opportunity to promote your products, services, etc. Also, limiting the number of rel=nofollows used and allowing link juice (or Page Rank) to flow more freely throughout your site will prove beneficial.

Hey Cowboy -

Some of my favs include:

http://www.johnon.com/ - John Andrews' Competitive Webmastering & SEO

http://www.seobythesea.com/ - Bill Slawski's SEO by the Sea

http://www.conversationmarketing.com - Ian Lurie's Conversation Marketing

@alhallinan - great thumbs-up-bait question! 

Will I lose or gain seo benefit from using rel=nofollow on my SSL certificate?  every page on the site refers (links) to the cert and the server call to display the cert adds over 500ms to my page load speeds.

<updated question="">  Is there a way to display the cert to cut down on load speeds?  Also, would Google discount or penalize the site if the cert were nofollowed?</updated>

Thoughts?

Thanks in advance!