Google's update, Galleries, and rel="nofollow"?? - GoFuckYourself.com

Naughty-Pages · 04-28-2012, 03:55 PM

Do you think that if you have a ton of galleries linked with rel="nofollow" that Google's latest updates now treat your whole gallery pages as one big pile of advertisements??

Just curious to hear from others who have a bunch of sites and use rel="nofollow" for fhg's on some sites and then do not use it on others.

The other messed up thing is on some sites I was ranked #1 for, I am now on page 5, and 90% of what is above me is illegal tubes with pirated content.. and Also Scraped content..

Some asshat stole a bunch of the titles verbatim including the name of my domain names from my sites and put it on pages of his own sites, and now outranks my own sites.. lmfao!

sandman! · 04-28-2012, 04:02 PM

i always thought of no follow as something google can track to see who is spending more time on seo then building quality sites

Naughty-Pages · 04-28-2012, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandman!

i always thought of no follow as something google can track to see who is spending more time on seo then building quality sites

Ya.. that was sort of what I was thinking

part of their over-optimization algo (combined with looking like one big advertisement)

u-Bob · 04-28-2012, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandman!

i always thought of no follow as something google can track to see who is spending more time on seo then building quality sites

Exactly. There's no reason to use "no follow" in places other than user submitted comment areas. I always laughed when peopled used "no follow" to 'sculpt' their internal link structure.

baryl · 04-28-2012, 04:40 PM

Well if your site is full of nothing but links to sponsor galleries then it is a page full of ads.

RyuLion · 04-28-2012, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baryl

Well if your site is full of nothing but links to sponsor galleries then it is a page full of ads.

VenusBlogger · 04-28-2012, 04:59 PM

nofollow never made sense...

it's a waste of time and it will only hurt your site to give it a NO NATURAL look...

stevemib · 04-28-2012, 05:03 PM

From what I have read is Google looks at everything above the fold. If there are too many ads and little content then it will hurt rankings. They have a full tutorial on google webmaster about the new Panda update.

PXN · 04-28-2012, 05:07 PM

Don't think it make that much of a difference. But if you have too many like using it for links for hundreds of galleries it can make your whole webpage look long and bulky to google.

baryl · 04-28-2012, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VenusBlogger

nofollow never made sense...

it's a waste of time and it will only hurt your site to give it a NO NATURAL look...

What is a "natural" look? Slopped together and unprofessional?

I don't think nofollow in itself is bad but abusing it, especially on internal links, is bad. If a site is nothing but ads or gallery links it's going to get punished with out without nofollow.

04-28-2012, 04:02 PM	#2
sandman! Icq: 14420613 Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: chicago Posts: 15,432	i always thought of no follow as something google can track to see who is spending more time on seo then building quality sites __________________ Need WebHosting ? Email me for some great deals [email protected]

04-28-2012, 03:55 PM	#1
Naughty-Pages Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: SWFL Posts: 4,533	Google's update, Galleries, and rel="nofollow"?? Do you think that if you have a ton of galleries linked with rel="nofollow" that Google's latest updates now treat your whole gallery pages as one big pile of advertisements?? Just curious to hear from others who have a bunch of sites and use rel="nofollow" for fhg's on some sites and then do not use it on others. The other messed up thing is on some sites I was ranked #1 for, I am now on page 5, and 90% of what is above me is illegal tubes with pirated content.. and Also Scraped content.. Some asshat stole a bunch of the titles verbatim including the name of my domain names from my sites and put it on pages of his own sites, and now outranks my own sites.. lmfao! __________________ *400 HARDL1NKS only $117! - (100 for $45)* BL0G P0STS $1.85+ \| 55,000 Word Comprehensive Synonym Database 2 REVIEW COPIES AVAIL AT 50% OFF! \| 16 yr old Aged Domains 4Sale ICQ: 265-593-735 ~ Skype: Naughty-Pages ~ email: ez_money4u(at)comcast(dot)net Last edited by Naughty-Pages; 04-28-2012 at 03:57 PM..

04-28-2012, 04:40 PM	#5
baryl Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 1,086	Well if your site is full of nothing but links to sponsor galleries then it is a page full of ads.

04-28-2012, 04:59 PM	#7
VenusBlogger So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 1,540	nofollow never made sense... it's a waste of time and it will only hurt your site to give it a NO NATURAL look...

04-28-2012, 05:03 PM	#8
stevemib Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: American in the PI. Posts: 68	From what I have read is Google looks at everything above the fold. If there are too many ads and little content then it will hurt rankings. They have a full tutorial on google webmaster about the new Panda update.

04-28-2012, 05:07 PM	#9
PXN Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 1,548	Don't think it make that much of a difference. But if you have too many like using it for links for hundreds of galleries it can make your whole webpage look long and bulky to google.