Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    PROFRBcom's Avatar
    PROFRBcom is online now Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Posts
    2,080
    Thanks
    1,444
    Thanked 1,176 Times in 761 Posts

    Default "Go To" links. Do they count for anything?

    Name:  nTvJ4nQ.jpg
Views: 154
Size:  16.6 KB

    Please ignore the fact that this link is external nofollow. I do not wish to debate the merits of NF links in this post.

    I have not seen a "go to" link like this in a while, but my analytics showed a couple clicks from a forum website, I tracked down the post, and looked at the code. The image above is what I found. A redirecting link.

    For the sake of argument, if this link were DF, do you think it would "count" as a backlink to Google?


    P.S. And yes, I am happy to get the organic traffic, regardless of the link status, as we are trying to promote this page anyway. But again, traffic or NF is not the point of the question/post, the point is, do redirecting "go to" links have value from an algorithmic/backlink/seo standpoint?

  2. #2
    ddm
    ddm is offline Former Member
    Join Date
    July 2006
    Posts
    1,126
    Thanks
    418
    Thanked 469 Times in 286 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PROFRBcom View Post
    if this link were DF, do you think it would "count" as a backlink to Google?
    yep

  3. #3
    TheGooner's Avatar
    TheGooner is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    March 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    4,268
    Thanks
    1,953
    Thanked 4,218 Times in 2,008 Posts

    Default

    Probably but not definitely.

    I think the Googlebot simply sees where it ends up - and then records that destination as being linked from the source.
    Think of all the different ways that you can redirect - with javascript, php and html redirects - so I don't think that Google do analysis on exactly what command got them there - other than capturing any rel="" tags.

    So a link through any redirect PROBABLY counts.

  4. #4
    universal4's Avatar
    universal4 is online now Forum Administrator
    Join Date
    July 2003
    Location
    Courage is being scared to death...and saddling up anyway. John Wayne
    Posts
    28,299
    Thanks
    2,295
    Thanked 7,983 Times in 5,040 Posts

    Default

    How do opinions change on this if the html, php etc embedded link sits in a file inside a robots.txt restricted folder and possibly not in the html code on the referring page?

    Rick
    Universal4

  5. #5
    baldidiot is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2010
    Posts
    4,459
    Thanks
    410
    Thanked 2,025 Times in 1,337 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGooner View Post
    Probably but not definitely.
    I'd go with probably as well. In theory if it's just a redirected link it should see it the way it would see any other redirect so should count. But google does weird things sometimes and plays to the beat of it's own drum so hard to know for sure.

    Plus there's also other things that could come in to play - such as the goto prefix of the intermediary link being disallowed in robots.txt.
    onlinegamblingwebsites.com - Formally known as goodbonusguide.

  6. #6
    baldidiot is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2010
    Posts
    4,459
    Thanks
    410
    Thanked 2,025 Times in 1,337 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by universal4 View Post
    How do opinions change on this if the html, php etc embedded link sits in a file inside a robots.txt restricted folder and possibly not in the html code on the referring page?
    Yeah that's what I was thinking as well. If the folder is disallowed then you'd think google wouldn't follow the redirect.
    onlinegamblingwebsites.com - Formally known as goodbonusguide.

  7. #7
    gil.langelaan's Avatar
    gil.langelaan is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    July 2018
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    952
    Thanks
    107
    Thanked 299 Times in 237 Posts

    Default

    If it's disallowed in robots.tx than no, but if not I would count, I guess.

  8. #8
    Lee1 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts

    Default

    Nope.

    There's a nofollow attribute before the link.

    Only benefit you get is traffic from the forum/site.

    Always good to have a link from a related website, regardless of it's no or dofollow.

  9. #9
    Lee1 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by universal4 View Post
    How do opinions change on this if the html, php etc embedded link sits in a file inside a robots.txt restricted folder and possibly not in the html code on the referring page?

    Rick
    Universal4
    Robots.txt isn't a directive. So it doesn't really matter what you put in your Robots.txt.

    You don't even need a Robots.txt (at least for Google which is my sole focus) it's the meta data is a lot more important in this case.

  10. #10
    PROFRBcom's Avatar
    PROFRBcom is online now Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Posts
    2,080
    Thanks
    1,444
    Thanked 1,176 Times in 761 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee1 View Post
    Nope.

    There's a nofollow attribute before the link.

    Only benefit you get is traffic from the forum/site.

    Always good to have a link from a related website, regardless of it's no or dofollow.

    One can always tell when another didn't read the ******* post.

  11. #11
    Lee1 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    June 2013
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    23
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts

    Default

    You're absolutely right, I didn't read all of it but my answer still stands, no.

    Google will ignore anything after /go? Because there is no query string.

    Also, the entire link iis encoded incorrectly, I.e:

    No :// on the end of the http.

    Incorrect encoding with the %3A etc.

    You wouldn't even need to apply a nofollow to that code shared.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Lee1 For This Useful Post:

    gm2891 (14 August 2021)

  13. #12
    universal4's Avatar
    universal4 is online now Forum Administrator
    Join Date
    July 2003
    Location
    Courage is being scared to death...and saddling up anyway. John Wayne
    Posts
    28,299
    Thanks
    2,295
    Thanked 7,983 Times in 5,040 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee1 View Post
    Also, the entire link iis encoded incorrectly, I.e:

    No :// on the end of the http.

    Incorrect encoding with the %3A etc.

    You wouldn't even need to apply a nofollow to that code shared.

    Code:
    %3A%2F%2F
    does in fact equal
    Code:
    ://
    https://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_urlencode.ASP


    Rick
    Universal4

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to universal4 For This Useful Post:

    PROFRBcom (14 August 2021)

  15. #13
    PROFRBcom's Avatar
    PROFRBcom is online now Private Member
    Join Date
    April 2013
    Posts
    2,080
    Thanks
    1,444
    Thanked 1,176 Times in 761 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee1 View Post
    You're absolutely right, I didn't read all of it but my answer still stands, no.
    You didn't read any of it as the first ******* sentence was "I do not wish to debate the merits of Nofollow"


    Quote Originally Posted by Lee1 View Post
    Also, the entire link iis encoded incorrectly, I.e:

    No :// on te end of the http.
    Wrong again, had you read the post, you would have read that I saw the referrals in my analytics. If the link were not encoded properly in the manner in which you speak, it would not have ******* worked, no one would have visited my site from said page, and there would be no ******* analytics.

    Please stop replying to this thread, you are adding nothing worthwhile to the discussion.

  16. #14
    baldidiot is offline Private Member
    Join Date
    January 2010
    Posts
    4,459
    Thanks
    410
    Thanked 2,025 Times in 1,337 Posts

    Default

    It would probably be pretty easy to test if you want to know for sure. Set up a random url on a site that isn't linked to anywhere and in any sitemaps with a string of unique text (plain html file would probably work for this). Then create a link in the style of the one in the OP on another site pointing to it.

    If google ends up indexing the page then it would be a pretty good indication that it is following those links.

    Not perfect as there would still be a lot of unknown variables but at least you'd know if google was capable of parsing and following them.
    onlinegamblingwebsites.com - Formally known as goodbonusguide.

  17. #15
    gm2891's Avatar
    gm2891 is offline Public Member
    Join Date
    June 2018
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    187
    Thanks
    164
    Thanked 116 Times in 72 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PROFRBcom View Post
    Name:  nTvJ4nQ.jpg
Views: 154
Size:  16.6 KB

    For the sake of argument, if this link were DF, do you think it would "count" as a backlink to Google?
    From the first impression, it seemed like a general question whose answer could be found on Google straight away. But I had to do a bit of research this morning as it's actually an interesting question and the best I've found is Gooner's reply above and someone else on Telegram SEO chats.

    In a nutshell, most reckon there is no definitive answer because there is no 100% guarantee that Google will index every link it finds. Some say Google may count it but adding a lower value to it as if it was a normal DF link while others say it won't count at all. So it's 50/50.

    Personally, I think the the same 50/50, because I have good DF links that Google simply ignores, and no matter what i do to get them indexed.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •