I have a site which describes how to buy tickets online team wise for a cricket tournament. For each team I link to external Ticket Portals to purchase the respective tickets. I also place a link to the Home Ground Google Map Stadium Location for each of the teams.
Now my question is whether to make these External Links No Follow?
[FONT=Verdana]As a general rule, you probably want to “nofollow” any links in user-generated content (because you can’t vouch for them), and any links to pages that can only be accessed by logged in users, or pages that perform an action (because there’s nothing for search engines to see there).
Apart from that, if you think a link is worth recommending to your readers, why are you not also prepared to recommend it to search engines?[/FONT]
In here I link to the Ticket portals as well as the Google Map for the Stadium Location. Could you advice me now as per my usage. These links are useful to the readers as they would reach directly to the page where a portal is selling that particular team’s tickets.
I don’t see any reason to mark those links as “nofollow”. They are genuine links that the general surfing public might find helpful, so it’s sensible to let Google follow them and rank those pages appropriately.
If it’s relevant, don’t add the rel=nofollow attribute. I think the reason why richardfranklin here mentioned something about adding the nofollow is because these things are usually mentioned in blog commenting. I think he’s trying to avoid making his site open to spammers. Man, some people have to remember that those nofollow links aren’t limited to just the blog comments, but to all kinds of links.
But in the case of nuklear’s site, I don’t see why you have to add the nofollow because it’s relevant.
Generally speaking if it’s a genuine trusted link then it’s no crime to follow it. The issue which many have is that they DO NOT have control over that link, and this is why sometimes people prefer to put no-follow links. Your websites VALUE is based on it’s incoming and outgoing links, so let’s say you link your website is a GOOD website gone BAD, this will negatively affect your SEO. This is why people prefer to put in a no follow links.
If every link your site has is No Follow you’re giving the engines no sense of what you value – thus they have a reason to spider everything you show the same – and of course other sites have less interest in linking to you. If the whole web (or even just your site) becomes no follow the value of no follow is negated.
I agree with you but at the same time I believe that all Wikipedia external links are nofollow, how does that fit in? Is it ok for high authority sites to go nofollow but not those lower down the food chain?
there is nothing wrong if you maintain them as dofollow links. you should only be scared to give a dofollow link from your site to another when you know the other site might contain activities disliked by google.
The problem for Wikipedia is that there is little editorial control over links added, because it’s all user-generated content (which is where you generally want to put your "nofollow"s). Allowing users to insert links that Google would follow would open the floodgates to unimaginable quantities of spam, which would then become almost impossible to police effectively.