[RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Note: We are moving the topics of this forum and it will be deleted at some point

Publish your own request for comments/change or patches for the next version of phpBB. Discuss the contributions and proposals of others. Upcoming releases are 3.2/Rhea and 3.3.
User avatar
Noxwizard
Support Team Leader
Support Team Leader
Posts: 135
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

[RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by Noxwizard » Fri Feb 17, 2012 7:35 am

When links are followed from one site to another, search engines will count the source page toward the other site's Page Rank. Links are often posted by users that aren't related to the site's topic (profile/signature links) or that the site would probably not like to "endorse" with its Page Rank. Our own sites for example have many links from the support forums that phpBB does not care to endorse. I suggest adding the nofollow relationship attribute to links in posts, profiles, and signatures.

Bing, Google, and Yahoo support this attribute: http://searchenginewatch.com/article/20 ... -For-Links

User avatar
callumacrae
Infrastructure Team
Infrastructure Team
Posts: 1046
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:37 am
Location: England
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by callumacrae » Fri Feb 17, 2012 7:53 am

-1, I think anyone who has posted deserve to have their site indexed.

How about a permission for this? It would be useful for the newly registered users group.
Made by developers, for developers!
My blog

Oleg
Posts: 1150
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by Oleg » Fri Feb 17, 2012 9:28 am

(04:21:52) nn-: nofollow is either the wrong solution or the pinnacle of selfishness depending on your reasons for doing it
(04:22:30) nn-: search 'wikipedia nofollow' for a popular debate

Please no.

And links in posts? What links are you going to leave?

ecwpa
Registered User
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:10 am
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by ecwpa » Sat Feb 18, 2012 2:08 pm

The only scenario I would use nofollow is probably for new users (read less than 5 post or something). I would apply the nofollow rule to users signatures and profile links but not for the posts itself. That's mods and admins work and its a very cheap way to punish legitimate links just to avoid spam.

The problem is, this could easily get out of hands. If something isn't spam, and it doesn't break the forum rules, admins shouldn't decide what is a what isn't relevant to search engines.
Slightly better English than it was in 2005, still improving :D

User avatar
callumacrae
Infrastructure Team
Infrastructure Team
Posts: 1046
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 9:37 am
Location: England
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by callumacrae » Sat Feb 18, 2012 2:58 pm

ecwpa wrote:The only scenario I would use nofollow is probably for new users (read less than 5 post or something). I would apply the nofollow rule to users signatures and profile links but not for the posts itself. That's mods and admins work and its a very cheap way to punish legitimate links just to avoid spam.

The problem is, this could easily get out of hands. If something isn't spam, and it doesn't break the forum rules, admins shouldn't decide what is a what isn't relevant to search engines.
+1
Made by developers, for developers!
My blog

User avatar
/a3
Registered User
Posts: 97
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 6:44 am

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by /a3 » Sun Feb 19, 2012 7:58 am

Website profiles, definitely yes. Signatures, I think so as well. Posts: definitely not!

It's not that phpBB.com doesn't endorse those links, it's whether the link is relevant to the post content or not. Hopefully, if the moderators are doing their job properly, that should be the case. So I definitely would not agree with having nofollow on posts by default.
$ git commit -m "YOLO"

User avatar
spello
Registered User
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:13 pm
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by spello » Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:03 pm

I think that signatures should be disabled from displaying for bots at all. Also, urls in signatures and in profile fields (personal website, facebook profile etc.) should be nofollowed, because not all bots are on ACP bot list.

User avatar
Volksdevil
Registered User
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:17 pm
Contact:

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by Volksdevil » Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:38 pm

Big +1!

I've had this on my 3.0.12 for a while now for:
1/ External links.
2/ Member profiles.
3/ Profile/custom profile fields.

I used a combination of the 'Prime links' MOD by Prime halo?, and my own tweaking of code to add the rel="nofollow" to the external links. It's styled really nicely and is also good web design etiquette IMO.

User avatar
mrgtb
Registered User
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:09 pm

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by mrgtb » Tue Jul 22, 2014 11:49 pm

you can edit a template and add a simple conditional wrapped around signature link code to only show them to members. So adding the feature to disable signature links from being viewed by guests/bots shouldn't be that hard to implement with a switch added in admin cp to either allow or deny bots/guests from viewing signatures. It can also help combat spammers joining if there's an option to switch signature links off globally from guests/bots viewing - and help a little with SEO because there's "less noise" in topics with them not displayed to guest/bots indexing content.

But agree, all external links leading away from forum should have nofollow attribute added to them. Otherwise you passing page rank (juice) onto other sites, which nofollow tells search engines like Google not to do.

+1

https://support.google.com/webmasters/a ... 6569?hl=en

User avatar
jsebean
Registered User
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 1:40 am
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: [RFC] Search engine optimization: nofollow

Post by jsebean » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:22 am

This is a minor change to the core that doesn't matter one way or the other. Spammers will still spam. Additionally, even if this were to be implemented, you don't want to add nofollow to links within your own website.

-1
Personally, I'd say no to the core. While I might consider it as an extension and using it on my board if implemented properly, doesn't the ACP have enough toggle buttons? :P This one isn't going to make a bit of difference from the spam side of things. Wordpress already does this yet spammers will spam the crap out of wordpress anyway. All you're doing is hurting legit posts that wouldn't harm anyone if they benefited by a little bit of pagerank anyway.

Not only that, but how many times does this have to be brought up?
-Jonah

Post Reply