How can you get the right site links for your site?
-
Hello all,
I have been trying to get Google to list relevant site links for my site when you type in our brand name, Loco2 or for when Loco2 comes up in a search result.
Different things come up when you search Loco2 and Loco 2.
We would like site links to look like how they do when you search Loco 2. However Loco2 is our brand name, NOT Loco 2.
Does anyone know why Google is doing this and whether we can influence results? We have done as much as possible via Google webmaster, in terms of specifying the links we DO NOT want Google to list for Loco2. However, when you search "Loco2", results only show simple site links.
Ideally what we want is:
-
Loco2 to be recognised as the brand NOT Loco 2
-
The same results (substantial, identical) for Loco2 as for Loco 2 (think o2 and o 2)
-
For the site links to reflect the main pages of our site (Times & Tickets, Engine Room forum etc.)
Many thanks in advance!
Anila
-
-
Alan,
On that note, do you recommend demoting the sitelinks via webmaster to get Google to replace it with the better optimized and relevant pages? or just let time do its thing
Thanks
-
The more emphasis, signals and depth of content, supported by a stronger individual page focused inbound link effort, the more likely the pages you care about will be to end up in sitelinks.
There isn't one formula unique to sitelinks that Google specifies, so I've only ever just applied best practices SEO concepts to my desired goal. And have seen those pages sometimes become sitelinks.
-
Have you got any suggestions of how to optimize for the brand Loco2 without coming across as OTT. The reason is we already have Loco2 on a lot of pages. Should we try and optimise each page we want as a site link for Loco2 AND relevant terms for that page?
-
We will try to optimise site pages that we want to come up. What tips do you have for that. For example on the Times and Tickets, do we need to make it explicit that this is where you can search and book trains? should this be via H1 tags or meta data or something else. The reason I ask this is that there is only a little text on this page for a reason as it's function is as a software tool.
What about the Loco2 / Loco 2 discrepancy? That is the main issue - we would like to see substantial site links that are identical for both these terms (I have changed the question to reflect this!)
-
It's correct that you can't directly control or dictate which pages Google includes in sitelinks. You can, however, help influence this by better optimizing the pages you want included through more emphasis on your brand within the content of those pages - integrate brand references within on-page content. Then, work to get a mix of brand-centric anchor text into links coming from other sites that point to those pages.
It's not a guarantee, however I've seen some success in this method for various clients.
-
This could be that LoCO2 is another branded term another company is using like LoCO2 Energy.
This can be fixed by just SEO the pages that you want to be indexed and searched. Majority of the time companies with less competitors using the same branded terms, they have a higher chance of dominating the SERP, this could be the case for your brand.
My suggestions, you should optimize your and build links around your targeted brand term 'Loco2'.
If you want more sitelinks, or more related site links(currently you have About - FAQs - Blog - Inspire me) you can demote these sitelinks within Google Webmaster Tools. You can list the subfolders you don't want to appear in sitelinks extension and it will randomly fill it with another link.
I don't believe you can CHOOSE which links appear at the sitelinks but only what not to include.
Good luck!
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
How are Server side redirects perceived compared to direct links (on a Directory site)
Hi, Im creating some listings for a client on a relevant b2b directory (a good quality directory) I asked if the links are 'followed' or no 'followed' and they said they are 'server side redirects' so no direct links. Does anyone know how these are likely to be perceived by Google ? All BEst Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence1 -
Will you get more 'google juice' if your social links are in your websites header, rather than its footer?
Hi team, I'm in the process of making some aesthetic changes to my website. Its getting quite cluttered so the main purpose is to clean up its look. I currently have 3x social links in the header, right at the top, and i would really like to move these to the footer to remove some clutter in the header. My concern is that moving them may have an impact on the domains ranking in google. Website: www.mountainjade.co.nz We've made some huge gains against our competitors over the past 6 months and I don't want to jeopardise that. Any help would be much appreciated as i'm self taught in SEO and have learnt through making mistakes. This time however, with Moz, i'd rather get some advice before I make any decisions! Thanks is advance, Jake S
Technical SEO | | Jacobsheehan0 -
301 redirecting old content from one site to updated content on a different site
I have a client with two websites. Here are some details, sorry I can't be more specific! Their older site -- specific to one product -- has a very high DA and about 75K visits per month, 80% of which comes from search engines. Their newer site -- focused generally on the brand -- is their top priority. The content here is much better. The vast majority of visits are from referrals (mainly social channels and an email newsletter) and direct traffic. Search traffic is relatively low though. I really want to boost search traffic to site #2. And I'd like to piggy back off some of the search traffic from site #1. Here's my question: If a particular article on site #1 (that ranks very well) needs to be updated, what's the risk/reward of updating the content on site #2 instead and 301 redirecting the original post to the newer post on site #2? Part 2: There are dozens of posts on site #1 that can be improved and updated. Is there an extra risk (or diminishing returns) associated with doing this across many posts? Hope this makes sense. Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | djreich0 -
While SEOMoz currently can tell us the number of linking c-blocks, can SEOMoz tell us what the specific c-blocks are?
I know it is important to have a diverse set of c-blocks, but I don't know how it is possible to have a diverse set if I can't find out what the c-blocks are in the first place. Also, is there a standard for domain linking c-blocks? For instance, I'm not sure if a certain amount is considered "average" or "above-average."
Technical SEO | | Todd_Kendrick0 -
No inbound links. Should I link-build or create new content?
I have a PR4 site with good traffic but the blog is not very popular--the posts do not generate any backlinks and hardly get any traffic. Yet, I continue to kick out a new post every week. Site: http://www.stadriemblems.com/
Technical SEO | | UnderRugSwept
Blog: http://www.stadriemblems.com/blog/ I keep posting content so that Google keeps crawling the site and viewing it as fresh (and yes, I'm posting for my human visitors' benefit too!), but I'm wondering if eventually this will hurt more than help if Google detects all these new pages are not being linked to, and therefore starts viewing the site as low quality and devalues it. So should I: Keep posting Stop posting and build links to the posts Try to promote my blog to get more traffic and hope people link to it Something else or some combination of the above0 -
If two links from one page link to another, how can I get the second link's anchor text to count?
I am working on an e-commerce site and on the category pages each of the product listings link to the product page twice. The first is an image link and then the second is the product name. I want to get the anchor text of the second link to count. If I no-follow the image link will that help at all? If not is there a way to do this?
Technical SEO | | JordanJudson0 -
Should I 301 redirect my country specific sites, or use them as linking root domains?
I have loveelectronics.co.uk, but I also own 10 other country code specific domains. I am short on links (i'm actually still setting up the website) and wondered that until i have country specific content, should I 301 redirect these websites to the homepage of my main site, or could I use them as links which would mean I have more linking root domains? Sorry if this is a beginner question, but it would be good to know so I can sort this.
Technical SEO | | jcarter0 -
What is the best top menu linking structure (for SEO) for my site: A or B?
I don't know if these two scenarios are any different as far as SEO is concerned, but I wanted to ask to get an opinion. On my website: http://www.rainchainsdirect.com you can see there is a top menu with "About" "Info" "Questions" etc. Some of these links lead to further pages that are essentially a indeces for multiple further links. My question is: in terms of SEO, is it better to A) have all links (that are now on the pages that the menu links lead to) displayed in a drop down menu directly from the top menu (and bypassing an intermediate page) or B) to have it as it is now where you have to click to an intermediate page (like "rain chain info") to get access to the links (and not have such a large drop down menu) Is there a difference in terms of SEO? In terms of useability it almost seems like a toss up between the two, so if there were better SEO value to one of the other, then I would choose that one. By the way, I know that the way it is structured now is strange, where there is only one drop down that leads to the same page as the top menu item, but that will be fixed, fyi. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | csblev0