To follow or to nofollow...
On a related note, though, and echoing Matt’s earlier sentiments… we hope and expect that more and more sites — including Wikipedia — will adopt a less-absolute approach to no-follow… expiring no-follows, not applying no-follows to trusted contributors, and so on.So within even Google, with the strictest application of a nofollow policy, there is certainly a strong argument and use case for treating this as a hint as opposed to a policy. I'm not even sure why Google needs wikipedia to make a policy change, everything they hope for could be implemented at their end. A link on wikipeida, if it's been there long enough, probably deserves some juice. And that same logic applies to any site, even your blog - nofollow is a hint to a search engine. It's there to deter spam, but if a link sticks around then by not removing it, to a point, the site is endorsing it. For our application we're working from a slightly different angle - there aren't a lot of geotagged urls and there isn't much span so at least initially we want as many as we can get. So we may not index or pass juice on to the site, at least initially, but we do want to follow the link.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Q&A;: What is the Nofollow Link Attribute? (list-your-blog.com)
- What Is NoFollow Used For? (takeoverpageone.com)
- Does Having Lots Of DoFollow Links Mean Your Page Rank Could Be Penalized? (onthenetdollars.com)
Subscribe via RSS