commit: 6b2ca8a - #414 (2014-03-05 12:54:44 -0500)
To my eyes this doesn't look like much more than baseless speculation.
I think I've explained in a pretty clear way why the default unmodified WordPress commenting system affects the internal PageRank flow. I don't see how this can be a 'speculation'.
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/pagerank-sculpting/"Q: Okay, but doesn’t this encourage me to link out less? Should I turn off comments on my blog?A: I wouldn’t recommend closing comments in an attempt to “hoard” your PageRank. In the same way that Google trusts sites less when they link to spammy sites or bad neighborhoods, parts of our system encourage links to good sites."
"parts of our system encourage links to good sites."Speaking from my personal experience, most comment-spammers' sites wouldn't really be 'good', or even relevant.Now, I have nothing to say if you think "linking to good sites" is more important than PageRank as a search engine ranking factor.
PageRank sculpting is, as Matt Cutts says in that article, largely a waste of time.
He said in the past link building is not that effective anymore. This suggests otherwise: http://moz.com/blog/ranking-factors-2013Also, here's why focussing only on quality content doesn't get you lots of organic traffic: http://techtage.com/2013/07/why-quality-content-alone-isnt-enough-to-get-tons-of-organic-traffic/
I want to add something.Matt said: “a better, more effective form of PageRank sculpting is choosing (for example) which things to link to from your home page.”Just replace the 'home page' part with 'post pages' and that's basically what I'm saying.
I'll go out on a limb here and say you might have misunderstood what PageRank sculpting is, "supposing it's still a thing". Sorry I had to say it that way. I work on a 80–20 rule and on experience have known there are other better and time-efficient things to do. I personally think it's not just about raw link juice being funneled properly through a series of pages. Have you given thought about the relevancy between the content of the current page to the page it is linking to, whether internal or external? If I wrote about a post about SEO and then another SEO guy leaves a good comment about my post but links to an online shop selling onesies (probably his own or a client's), wouldn't it make sense NOT to pass "relevancy juice" through that link, do-followed or not? I'm admittedly not a smart guy but the Google Search team is comprised of a number of good engineers. They should be able to figure that out if they haven't yet, though I believe they already did a long time ago and it's been in play.
The post deals with PageRank juice, not 'relevancy juice'. It's better, IMHO, to fix the potentially harmful problems yourself rather than relying totally on Google's 'smart engineers'.
Differing notions I guess. :)
It's probably true but it's really hardcore optimization ... I'm happy to link to someone's website if the comment is worth it even if i'm a bit penalized on the PR ... I don't thinky anyway this can have an impact greater than 1% on the overall site optimization
Not really a hardcore optimization. An example of a popular site removing the 'user website' field altogether is WPBeginner.com.If you understand how nofollow links affect PageRank flow right now, then you'd easily understand what a huge amount of PageRank juice gets 'wasted'. Not only that doesn't help your readers (by getting passed to their sites) but also affects your own site's internal PageRank flow. I'm a bit concerned about the 'wasted' part. If you really want to know about your readers' sites, you better use a custom plugin.Again, this shouldn't affect smaller blogs with small numbers of comments per post that much.
I thought I would discuss a tangential issue with the community here, the article discusses how WP's internal comment engine is wrecking havoc with the internal linking and suggests one possible solution by removing the Author URL itself. However, I see a suite of commenting plug-ins such as CommentLuv which actually encourages comments by ensuring that the Author URLs are do-follow links. Would you start passing link juice for the sake of comments?
I've noticed that CommentLuv links too are mostly nofollow'ed. CommentLuv increases the severity of the issue that I've mentioned.Now about getting more comments, do you think those who commented on your post only because they could link to a post of their own would actually add some value to the discussion? It doesn't happen. Those who really have something to say on the topic, should ideally post comments regardless of they get backlinks or not. It's just my personal opinion.
Spam comments is what Akismet is for. As for allowing a user to link to an external page of his choice on a comment, I think it's pure courtesy and that he deserves that link as long as the comment shared is something relevant, constructive and/or of good quality. That would also help other readers quickly get information (credibility, identity) about that specific person (e.g. if he linked it to his personal website). Lastly, genuine comments = community. Yes, we can discuss about a topic through other mediums like social media or forums, but nothing beats finding all the supplementary information in the same place as its original source.
You seem to have read the post partially.1. Outright spam comments can indeed be handled by Akismet. But you probably don't know those who comment on others blog (like: "Hi *author*, that was very helpful. I did it on my site and got good results. Keep up the good work") just to get a nofollow'ed link (whether they know about nofollow or not).
2. I mentioned about using 'third-party commenting systems' in that post. With Disqus, people can still find your website, and it won't harm the website's PageRank flow. "That would also help other readers quickly get information (credibility, identity) about that specific person (e.g. if he linked it to his personal website)" plus his other recent comments on other sites, his social media presence and a whole lot more data, if one uses Disqus.
3. Comments posted through third-party commenting platforms or through wordpress commenting forms without the website field aren't genuine? Is that what you mean?
I apologize about that. I scanread past through everything before the "Effect on WordPress Sites Using The Default Commenting Platform" section because of the blog post title. 1.) You can always disable auto-approval of comments and even go about labeling what you think are spam - an option found in the native WP comment system as well as with 3rd party ones. 2.) I have nothing about 3rd party commenting systems. I use Disqus on my own site as well (for better moderation) and recommend it to clients. I just don't think it's right to directly state that the "...WordPress Commenting Platform Screws Up Your Blog’s SEO". It's all about setting things up properly on the backend to moderate comments. The WordPress platform have gone through a lot of revisions (already at v3.5.2 at the moment), with great generous people contributing to its betterment over time, and I think it's not fair to them to say that the native comment system "screws" things up. The system is OK. 3.) No. What I mean is there are a lot of bloggers out there who still prefers the native WordPress comment system and removing the option for the user to include a link (which would come as some sort of authentication/reference) to his website when commenting is like inviting a random person to your party, not caring who he is or what he does while he's there. It just defeats the purpose of establishing connections (blogs where you have to register to be able to comment like Moz are a different case obviously). Again, this is to speak for those who prefers the default WordPress commenting system. You replied to my other comment here with "It's better, IMHO, to fix the potentially harmful problems yourself rather than relying totally on Google's 'smart engineers'.", but it seems like you're focused on practicing the opposite (relying on what Google says). SEO is just a part of something bigger. Also, credit to Rand's Moz blog post http://moz.com/blog/link-consolidation-the-new-pagerank-sculpting (it's from 2009 by the way) for the image you used, and to quote him: "Doing good things for SEO shouldn't get in the way of a good user experience."
I agree with your overall philosophy. I do understand the importance of user experience. But, in that post, I just provided better options (than the default) to handle a 'potentially harmful problem'. I have no wrath against WordPress at all. I use it on 90% of my sites and I'm running even the 3.6 RC1 on a non-test site. Maybe, people got it all wrong because of the 'title'.I love WordPress.
What I basically wanted to say, is that, if your visitors don't care about links and you love the default WordPress commenting system, keep using it after removing the 'user website' field.
If you want to improve your site's internal PageRank flow (how small impact that might have on search engine rankings is a different issue) without making users (except those who wants to get THE LINK, instead of wanting to simply get EXPOSURE) unhappy and also would love to learn more (details) about your commenters, switch to a third-party platform.
This'll be applicable as long as Google doesn't update its current policy regarding PageRank flow and the relation with nofollow'ed links and WordPress Comments System doesn't get a massive overhaul in future.Does this seem to do any harm to anyone?
So... There's a quick fix for both UX & SEO. It's called only displaying a small amount of comments on the post URL, and having a link to a bigger comment page of discussion. i.e. show only 5-10 comments on the post page, then a click & expand to show i.e. 50 per page.
Nice and quick fix, but some would argue that it'll "make users click more links and open more pages", affecting 'user experience'.
What commenting system do you prefer (outside of Disqus)?