v1.5.7b php 7.3

I am confused about so called best practices for internal linking mainly because there are so many different opinions out there. I have read https://pro-webs.net/blog/2009/09/10/zen-cart-seo-12-steps/ by Melanie Prough (mprough) which was very useful and answered / confirmed a number of SEO aspects for me however I am still unsure of a few things below so I am looking for some opinions please.

My starting point is to make sure I understand the internal linking structure within Zen-Cart (after some 12 years using ZC, go figure) but I cannot find an explanation in storeowner docs - I am not a professional developer (self taught through asking questions in here) so am looking for some guidance / instruction.

I need to make sure my internal linking is best practices. Am I doing enough or too much.

Internal Linking Structure
So this is how I see that it works within ZC in simplistic terms (with emphasis on products) but I am obviously not sure;

products within a category link to the category page - product <title> being the anchor text
product categories link to main page - page <title> being the anchor text

is that a fair assessment?

So the above if correct forms a heirachy passing on 'link juice' from the product to the category and then ultimately to the main page. This should make the main page the most important in Googles eyes followed by the category pages. So this would mean there is no advantage in me inserting links on the product page to the category page or main page? ... is this correct? ... I actually have been inserting links for a long time, with different anchor text to the product <title>, targeting the category page in an effort to boost its 'importance' and hence achieve better ranking - Q so am I overdoing it, duplicating what ZC is already doing? or is it OK to do this? I have to admit I am not seeing links in competitor descriptions or headers - so either I am overdoing it or they are not taking advantage of adding links??

Linking from one product to another will pass link juice from product A to product B ?? Most SEO sites suggest internally linking from one page to another can be a good thing, particularly if it helps the customer find what they are after, however some say that too much linking from a product can dilute it's link juice being passed on to the category page. Some have even suggested using rel="no follow" attributes to tell the crawler not to pass on any juice to the target page (which I have recently implemented). However some reading I've done suggests that the nofollow indicates to Google a lack of 'trust' in the target page ... very, very confusing!
Q is it ok to use rel="no follow" in internal links? and more to the point does it make any SEO sense to do so? is the link juice factor a red herring? (I have a sneaky suspicion I may have to undo the inclusion of the nofollow attribute but am looking obviously for opinions).

I actually did an SEMrush site audit yesterday for the first time, that really threw me - it showed for a given product that there were 4-8 (variable) incoming internal links and upwards of 70 outgoing internal links - so I counted all the links on the 'visible page' , i.e. all category links, reviews, footer links, featured products etc etc which totaled 70. I don't know if it is just how SEM do their reporting but I was under the assumption that links on a product page were those in the content within what is added by the page template and that of the page content defines added in the process of creating a new product, e.g. any links I inserted - I didn't expect that it was in fact the entire page as it is resolved based on the url so as I said it was somewhat of a shock. (showing my naevity).

So in respect to the above para, I can only assume that the links are differentiated by the crawler / ZC structure such that the links extraneous to the actual product page segment are not attributed to the 'product' as such - so referencing the above para again if I do not insert any links in the text of a product page then the only outgoing link is to the category that the product is listed under, and that is part of the standard ZC structure - Q is this the case?

Product Page Content

I have some 'common text' pretty much on every product description albeit the first section, including a h2 header in most cases, will be unique to the specific product but I am unsure as to whether Google is still seeing 'duplicate' content across my product pages. As much as I would like to have more / longer unique content, with nearly 250 earrings products it is very difficult to describe something as simple as an earring 250 different ways beyond about 200 characters without a lot of repetition.

Example of a typical product page text; the colored text is a unique description of the product, the rest is 'common' (other than variations of actual dimensions and sometimes materials and styles are variable but format is the same).

Long Drop Soft Blue Clip On Dangle Earrings (h2)
Beautiful modern Clip on Earrings featuring a lovely filigree intricate pattern in a lightweight metal in a fashionable soft pastel blue colour enamel finish - long drop 2 tier. Another gorgeous pair of earrings by Dazzlers that look quite spectacular on and represent Excellent Value and are fitted with excellent quality and very comfortable earring clips.

....... **Bonus comfort earring clip pads are included free!

Dimensions: Length to top of Earring Clip = 80mm (3 1/4") and 30mm (1 1/4") wide.

Materials;

● Earring Body: Soft pastel blue enameled metal alloy
● Clips: Gold plated - fitted with soft comfort clip pads

● Style(s): Modern Clip On Earrings Australia | Clip On Drop Earrings

● Shipping: item will ship from Adelaide, Australia in 1 business day via Australia Post
####################__

in the example above the H2 heading is linked to the category this product is in and Styles are links to two(2) different categories that this product could also fit into but these latter links have the rel="no follow" attribute.
So the unique content is about 220 characters and the common content is roughly the same at about 240 -
Q is the ratio acceptable for Google to not class it as duplication of the product description?

product url https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/fashion-clip-on-earrings/dangle-clip-on-earrings-soft-blue-metal-filigree-gold-clips

site url https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/

cheers, Mike

shags38:

v1.5.7b php 7.3

I am confused about so called best practices for internal linking mainly because there are so many different opinions out there. I have read https://pro-webs.net/blog/2009/09/10/zen-cart-seo-12-steps/ by Melanie Prough (mprough) which was very useful and answered / confirmed a number of SEO aspects for me however I am still unsure of a few things below so I am looking for some opinions please.

My starting point is to make sure I understand the internal linking structure within Zen-Cart (after some 12 years using ZC, go figure) but I cannot find an explanation in storeowner docs - I am not a professional developer (self taught through asking questions in here) so am looking for some guidance / instruction.

I need to make sure my internal linking is best practices. Am I doing enough or too much.

Internal Linking Structure
So this is how I see that it works within ZC in simplistic terms (with emphasis on products) but I am obviously not sure;

products within a category link to the category page - product <title> being the anchor text
product categories link to main page - page <title> being the anchor text

is that a fair assessment?
I think it is a fair assessment. It can however, with linked categories & products be a bit more complicated. I believe Zen Cart has adequate internal linking mechanisms and handles the canonical uses of linked pages very well compared to the "old" 1.3.X versions. I am way more concerned with resources, content & ease of navigation for the shoppers. I try to concentrate on the shopper's view to prevent lost sales (cart abandonment) from low trust markers & poor navigation.

shags38:

So the above if correct forms a heirachy passing on 'link juice' from the product to the category and then ultimately to the main page. This should make the main page the most important in Googles eyes followed by the category pages. So this would mean there is no advantage in me inserting links on the product page to the category page or main page? ... is this correct? ... I actually have been inserting links for a long time, with different anchor text to the product <title>, targeting the category page in an effort to boost its 'importance' and hence achieve better ranking - Q so am I overdoing it, duplicating what ZC is already doing? or is it OK to do this? I have to admit I am not seeing links in competitor descriptions or headers - so either I am overdoing it or they are not taking advantage of adding links??
No, the most important pages are your product pages. Google searches will generally land on a product or product level category. Your main page, however, is generally visited by shoppers who are trying to confirm they can trust you. They want to see policy pages, clear instructions, phone number & clear contact methods.

All internal linking matters when crawled. "Link juice" is becoming a very old, dated term. Content is king. Google & the other search engines are generally going to be crawling in "full text" these days. I have always felt the product title is excellent link text, so long as the title is well written.

shags38:

Linking from one product to another will pass link juice from product A to product B ?? Most SEO sites suggest internally linking from one page to another can be a good thing, particularly if it helps the customer find what they are after, however some say that too much linking from a product can dilute it's link juice being passed on to the category page. Some have even suggested using rel="no follow" attributes to tell the crawler not to pass on any juice to the target page (which I have recently implemented). However some reading I've done suggests that the nofollow indicates to Google a lack of 'trust' in the target page ... very, very confusing!
Q is it ok to use rel="no follow" in internal links? and more to the point does it make any SEO sense to do so? is the link juice factor a red herring? (I have a sneaky suspicion I may have to undo the inclusion of the nofollow attribute but am looking obviously for opinions).

Again, terms like "link juice" are very dated. rel="nofollow" should only be used on external links & page links that are NOT content pages, such as policy pages & other transactional related information. This is to let the search engines know that these pages don't contain product information and are ancillary.

shags38:

I actually did an SEMrush site audit yesterday for the first time, that really threw me - it showed for a given product that there were 4-8 (variable) incoming internal links and upwards of 70 outgoing internal links - so I counted all the links on the 'visible page' , i.e. all category links, reviews, footer links, featured products etc etc which totaled 70. I don't know if it is just how SEM do their reporting but I was under the assumption that links on a product page were those in the content within what is added by the page template and that of the page content defines added in the process of creating a new product, e.g. any links I inserted - I didn't expect that it was in fact the entire page as it is resolved based on the url so as I said it was somewhat of a shock. (showing my naevity).

shags38:

So in respect to the above para, I can only assume that the links are differentiated by the crawler / ZC structure such that the links extraneous to the actual product page segment are not attributed to the 'product' as such - so referencing the above para again if I do not insert any links in the text of a product page then the only outgoing link is to the category that the product is listed under, and that is part of the standard ZC structure - Q is this the case?
I think navigation is largely counted as such. Remember, full text crawling & indexing.... So navigation, especially links from common template areas that are repeated on many pages are seen as navigational structure. Link juice is a very dated term from old SEO. It's not very applicable with common navigation.

shags38:

Product Page Content

I have some 'common text' pretty much on every product description albeit the first section, including a h2 header in most cases, will be unique to the specific product but I am unsure as to whether Google is still seeing 'duplicate' content across my product pages. As much as I would like to have more / longer unique content, with nearly 250 earrings products it is very difficult to describe something as simple as an earring 250 different ways beyond about 200 characters without a lot of repetition.
Okay, this is a good place to help your rank. Google for example can be fooled by your boilerplate text if you add or change a word every 5 words, making it mathematically unique. Because they crawl in shingles.

shags38:

Example of a typical product page text; the colored text is a unique description of the product, the rest is 'common' (other than variations of actual dimensions and sometimes materials and styles are variable but format is the same). I think otherwise your content is quite good.

Long Drop Soft Blue Clip On Dangle Earrings (h2)
Beautiful modern Clip on Earrings featuring a lovely filigree intricate pattern in a lightweight metal in a fashionable soft pastel blue colour enamel finish - long drop 2 tier. Another gorgeous pair of earrings by Dazzlers that look quite spectacular on and represent Excellent Value and are fitted with excellent quality and very comfortable earring clips.

....... **Bonus comfort earring clip pads are included free!

Dimensions: Length to top of Earring Clip = 80mm (3 1/4") and 30mm (1 1/4") wide.

Materials;

● Earring Body: Soft pastel blue enameled metal alloy
● Clips: Gold plated - fitted with soft comfort clip pads

● Style(s): Modern Clip On Earrings Australia | Clip On Drop Earrings

● Shipping: item will ship from Adelaide, Australia in 1 business day via Australia Post
####################__

in the example above the H2 heading is linked to the category this product is in and Styles are links to two(2) different categories that this product could also fit into but these latter links have the rel="no follow" attribute.
So the unique content is about 220 characters and the common content is roughly the same at about 240 -
Q is the ratio acceptable for Google to not class it as duplication of the product description?

product url https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/fashion-clip-on-earrings/dangle-clip-on-earrings-soft-blue-metal-filigree-gold-clips

site url https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/

cheers, Mike

I'm not seeing the rel="nofollow" you are describing. This link (https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/dangle-clip-on-earrings/clip-on-earrings-twist-style-gold-fashion-earrings-by-dazzlers?cPath=1&) for example is from your "ALL Clip On Earrings" category, which I assume is all linked product's.

So it's "real page is here" (https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/dangle-clip-on-earrings/clip-on-earrings-twist-style-gold-fashion-earrings-by-dazzlers). The linked page above with a different URL, same product, carries the correct canonical declaration.

<link rel="canonical" href="https://www.cliponearrings.net.au/dangle-clip-on-earrings/clip-on-earrings-twist-style-gold-fashion-earrings-by-dazzlers" />

With regard to the percentage of uniqueness, more unique is better.... period. Google for example has never came out and said "we require X amount of uniqueness", instead they preach unique content and rank you accordingly on that metric. Remember your boilerplate here, it adds to your duplicity.

~Melanie