Mashable - The Social Media Guide - Latest Comments in Internal Linking Explained

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Rob Maguire — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 08:14:18 -0000

I'd love to see a similar piece on via links, feel free to entertain the idea.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

below24 — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 05:08:46 -0000

Useful links are what help the net grow. Maybe a link rating system would be good. Sites with less than favourable content would then either have to get there act together or see there visitor count fall drasticaly.

The likns could change colour depending on relevance.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Alexandre Figueiredo — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:54:12 -0000

I have to agree with igneous and I already mentioned it here once. There's nothing has annoying has a link to a useless site like crunchbase.
It would be a lot more honest and useful to link to a internal page like it's done here at Mashable. At least we're redirected to a link that actually has information about the site we want to get to know.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

zooloo — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 09:37:37 -0000

Hi. that was a very interesting articel about inbounding linkage! thanks

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Gina — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:02:01 -0000

Internal linking has ramifications beyond company revenues (which in my opinion should reflect and be subservient to the quality of your relationship with your customer base).

If sites are willing to lead their users (internally) astray for the sake of ad revenues or site stats, I'd consider those revenues and stats a false reflection of the quality of your site/usership. You're essentially intentionally degrading the quality of the user's experience.

Perhaps it's possible to, instead of depending on that 10% of increased revenues to come from current internal linking dependencies, brainstorm a way to continue adding genuine value to your site that will encourage new opportunities for increased revenue.

That said, I for one certainly appreciate your efforts to remain conscious of the user experience--however, many journalistic sites, for example, are utilizing internal linking practices that have serious consequences that are contrary to their mission to inform their readers (by linking to tangentially relevant internal pages rather than highly topical external pages in their news citations).

Web sites need to be conscious of how, why and where they utilize internal links, and make sure that their strategy does not conflict with their central mission.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Adam Taylor — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 07:27:19 -0000

I like the way you've addressed the issue rationally and professionally.

Very nice to see. Good job!

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Pete — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 04:45:08 -0000

Oh, I have no doubt that [via] links should always be there - they always are.

We just sometimes get complaints that people want an in-article link, rather than [via sourcename]. On the other hand, if you do that, you sometimes get complaints that you are "burying" the source link in the story rather than making it more prominent by having it outside the article body in a [via] link. It's therefore impossible to please everyone.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Robin Wauters — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 04:24:38 -0000

I think internal linking is usually annoying (TC), sometimes not (Mashable).

At blognation, we always link directly to the service or company website, occasionally to a previous article or one from another editor that adds context. But unlike TC, we only link to the company database (index) at the very bottom of a post.

Curious what you have to say about 'via' links. My opinion: they should always be there. Period.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Keeem — Sun, 21 Oct 2007 01:08:31 -0000

I don't see anything wrong with how it's done now. I actually appreciate it. There's so much news reported here I can't read everything nor do I always remember where stuff I did read already is. The links are relevant and helpful. :)

Re: Internal Linking Explained

Collin LaHay — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:41:44 -0000

I think the way you do it right now is fine, but if you think you have a better idea, more power to you!

Re: Internal Linking Explained

igneous — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 22:15:46 -0000

heres an example of internal linking that I think everyone hates. Techcrunch to crunchbase. That shit annoys the fuck out of me

Re: Internal Linking Explained

me — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:16:08 -0000

I too don't mind the way the ads or internal linkage is setup at your site Pete. Any more ads and people will start using ad blockers ;)

Re: Internal Linking Explained

CountRob — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:07:57 -0000

Wikipedia has an insane amount of internal links, and they are helpful. If you just said "we covered this in an article a while back" and DIDN'T link to it, that would be annoying to have to find it. So internal links are logical.

Also, as long as you don't put ads inside the text it's not a problem. I hate it when sites put a huge square ad in the middle of the page and the text is around it. Very annoying, glad that isn't done here.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

DuaneBrown — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:46:25 -0000

I look forward to your better solution. Should be a good read.

Re: Internal Linking Explained

allen stern — Sat, 20 Oct 2007 20:08:42 -0000

There are internal links that add value, and those that don't. There are also ways of adding links only to add more traffic as you pointed out, which is sad.

Also when you read a story and expect to go:

a --> b

and instead you get

a --> some misc site within the site's network --> b

it doesn't work