4 ms·
There seems to be some confusion about the different kinds of nofollow. <a rel="nofollow"...> Means not to follow the link to which the nofollow belongs. It m
by jerednel 15y ago
There seems to be some confusion about the different kinds of nofollow.
<a rel="nofollow"...> Means not to follow the link to which the nofollow belongs. It may still be indexed, however, if the page is found by a either an internal or external followed link.
The <meta name="robots" content="nofollow"> does not follow/crawl to any of the links on the page. These pages may be indexed, however if they are reached by either an internal or external followed link
To keep the page out of the index, "noindex" should be applied to the meta tag of the page that is to be removed from the index.
Further, a Robots.txt /disallow does not remove pages from the index. A noindex must be used on the page to remove it from the index. Or a request via Google's Webmaster Tools.
That said, it seems feasible that if Google wanted to, they could parse the external links from a Twitter stream without actually following them. This wouldn't necessitate Twitter removing nofollow from their links.
- mapgrep 15y ago"if Google wanted to, they could parse the external links from a Twitter stream without actually following them" The problem is that there are no external links in the tweets. All tweets point to t.co, which is run by Twitter. You can't find out the ultimate destination of the link without following it through Twitter's redirector.