How To Write Internal Links And Anchor Text That Do Something

Internal links are the one ranking-adjacent thing you fully control, and most sites spend that control on a related-posts widget nobody clicks.

The value is in editorial links: the ones inside a sentence, placed where a reader has a live question, with anchor text that says what is on the other side. Everything else is navigation.

Anchor Text Is A Description, Not A Label

The anchor is the only information a reader or a machine gets about the destination before committing. Spending it on “here” or “read more” throws away the entire signal.

Before:

We’ve written about content pruning before. You can read more about it here.

After:

Deciding what to delete is a separate procedure with four possible outcomes per page, which we set out in content pruning: what to delete and what to keep.

The second version tells the reader what they will get, gives the destination descriptive anchor text, and does not waste a sentence announcing that a link exists.

Two limits worth respecting. Anchor text should be natural language, not a keyword jammed into a sentence that no longer reads properly. And it does not need to match the destination’s title exactly; a description of what the page does is better than a citation of what it is called.

Place Links Where The Question Occurs

The instinct is to put links at the end of a section, tidied out of the way. That is the point at which the reader’s question has already passed.

Link at the moment of doubt. If you write “this is riskier than it looks”, the sentence where you concede that is where the reader wants the detail, and that is where the link belongs.

The consequence is that a well-linked article has links distributed unevenly, clustered around the points where you are making claims that need support. A page with one link per section, evenly spaced, was linked by a process rather than by a writer.

Which Pages To Link To

The page you are implicitly relying on. If your argument assumes the reader accepts something you argued elsewhere, link it. This is the highest-value case and the one most often missed.

The next step. They are convinced; what do they do now.

The objection. If you know the reader is thinking “but what about X”, link the page that handles X rather than handling it badly in a parenthesis.

The page that needs help. Deliberately, occasionally. A page nobody links to is one nobody finds, and you control that.

What not to link: the same page five times in one article, your homepage inside body text, and anything linked because a plugin suggested a keyword match. Automated internal linking produces links whose anchor text matches a phrase rather than an intent, and readers notice within two clicks.

The Practical Rules

Two to four editorial links per 1,000 words is a reasonable density. Higher is fine when the article genuinely depends on other work; much higher makes the page hard to read.

Use root-relative paths so links survive a domain change. Check they resolve, because a broken internal link is worse than none and appears in exactly the place where you claimed support existed.

Link out too, at least once, to a primary source. A page that cites nothing is asking to be trusted on assertion, and adding citations was among the highest-performing edits in the original GEO study, which we summarise in what actually works in generative engine optimization.

A Context For Fixing Bad Anchors

A Wrivio Context for this could say:

Rewrite these sentences so each link anchor describes what the linked page contains. Replace anchors such as here, this article, read more, and click here with a descriptive phrase drawn from the surrounding sentence. Remove sentences whose only purpose is to announce that a link exists. Keep every URL and page title exactly as written. Do not add links, claims, or descriptions of pages that are not in the original.

Press Ctrl+Shift+Space, paste the paragraphs, and check the diff. Watch for a rewrite that improved an anchor by describing a page more specifically than you actually know it to be, since an anchor promising a template on a page with no template is a broken promise you shipped deliberately.

Why This Matters More Now

When a retrieval system chunks your page, the anchor text travels with the sentence. “Read more here” adds nothing to that chunk. “The four outcomes of a content audit” adds a fact about what exists on your site.

It also matters for the reader you still get. Fewer people arrive than did two years ago, so what they do after arriving carries more weight than it used to, which is the strategic point in zero-click search and what to do about it.

Common Questions

How many internal links should a post have?

Two to four per 1,000 words as editorial links inside sentences. Density matters less than placement, since a link at the point of doubt outperforms three links in a footer.

Does exact-match anchor text help rankings?

Descriptive anchor text helps, and forcing exact keyword matches into sentences hurts readability without a proportional gain. Write the phrase that describes the destination.

Should I use automated internal linking tools?

For finding candidates, yes. For placing links automatically, no, because the tool matches phrases rather than the reader’s question and the results read as machine-inserted.

Do links from old posts still count?

Yes, and adding links from your existing archive to a new post is usually the fastest way to get it discovered, which is why a publishing checklist should include linking from three older posts.

Download Wrivio for Windows to rewrite weak link anchors into descriptions, without a rewrite promising content the destination does not have.