#3.88 / 8 rate

SEO Broken Link Checker

4,000 users

2023-12-16

Craftled

[email protected]

Extension Information

5 star

63%

4 star

3 star

13%

2 star

13%

1 star

13%

Supported Languages

Permissions

Description

Check for broken links on the current page.

Reviews

Eb*****

Was working well but is no longer detecting broken links and is flagging some broken internal links as external for some odd reason.

Dr*****

I admit that I am not yet fully convinced of the functions and possibilities of the Chrome extension mentioned. I hope that my experiences so far are only a small part of the whole spectrum and that the extension will be convincing in other areas. It should be noted at this point that the extension has a relatively slow performance and does not offer a user interface that is as appealing as personal preferences. It must be stated that the programme examined is not capable of fulfilling the expectations placed on it. However, it must be stated that the tracking of URLs is not carried out in a nested manner. There is a possibility that the URLs can be copied. It is regrettable to note that the extension does not fulfil expectations. In practice, the extension proves to be less user-friendly and does not fulfil the requirement for efficient and intuitive handling. It would be extremely helpful if you could tell me who is responsible for producing such inadequate extensions. It would be very useful for further processing if you could let me know who is responsible for the production of such extensions, which unfortunately turn out to be unusable. In this context, it would be of great interest to find out whether tracking of links up to a nesting depth of five to nine could be realised. Storage in a TXT, CSV or JSON file might be a possible solution. Consideration should also be given to whether the responsibility could be assumed by someone else in order to ensure optimised implementation.

Va*****

It's good up to a point. I like that you can see, from a glance, which links are good, cautionary, or bad. However, the checker doesn't tell you *why* they're bad. Having an error code with the result would go a long way to explaining the type of error the checker encounters. It also doesn't seem to differentiate between a standard hyperlink and a scripting one for dynamic functionality. For example, it marks a dropdown menu trigger or ascending/descending toggle link as (BAD) when both work perfectly. Furthermore, it struggles (understandably) with pages behind firewalls or VPNs, giving similarly incorrect link health information. With those small tweaks, it could be a great(er) extension.