Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Sliders and Content Above the Fold
-
I was just inspecting a wire frame that is going out to a client and realized that the slider may interfere with the "content above the fold." Can't believe this had not struck me on others.
If the Header has basic business info, etc. in it and you place a slider to display images in the area just beneath the Header or slightly down from it, does that decrease the amount of content seen a being above the fold? Or, is content above the fold established by virtue of H1,2, 3, etc.?
-
The main considerations here are:
1. How is the slider interpreted by search engines and how the presence of a slider affects the interpretation of the page.
Accessibility of the text/content of the slider and how this content may be affected when the search engine tries to determine the relevance of the page.
If google is looking at the areas of a page and applying weightings etc (there's been a number of articles about the ratio of content vs ads for instance) then are you pushing more valuable content further down the page to a less important position and how much of a difference does this actually make.
How different is this from putting a picture at the top of an article/page (although normally the H1 would come first)
It would be interesting to test two copies of the same page - one with the slider above the content and one below to see what difference it makes.
Does the position of the
in the html make a difference?
2. From a user experience / conversion perspective - how effective are the sliders.
I completely see your point about selling product. Yes, putting your goods on show to communicate to the visitor that this is what you do and how great they are makes total sense. When you're a professional services company using a slider to present generic "values" against stock photos then maybe it's not the strongest approach!
How important is the fold to humans? I've read a number of times about how the old advice to put everything above the fold because users don't scroll is outdated advice and that people are more than willing to scroll down. I think the caveat here is that there has to be some sign/scent that they're going to find what they're looking for by scrolling down.
-
Thanks for the response Doug. Is there anyplace you have found as a resource that supports this above the fold delineation? I am with you in that it seems reasonable (but I grew up with newspapers ;)) My thoughts are that with the algorithm there would need to be some mechanism to measure that bottom of header - top of footer area [maybe character or word count] and then to calculate that and apply a factor to the content that is weighted higher than a similar factor for the second half.
It would certainly be easier to game if we new bottom of header to beginning of H2 is 'top of fold' and when there was no H1 or H2, etc. there would be full credit given to page in total. (Then, again, we are at the measure by equation versus placement).As to the slider, If I am doing a professional practice or a product producer, etc. I try to stay away. With companies that sell a service or product that "look" is a big appeal, it really is helpful. We use a lot of CMS (WordPress, Joomla, Drupal) and test a lot of sliders. Typically, by the time a plug in slider makes it near the top of the heap, it has been fairly well tested. Slider issues today typically revolve around browser updates and we have standards in place regarding updates due to the impact a failure can have on a client.
We only update after there has been time for the update to be in the marketplace (truly varies so we break it down by type of update). If it is a browser we might well wait 4 to 6 months to see what bugs get worked out. We then test all on the site once updated so the problem is not a surprise. But, again, I rarely see problems with them.
Thanks again,
-
Yep, there's a real risk that the slider is going to push more valuable content down the page and potentially below the fold.
"The fold" is not determined by header tags or anything like that, it's purely down to the window size of the browser. Different people are going to have different fold positions based on their screen size or their preferred browser window size so you can't be absolutely sure where the cut-off position is going to be.
I'm not a big fan of sliders. My worry is that they get stuck at the top of the page to create something visually interesting / dynamic rather than think about justifying the slider's place on the page.
Does the slider help clearly communicate the proposition / offer or idea being presented?
You want visitors arriving on the page to feel as if they've found what they are looking for rather than starting a treasure hunt...
Is the slider content indexable then you can treat this as content above the fold and optimise accordingly, but you've instantly placed stylistic constrains on yourself!
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Should I redirect or add content, to 47 Pages?
We have an insurance agency website with 47 pages that have duplicate/low content warnings. What's the best way to handle this? I'm I right in thinking I have 2 options? Either add new content or redirect the page? Thanks in advance 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | laurentjb1 -
Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
How long should my website content be (max and min number of words)?
I saw a web site which has been number 1 on Google for a long time, and the home page has 5700 words, but the results show it is not spam, so what would be the recommended word number for a home page?
On-Page Optimization | | Majapopa0 -
Duplicate Content with ?Page ID's in WordPress
Hi there, I'm trying to figure out the best way to solve a duplicate content problem that I have due to Page ID's that WordPress automatically assigns to pages. I know that in order for me to resolve this I have to use canonical urls but the problem for me is I can't figure out the URL structure. Moz is showing me thousands of duplicate content errors that are mostly related to Page IDs For example, this is how a page's url should look like on my site Moz is telling me there are 50 duplicate content errors for this page. The page ID for this page is 82 so the duplicate content errors appear as follows and so on. For 47 more pages. The problem repeats itself with other pages as well. My permalinks are set to "Post Name" so I know that's not an issue. What can I do to resolve this? How can I use canonical URLs to solve this problem. Any help will be greatly appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | SpaMedica0 -
Stolen Content reposted on other sites. How does this affect ranking?
Visitors often copy and paste my content and post it elsewhere... on Facebook, on Tumblr, on forums and sometimes on competing websites... but they don't link to me. How does Google treat this duplicated content? What is the best way to handle it? File DCMA claims or ask them for a link?
On-Page Optimization | | brianflannery0 -
Fading in content above the fold on window load
Hi, We'd like to render a font stack from Typekit and paint a large cover image above the fold of our homepage after document completion. Since asynchronously loading anything generally looks choppy, we fade in the affected elements when it's done. Sure, it gives a much smoother feeling and fast load times, but I have a concern about SEO. While Typekit loads, h1, h2 and the page's leading paragraph are sent down the wire with an invisible style (but still technically exist as static html). Even though they appear to a user only milliseconds later, I'm concerned that a search engine's initial request is met with a page whose best descriptive assets are marked as invisible. Both UX and SEO have high value to our business model, so we're asking for some perspective to make the right kind of trade off. Our site has a high domain authority compared to our competition, and sales keyword competition is high. Will this UX improvement damage our On-Page SEO? If so and purely from an SEO perspective, roughly how serious will the impact be? We're eager to hear any advice or comments on this. Thanks a lot.
On-Page Optimization | | noyelling0 -
Duplicate content penalty
when moz crawls my site they say I have 2x the pages that I really have & they say I am being penalized for duplicate content. I know years ago I had my old domain resolve over to my new domain. Its the only thing that makes sense as to the duplicate content but would search engines really penalize me for that? It is technically only on 1 site. My business took a significant sales hit starting early July 2013, I know google did and algorithm update that did have SEO aspects. I need to resolve the problem so I can stay in business
On-Page Optimization | | cheaptubes0 -
Does schema.org assist with duplicate content concerns
The issue of duplicate content has been well documented and there are lots of articles suggesting to noindex archive pages in WordPress powered sites. Schema.org allows us to mark-up our content, including marking a components URL. So my question simply, is no-indexing archive (category/tag) pages still relevant when considering duplicate content? These pages are in essence a list of articles, which can be marked as an article or blog posting, with the url of the main article and all the other cool stuff the scheme gives us. Surely Google et al are smart enough to recognise these article listings as gateways to the main content, therefore removing duplicate content concerns. Of course, whether or not doing this is a good idea will be subjective and based on individual circumstances - I'm just interested in whether or not the search engines can handle this appropriately.
On-Page Optimization | | MarkCA0