How to handle large numbers of comments?
-
First the good news. One site that I've been working on has seen an increase in traffic from 2k/month to 80k!
As well as lots of visitors, the site is also getting lots of comments with one page getting more than 70 comments/day and showing no sign of a slow down! Approximately 3000 comments in total and growing!
What is the best approach for handling this? I'm not talking about the review/approval/response but just in the way these comments are presented on the website taking both seo and usability into account.
Does anyone have any particular recommendations? Options I've considered are:
- Just show the most recent x comments and ignore the rest. (Nobody is going to read 3000 comments!)
- Paginate comments (risk of duplicate content? Using Ajax could hide long-tail phrases in comments?)
- Show all comments (page load speed is suffering and this is likely to be causing problems for mobile visitors)
How do active comments on a page contribute to an article's freshness?
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
-
Hi Paul. On many CMS's you'll find that the additional comments don't change the page's Last Modified http header or indeed the posted date in the body of the article. The comments are so far down the page that their perceived importance is going to be pretty low.
That said, active commends do show that there's significant visitor engagement which has got to be a good thing!
Interesting question about running a poll regarding the order of comments. I think however the order of the comments can work either way depending on the content/context.
For example, "news" type articles with a relatively short shelf-life tend to work better with comments in chronological order. There tend to be fewer comments (which dry-up as the article ages) so the ability to follow disussions in the comments is greatly improved.
For "ever-green" content it doesn't work so well. It can be jarring to come to the comments and be presented with one from 5 years ago!
The other SEO issues related to comments (especially out of the box on many CMS's) is the use of links (followed or no-followed).
If I've got a VERY popular page that's earning lots of real links, having all those links in the comments is going to be eating into the page equity that's going to be available to other pages I'm linking to on my own site. Paginating comments might be one way affect this?
I'm hoping to get some time to make the changes to the page in question - it'll be interesting to see what (if anything) changes!
Thanks!
-
My understanding of the freshness aspect of the algorithm is that just adding or changing content on a page won't help it look more "recent" to the SE's. So new comments aren't really a benefit there.
As a user, I prefer comments that appear in chronological order, but I know many who prefer reverse chrono. That would be a really good question for an interactive poll on the site. If visitors are that engaged with comments, you'd likely get a large enough response to be statistically significant.
The big SEO issue I encounter from large numbers of comments is that all the extra content can dilute the original keyword focus of the page as you created it. Sure, there may be long-tail phrases introduced, but if they start to override the terms you were originally trying to focus on & rank for, things can get messy. Not suggesting dropping comments, obviously, but paginating them with a canonical back to the original post might at least partly help.
I'm also curious whether, if the comments all repeat the target key phrases to frequently, the page could look keyword stuffed. have no proof of that, unfortunately, just the suspicion.
And yea, whatever you decide will definitely have to address the page speed issue for visitors.
Paul
-
Thanks Greg, I'd not considered "lazy loading", although while this is going to help with loading times I'm still a little concerned about page size! At least with user controlled pagination it's their choice to load more comments...
-
Thanks EGOL. Totally understand your point about respecting visitors who take the time to leave a comment. What makes it harder is that effort is being spent answering questions/engaging visitors in the comments which gets lost is we arbitrarily cut off comments.
-
Thank you!
I see that now. That looks great. Visitors can get to all comments but pageload time is saved.
-
EGOL, just to clarify...
With Lazy Loading and displaying only 20 comments, more comments get displayed when you scroll down, rather than having the page load all 3000 comments at once.
In other words, the comments wont be hidden, just tucked away and loaded as needed, when scrolling down the page.
http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/lazy-loading-dynamic-function-loading
Greg
-
I would paginate.
People who leave comments may come back a couple days later to see the comments left after theirs. I think that it would be disrespectful of these dedicated visitors to show only some of the comments.
Take care of these people. They are your most important asset.
-
I would go with your first point.
The more content on the page the better. Even better is user generated content!
Perhaps for user experience, display only 20 comments and wrap the wrest under "lazy loading" (suggestion from developer sitting next to me)
In other words, let the bots see all 3000 comments on the same page, but for user experience so the page doesn't take days to load, incorporate the "lazy loading" feature....
GREG
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
-
How handle pages with "read more" text query strings?
My site has hundreds of keyword content landing pages that contain one or two sections of "read more" text that work by calling the page and changing a ChangeReadMore variable. This causes the page to currently get indexed 5 times (see examples below plus two more with anchor tag set to #sectionReadMore2 This causes Google to include the first version of the page which is the canonical version and exclude the other 4 versions of the page. Google search console says my site has 4.93K valid pages and 13.8K excluded pages. My questions are: 1. Does having a lot of excluded pages which are all copies of included pages hurt my domain authority or otherwise hurt my SEO efforts? 2. Should I add a rel="nofollow" attribute to the read more link? If I do this will Google reduce the number of excluded pages? 3. Should I instead add logic so the canonical tag displays the exact URL each time the page re-displays in another readmore mode? I assume this would increase my "included pages" and decrease the number of "excluded pages". Would this somehow help my SEO efforts? EXAMPLE LINKS https://www.tpxonline.com/Marketplace/Used-AB-Dick-Presses-For-Sale.asp https://www.tpxonline.com/Marketplace/Used-AB-Dick-Presses-For-Sale.asp?ChangeReadMore=More#sectionReadMore1 https://www.tpxonline.com/Marketplace/Used-AB-Dick-Presses-For-Sale.asp?ChangeReadMore=Less#sectionReadMore1
Technical SEO | | DougHartline0 -
How to handle dynamic product url that changes regularly
Hey Moz, It's actually my first post - although I look at the Q&As on a daily basis! I was hoping to get your opinions on how to handle dynamic product url that can change regularly. Before we start, our product page urls get populated by the product titles. So the situation is this. Let’s say we have a product url: /product/12345-abcde-fghj/ Then the client decides to change the title a week later, so the url changes with it to): /listing/12345-klm-qjk Another week later, the agent changes to: /listing/12345-jkhfk-jhf-kjdhfkjdhf So to note, the product ID will always remain the same. Naturally, 301 redirecting every time would cause a bit of page authority to be lost every time 301ed. Also potentially creating new a few hundreds of 301 redirect daily sounds totally mental. (I have been informed by the dev we expect a few hundreds to change url daily) Although I understand there’s no limit on how many 301s you can have on a single domain, this would look completely unnatural - really not ideal. So the potential solution we thought was: we’ll keep the original url, and make sure that is the only url that will get indexed**/product/12345-abcde-fghj/**and put canonical tag on any of the new urls, directing to the original url. The problem we will have then is that the most current url may not exactly match the description of the product -wouldn’t be ideal for ux. Has anyone had dealing with issues like this in the past? Would love to get your input! Many Thanks
Technical SEO | | MH-UK0 -
Sizes and numbers in friendly urls - syntax
Ok, I'm trying to establish some business rules of syntax for SEO friendly URLS. I'm doing this for an OpenCart online store which uses a SEO-url field to construct the "friendly URL's". The good news of that is I have total control over the urls' the bad news is I had to do some tricky Excel work to populate them. That all said, I have a problem with items that have sizes. This is a crafts store so many of the items are differentiated by size. Examples: Sleigh Bells, come in 1/2", 3/4", 1", 1 1/2" etc. So far Ive tried to stay away from inch mark " by spelling it out. Right now its inch but could be in. The numbers, fractions, sizes etc. create some ghastly friendly URL's. Is there any wisdom or syntax standards out there that would help me. I'm trying to avoid this: www.mysite.com//index.php?route=craft-accessories/bells/sleigh-bells/sleigh-bells-1-one-half-inch-with-loop I realize that the category (sleigh-bells) is repeated in the product name but there are several 1 1/2" items in the store. Any thoughts would be useful, even if it's links to good SEO sites that have mastered the myriad of issues with dimensions in the urls. thanks
Technical SEO | | jbcul0 -
Is it bad for seo to have a large number of external links opening in modal windows?
I've got a job board that pulls in feeds from various job sites and recruiters. Rather than losing visitors exiting my site, I thought I was being clever by opening all external links in modal windows, so the user can 'click to close' and effectively stay on my site. I'm now starting to think this may potentially have been a bad move for SEO. Is there any evidence to suggest this? Simon
Technical SEO | | simmo2350 -
While SEOMoz currently can tell us the number of linking c-blocks, can SEOMoz tell us what the specific c-blocks are?
I know it is important to have a diverse set of c-blocks, but I don't know how it is possible to have a diverse set if I can't find out what the c-blocks are in the first place. Also, is there a standard for domain linking c-blocks? For instance, I'm not sure if a certain amount is considered "average" or "above-average."
Technical SEO | | Todd_Kendrick0 -
Which is The Best Way to Handle Query Parameters?
Hi mozzers, I would like to know the best way to handle query parameters. Say my site is example.com. Here are two scenarios. Scenario #1: Duplicate content example.com/category?page=1
Technical SEO | | jombay
example.com/category?order=updated_at+DESC
example.com/category
example.com/category?page=1&sr=blog-header All have the same content. Scenario #2: Pagination example.com/category?page=1
example.com/category?page=2 and so on. What is the best way to solve both? Do I need to use Rel=next and Rel=prev or is it better to use Google Webmaster tools parameter handling? Right now I am concerned about Google traffic only. For solving the duplicate content issue, do we need to use canonical tags on each such URL's? I am not using WordPress. My site is built on Ruby on Rails platform. Thanks!0 -
How to handle Not found Crawl errors?
I'm using Google webmaster tools and able to see Not found Crawl errors. I have set up custom 404 page for all broken links. You can see my custom 404 page as follow. http://www.vistastores.com/404 But, I have question about it. Will it require to set 301 redirect for broken links which found in Google webmaster tools?
Technical SEO | | CommercePundit0 -
DISQUS COMMENTS backlinks-good for seo? YES/NO?
DISQUS COMMENTS backlinks-good for seo? YES/NO? I have just started commenting on "powered by disquus" websites in the Disqus comments box and left a link to my website in the name field! Having googled whether Disqus comments backlinks are any good for seo purposes i have discovered that there is a 50/50 view on the subject with some people saying they are a "goldmine" for getting high PR backlinks and others saying they are a waste of time because googlebot cannot read Java. My own experience of commenting on Disqus powered websites is that wordpress blogs powered by disqus comments ARE INDEXED by GOOGLE and the "BACKLINK IS IN THE SOURCE OF THE PAGE" When i comment on normal websites using the Disqus comment system i have found that my Disqus comments ARE NOT indexed by Google and there IS NO BACKLINK in the page source! Has anybody got any views on whether Disqus comments backlinks are any good?
Technical SEO | | Freebetsuk2