Is there something fundamentally wrong with our site architecture?
-
Hi everyone!
Could a few of you brilliant people take a look at the architecture of this site http://www.ccisolutions.com, and let me know if you see any obvious problems? I have run the site through XENU, and all of our most important pages, including categories and products, are no deeper than level 3. Everything deeper than that is, in most cases, an image, a pdf or an orphaned page (of which we have thousands).
Could having thousands upon thousands of orphaned pages be having a more hurtful effect on our rankings than our site architecture? I have made loud noises and suggested that duplicate content, site speed and dilution of page authority due to all those orphaned pages are some of the primary reasons we don't rank as well as we could. But, I think those suggestions just aren't sexy or dramatic enough, so there is much shaking of heads and discussion that it must be something fundamentally wrong with site architecture.
I know re-arranging the furniture is more fun than scrubbing the floors, but I think our problems are more about fundamental cleanup than moving things around
What do you think?
-
Thank you so much Peter. This is excellent advice and has dot fallen on deaf ears! As we move forward, not only with trying to make the current site better but also to redesign a site on a new platform that is easier for our customers to use, your advice is going to come in very handy. Thanks so much for taking the time to comment and advise!
Dana
-
Come back in two or three months after you remove the pages and let us know if anything happened.
-
Thanks again. Yes, we are definitely going to go for it. It makes complete sense.
-
If this was my site I would place that form under a tab.
If you get rid of the review/ratings page and the email to friend page that will decrease the size of your site by a lot of pages. That will give you a more compact site with a much higher content value per page.
If I dumped pages like these from one of my sites I would be hoping to see my rankings slowly climb a little higher.
I can't guarantee that... It is what I would do myself and what I would hope the result would be.
Good luck if you try it. I think that there is upside here and I think that the downside is about zero.
-
One final follow up question EGOL if you don't mind. We also have a link on all the product pages that goes to an "Email this Product to a Friend" request page on another URL. It's a very similar scenario as the "Rating/Review" request links. Are these causing a similar problem? I ask because if we are going to fix one we might as well fix the other at the same time. Let me know what you think.
Thanks as always!
-
Fascinating. It never ceases to amaze me that the better I get at SEO, the less I seem to know Thanks very much EGOL I very very much appreciate your explanation and help on this one!
-
My understanding is that pagerank flows into every link on a page. If the page has a nofollow link then the pagerank into that page is lost.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVOOB_Q0MZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cl0MBeKDXLY
These pages are not needed for the visitor either. One click less if the form is placed under the review/ratings tab that leads to them.
-
Thanks EGOL,
Is it evaporating pagerank simply because those pages exist as many separate pages with thin/duplicate content? Or would the "no follow" be evaporating pagerank? If so, how? I was under the impression that adding a "no follow" attribute retained the pagerank of the page on which the no followed link resides?
Thanks for any clarification you can provide. I am trying to get my ducks in a row before giving marching orders to our IT director.
Dana
-
That would evaporate a lot of pagerank.
I would place the form under a tab to reduce that loss.
-
Thanks EGOL,
I have spent some time discussing the "Review Request" page types that you referenced above with our IT director. Since we have these set as "disallow" in our robots.txt file, and it appears that none of these pages have been indexed, shouldn't we be able to accomplish what needs to be done by adding a "no follow" attribute to these pages?
-
Maybe do some re-architecting along with the cleanup.
I didn't walk thru the cart process but the site navigation at least has the look of something that's been patched and altered over time, for example: Main menu My Account and Login point to the same page so that kind of thing should be sorted, the navigation paths should be mapped and made simpler if possible.
The site could do with some copy editing. Might want to tighten up how everything is organized, and plan overall what pages are supposed to be ranking for what terms, the information seems spread around too much, it all seems a little scattered and in places a little verbose.
Here: https://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/CLA.cat, we have a mis-used "About Us" page offering additional services descriptions instead of talking exclusively about the company.
Services overviews should be found only on their own focussed pages designed to rank for their terms.
About page should be about the company itself: who's in it, reason for being, history, function within the economy, corporate responsibility ideas, market(s) served. That kind of stuff.
My take just checking quickly.
-
If I had a site with thousands orphaned pages I would be attacking them with an ax in both hands. If they serve no purpose they would have been redirected the same day they were orphaned.
Google can have a really long memory for orphaned pages - years for some that I have seen. So if these pages are thin content, or duplicate content I think that they would be putting a drag on your site if they are not causing a Panda problem.
If possible, I would also be putting links in the pdf documents that point to the homepage or a more relevant page of the website. Then any linkjuice that flows into them from your site or from other sites is put to good use. For pdfs that you don't own and can't edit I would be looking for a way to provide the same information where linkjuice can flow back.
I would also be after those review form pages, getting rid of them for a form on the product page under a tab. Those pages are linkjuice sinks, trivial content, duplicate content. I would get rid of them ASAP.
Here is an example
http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/jsp/product/ProductRatingRequest.jsp?product=ANH-GL2400-24
That's what I see in a quick look.
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
-
Does adding new pages, new slugs, new URLS in a site affects rankings and visibility?
hi reader, i have decided to add new pages to my site. if i add new urls, i feel like i have to submit the sitemap again. my question is, does submitting sitemap again with new slugs or urls affects visibility is serps, if yes, how do i minimize the impact?
Web Design | | SIMON-CULL0 -
Can I safely asume that links between subsites on a subdirectories based multisite will be treated as internal links within a single site by Google?
I am building a multisite network based in subdirectories (of the mainsite.com/site1 kind) where the main site is like a company site, and subsites are focused on brands or projects of that company. There will be links back and forth from the main site and the subsites, as if subsites were just categories or pages within the main site (they are hosted in subfolders of the main domain, after all). Now, Google's John Mueller has said: <<as far="" as="" their="" url="" structure="" is concerned,="" subdirectories="" are="" no="" different="" from="" pages="" and="" subpages="" on="" your="" main="" site.="" google="" will="" do="" its="" best="" to="" identify="" where="" sites="" separate="" using="" but="" the="" is="" same="" for="" a="" single="" site,="" you="" should="" assume="" that="" seo="" purposes,="" network="" be="" treated="" one="">></as> This sounds fine to me, except for the part "Google will do its best to identify where sites are separate", because then, if Google establishes that my multisite structure is actually a collection of different sites, links between subsites and mainsite would be considered backlinks between my own sites, which could be therefore considered a link wheel, that is, a kind of linking structure Google doesn't like. How can I make sure that Google understand my multisite as a unique site? P.S. - The reason I chose this multisite structure, instead of hosting brands in categories of the main site, is that if I use the subdirectories based multisite feature I will be able to map a TLD domain to any of my brands (subsites) whenever I'd choose to give that brand a more distinct profile, as if it really was a different website.
Web Design | | PabloCulebras0 -
Regarding rel=canonical on duplicate pages on a shopping site... some direction, please.
Good morning, Moz community: My name is David, and I'm currently doing internet marketing for an online retailer of marine accessories. While many product pages and descriptions are unique, there are some that have the descriptions duplicated across many products. The advice commonly given is to leave one page as is / crawlable (probably best for one that is already ranking/indexed), and use rel=canonical on all duplicates. Any idea for direction on this? Do you think it is necessary? It will be a massive task. (also, one of the products that we rank highest for, we have tons of duplicate descriptions.... so... that is sort of like evidence against the idea?) Thanks!
Web Design | | DavidCiti0 -
Is there an issue if we show our old mobile site to Google & new site to users
Hi, We have our existing mobile site that contains interlinking in footer & content and new mobile site that does not have interlinking. We will show existing mobile site to google crawler & new mobile site to users. Will this be taken as black hat by Google. The mobile site & desktop site will have same url across devices & browsers. Regards
Web Design | | vivekrathore0 -
Web Hosting and CDN for Wordpress Site Load Speed - Suggestions Needed
We all know that website load speed is more important than ever. While I love the look and feel of parallax and Wordpress, I want to do everything I can to keep the load speed down. I see a lot of conflicting information regarding web hosting services, CDN services and other service (Cloudflare for example). I am looking to hear from those with their own experiences to let me know what they think is the ideal setup for a parallax Wordpress site is as far as which services to use, including: 1. Web Hosting
Web Design | | Gauge123
2. CDN
3. Any other service or product that would help to provide and extremely fast site load time. Thank you!0 -
Using content from other sites without duplicate content penalties?
Hi there, I am setting up a website, where i believe it would substantially benefit users experience if i setup a database of information on artists. I am torn because to feasibly do this correctly, i would have content that is built from multiple sources, but has no real unique content. It would have parts from Wikipedia, parts from other websites etc. All would be sourced of-course. My concern is that if i do this, am i risking in devaluing my website because of this. Is there a way i can handle this without taking a hit?
Web Design | | BorisD0 -
International SEO issues for multiple sites
We currently have 3 websites: oursite.co.uk oursite.fr oursite.ch We also own Oursite.com, and that URL currently redirects to Oursite.fr. We are considering a complete site redesign and a possible merge of the 3 sites. Assumptions: ** the 3 sites currently receive organic search traffic to varying degrees
Web Design | | darkgreenguy
** Oursite.ch is almost identical to Oursite.fr in terms of the site content
** Our target market is NOT the USA for English-language searches. It is the UK. With a re-design, we see our options as follows: Merge the 3 sites and make Oursite.com the "main site" and then have subfolders as follows: /uk /fr /ch Keep the 3 sites as they are. We see Option 1 as the best in terms of saving time when updating the site, and saving money paid to the site developers (1 site vs 3 sites). We see Option 2 as the best in terms of ability of the site to rank, as well as confidence of searchers when seeing our site in the search results (in other words, a person searching in France would be more likely to buy and/or submit a form on our site if they saw Oursite.fr vs Oursite.com/fr). I guess we're looking for some suggestions/guidance here. Are we missing any big issues? Does anyone have experience with an issue such as this? Thank you in advance...
-Shawn0 -
For a varied product type or keywords group is it best to have several sites?
Hello everyone... Question: I have 7-8 generic keywords that I would like to rank for, is it possible for one site to rank highly for all these different keywords, or would this be best achieved by making 2 or 3 websites in total targeting different keywords (product sectors)? More info: We are in a niche industry & would like to know if it would be beneficial to have several websites made for specific product types rather than one main site? Although these sub classifications of products are nice, they are competitive as they have a high search volume Would it be better to build specific websites that only do that one type of product and have related keyword in domain, content & blogs on the site to that effect to increase relevance and positions as a result? Thanks
Web Design | | Ray_UK0