What to do with bad webpage
-
Hello everyone,
I have a page in my website that has a terrible link profile (95% exact match keyword links.) What is the best thing to do with this page? It provides no value, and if anything it is hurting me.
Should I just delete the page, 301 it to an obscure page or something else?
Thanks!
-
Well there you go.
If you have a page (Page A) that was ranking poorly due to over optmization, then you 301 Page A to a new page (Page B), the 301 passes pretty much all the negative link equity from Page A to Page B. Therefore, Page B is going down the toilet now.
You just kicked the can further down the street, vs fixing the initial issue. aka You just kicked yourself in the pants. (you can insert what ever kicking analogy you like here for emphasis and/or humor, but don't beat yourself up over it).
That is why I mentioned above, the 301 is really not a solution in this case and you need to noindex the page or 404 it.
I am of the group that I try and minimize 404s as much as possible. There is only one page to 404 here, so is really a non issue.
-
CleverPhD pretty much hit the nail on the head with a much more concise version of what I was trying to say. +1 internets for you good sir or madam.
As for the 404... Google will not penalize you for having a page that isn't there. Too many 404s can be bad for user experience but in this case the pages you'd be 404ing are causing much more trouble.
-
Thanks!
The reason I am doing this is one of my pages has dropped from page 2 to outside of the top 500. I currently have this over-optimized page 301's to the (formerly) ranking page. I think this may have something to do with it.
If a page a page is 404, does Google penalize the entire site?
-
Ok, if you think there is a problem, see steps 1-4, but you have to ask yourself, is this really a problem? See end of this post.
Steps to consider
- Look at the link profile and determine if you can see where are these links generated.
We had one case where we determined that the issue was a competing agency that was building negative links to properties that we managed for a client vs the web properties that they managed for the same clients! We tactfully made courtesy calls to the clients to help them by describing the negative link patterns and inquiring if they used anyone else for web marketing etc and suggesting that they contact the other agency as the other agency may not be aware that this is going on.
We were able to not only stop getting the links being built, but we looked good to our clients. This may or may not apply to you, but just throwing it out there that you need to look at this at a higher level to help with a) stopping additional links from being built or b) getting links removed.
- I saw this in a tweet by @dr_pete the other day and I retweeted it as I thought it was a good article
http://www.distilled.net/blog/seo/the-latest-5-tools-ive-added-to-my-seo-toolbox/
There is a tool rmoov that is mentioned
http://www.rmoov.com/index.php
There is a free version and so this may work. Note, I have not used this tool, but it looks interesting enough that I would try it. May be worth asking the group here - have they used it and what do they think of the tool.
- Redirect or 404. If you 301, then all you are doing is redirecting the negative link equity to other pages on your site, or externally. Probably not what you want to do as then you are just spreading the negative link "juice".
You can either 404 the page and let it die. Or, if you want to leave up a simple page with no other links to other pages on your site and then add a noindex tag so that it gets removed from Googles index
- The Disavow tool. This would be only for extreme examples and if you had proof that these links were negatively impacting this page and/or had a penalty notice from Google. I only mention to be complete, but this is probably not appropriate for you.
All of that said, let's just ignore everything I mentioned above. If the only issue here that you have 95% exact match anchor text. While that can be a symptom of a "bad link" profile, is it really impacting this page? Are you seeing a decrease in rankings for that page for those key terms? More importantly, are you seeing decreased traffic to that page (as rankings are relative). Are you assuming there is a problem, when there is not one? So you have a page with a "too perfect" of an anchor link profile. Then just stop doing it on future pages and move on. You may not have hit a threshold that triggers a penalty just yet. Have to consider where you are spending your time. May may more sense to work on building value, vs correcting things that may or may not be negatively impacting you.
My 2 cents plus a dime.
-
No, no warnings. I would doubt it is a manual penalty also. I am not in a super competitive niche, and I am not a huge name in my niche either from an SEO standpoint.
-
Large amounts of spammy looking exact match keywords creating an unnatural link profile will do that nowadays. Have you received any unnatural link warnings because of them or seen anything that appears to be an algorithmic penalty?
-
Thanks for the response!
They provide no value. They are not bad per se as they are original articles that I wrote. What I did was the old Article Syndication trick about 6 years ago. These article databases point to a page of a product that I don't even really sell anymore.
The bigger issue I face is the page I 301'd these links to suddenly dropped out of the rankings in early March. It went from page 2/3 to outside of the top 500. I would assume that the article links may have something to do with it.
-
How bad are the links? Sure exact match can hurt now but would it be better to attempt gaining some more natural links to the page. Have you attempted to get any bad links pointing at it removed?
Does the page really provide no value? Does it get any qualified traffic which then disseminates to the rest of your site? Or is the page DOA?
Personally I'd say NoIndex it for now, see if there's better content you could add, work on removing links and getting better ones, and see if that helps. You wouldn't want to 301 bad links to another place on your site because it doesn't fix anything... it just deflects the issue for a while.
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
-
Webpage is not ranking
https://www.nextheadphone.com/oneodio-a10-hybrid-review/ I just published a new article. Keyword is : OneOdio A10 Hybrid Review Before writing the article, I researched that This is Easy keyword. I should rank as soon as I publish the article. After publishing the article my Current rank is #32 Why its not ranking? Any idea
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NextHeadphone0 -
Removed everything from my webpage still not de-ranked
Hi, How long is the delay to de-rank once you remove everything from a page ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
External Keyword Anchor Links - Always Bad?
1) I've been told that other sites linking to my site with keyword-rich text are bad. 2) But Google Console / Analytics shows that we rank extremely high for random, pointless phrases loosely tied to the topic of our site. Like "dht blocker". (its a hair loss site) 3) This week I began analyzing our backlinks. Guess what I found? Literally hundreds of bot-created spammy trackback and pingback text links around the phrase "dht blocker" It seems to me that keyword rich anchor text on external sites is NOT a bad thing. In fact its an outstanding way to rank better for your desired keywords. Obviously the "bad" is the spam element. Probably the high quantity. On unrelated websites. But guess what? It worked. _We are ranking extremely well for these pointless phrases, thanks to these spam bots. _ Obviously we will be disavowing all these sites. But I want to start building quality links via legitimate, honest means. So here is my question: If I begin a legitimate honest link building campaign with other websites, and request that they put the HREF around our most coveted keyword phrase - is this inherently BAD? Or is it actually possibly GOOD? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HLTalk1 -
Is it bad for SEO to have a page that is not linked to anywhere on your site?
Hi, We had a content manager request to delete a page from our site. Looking at the traffic to the page, I noticed there were a lot of inbound links from credible sites. Rather than deleting the page, we simply removed it from the navigation, so that a user could still access the page by clicking on a link to it from an external site. Questions: Is it bad for SEO to have a page that is not directly accessible from your site? If no: do we keep this page in our Sitemap, or remove it? If yes: what is a better strategy to ensure the inbound links aren't considered "broken links" and also to minimize any negative impact to our SEO? Should we delete the page and 301 redirect users to the parent page for the page we had previously hidden?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jnew9290 -
Link cloaking in 2015\. Is it a bad idea now?
Hi everyone, I run a travel-related website and work with various affiliate partners. We have thousands of pages of well-written and helpful content, and many of these pages link off to one of our affiliates for booking purposes. Years ago I followed the prevailing wisdom and cloaked those links (bouncing them into a folder that was blocked in the robots.txt file, then redirecting them off to the affiliate). Basically, doing as Yoast has written: https://yoast.com/cloak-affiliate-links/ However, that seems kind of spammy and manipulative these days. Doesn't Google talk about not trying to manipulate links and redirect users? Could I just "nofollow" these links instead and drop the whole redirect charade? Could cloaking actually work against you? Thoughts? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TomNYC0 -
Bad performance for low competition term (Take two)
Hi all! I asked the question below a little while back and got some great responses. Most said that the link profile needed A LOT of work. This got me thinking. As it is quite a low competition term, and I have control over a few of its inbound links, would it be easier to move to a new domain and start again? That is, no 301, just move the site and update it in WMT? Hi everybody. I've been working on this page for some time, http://www.double-glazing-forum.com/anglian-windows.aspx. Until several months ago, it ranked really well for the terms 'Anglian windows' and 'Anglian windows reviews'. However, following a Google update it tanked and has got worse ever since. Here's what I've done to try and fix it. Added 800 words of unique copy Added YouTube videos Replaced scraped press releases with unique descriptions that link to the source Analysed the backlink profile and uploaded a disavow file containing all bad links Contacted webmaster to remove them where possible Getting a bit low on ideas now, so any help would be great!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blink-SEO0 -
Are all duplicate content issues bad? (Blog article Tags)
If so how bad? We use tags on our blog and this causes duplicate content issues. We don't use wordpress but with such a highly used cms having the same issue it seems quite plausible that Google would be smart enough to deal with duplicate content issues caused by blog article tags and not penalise at all. Here it has been discussed and I'm ready to remove tags from our blog articles or monitor them closely to see how it effects our rankings. Before I do, can you give me some advice around this? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Daniel_B
Daniel.0 -
Are dropdown menus bad for SEO
I have an ecommerce shop here: http://m00.biz/UHuGGC I've added a submenu for each major category and subcategory of items for sale. There are over 60 categories on that submenu. I've heard that loading this (and the number of links) before the content is very bad for SEO. Some will place the menu below the content and use absolute positioning to put the menu where it currently is now. It's a bit ridiculous in doing things backwards and wondering if search engines really don't understand. So the question is twofold: (1) Are the links better in a bottom loading sidemenu where they are now? (2) Given the number of links (about 80 in total with all categories and subcategories), is it bad to have the sidemenu show the subcategories which, in this instance, are somewhat important? Should I just go for the drilldown, e.g. show only categories and then show subcategories after? Truth is that users probably would prefer the dropdown with all the categories and second level subcategories, despite the link number and placement.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | attorney1