Is Content Location Determined by Source Code or Visual Location in Search Engine's Mind?
-
I have a page with 2 scroll features. First 1/3 of the page (from left) has thumb pictures (not original content) and a vertical scroll next to. Remaining 2/3 of the page has a lot of unique content and a vertical scroll next to it.
Question: Visually on a computer, the unique content is right next to the thumbs, but in the source code the original content shows after these thumbs. Does that mean search engines will see this content as "below the fold" and actually, placing this content below the thumbs (requiring a lot of scrolling to get to the original content) would in a search engine's mind be the exact same location of the content, as the source code shows the same location?
I am trying to understand if search engines base their analysis on source code or also visual location of content? thx
-
That sounds like a reasonable approach. If you wanted to be extra careful you could also ad a robots follow,noindex tag to the header of the paginated pages since they all have very little unique content to add.
A third option, which I would only use if people are linking into those paginated pages (very rare), is to rel canonical the paginated pages to the first page.
-
thx, again. That is my big concern: should I put in the effort to move the content higher on page. It is year 2014 and Google does not give real estate websites or e-commerce sites any clue as to how they want us to deal with duplicate issues (content appearing across a bunch of other websites). I am using "noindex, follow" for the "MLS result pages" where I do not have unique content added, and when I have unique content on Page 1, then I keep entire serious of paginated pages (sometime Page 1 - 100) indexed but add rel=next prev.
Any thoughts on that?
-
I think Google is looking for more extreme situations than the one you have. The content is well-written, useful and isn't so far down the page that someone isn't going to see it. However, I don't have to tell you that it's going to take a LOT to compete in that niche.
Good luck.
-
th, Everett. Appreciate the input. Take a look here: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu/metro/waikiki-condos/ - if I move all my "unique content" (currently below the thumbs and large map) up to location where the map is and get rid of that map, you are saying that most likely that will be seen as being located more "above the fold"?
-
Hello Khi5,
I can't say with 100% certainty, but I feel confident that Google looks at both. I'm not sure about other search engines. Specifically, "page layout" algorithm needs to render the html/CSS - and increasingly javascript - in order to determine if there are too many ads "above the fold". Google also used to render the page to provide "instant previews" of each website in the SERPs.
In other words, the all-seeing eye of Google knows if your "unique content" shows up above or below the fold, or even 6,000 pixels off-screen to the left.
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
-
Print pages returning 404's
Print pages on one of our sister sites are returning 404's in our crawl but are visible when clicked on. Here is one example: https://www.theelementsofliving.com/recipe/citrus-energy-boosting-smoothie/print Any ideas as to why these are returning errors? Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FirstService0 -
My blog's categories are winning over my landing pages, what to do?
Hi My blogs categories for the ecommerce site are by subject and are similar to the product landing pages. Example Domain.com/laptops that sells laptops Domain.com/blog/laptops that shows news and articles on laptops Within the blog posts the links of anchor laptop are to the store. What to do? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeytzNet1 -
Google isn't seeing the content but it is still indexing the webpage
When I fetch my website page using GWT this is what I receive. HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jacobfy
X-Pantheon-Styx-Hostname: styx1560bba9.chios.panth.io
server: nginx
content-type: text/html
location: https://www.inscopix.com/
x-pantheon-endpoint: 4ac0249e-9a7a-4fd6-81fc-a7170812c4d6
Cache-Control: public, max-age=86400
Content-Length: 0
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 16:29:38 GMT
X-Varnish: 2640682369 2640432361
Age: 326
Via: 1.1 varnish
Connection: keep-alive What I used to get is this: HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:00:24 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.23 (Amazon)
X-Powered-By: PHP/5.3.18
Expires: Sun, 19 Nov 1978 05:00:00 GMT
Last-Modified: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 16:00:24 +0000
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate, post-check=0, pre-check=0
ETag: "1365696024"
Content-Language: en
Link: ; rel="canonical",; rel="shortlink"
X-Generator: Drupal 7 (http://drupal.org)
Connection: close
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:og="http://ogp.me/ns#"
xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
xmlns:sioc="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#"
xmlns:sioct="http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#"
xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#"> <title>Inscopix | In vivo rodent brain imaging</title>0 -
Launching a new site with old, new and updated content: What’s best practice?
Hi all, We are launching a new site soon and I’d like your opinion on best practice related to its content. We will be retaining some pages and content (although the URLs might change a bit as I intend to replace under-scores with hyphens and remove .asp from some extensions in order to standardise a currently uneven URL structuring). I will also be adding a lot of new pages with new content, along with amend some pages and their content (and amend URLs again if need be), and a few pages are going to be done away with all together. Any advice from those who’ve done the same in the past as to how best to proceed? Does the URL rewriting sound OK to do in conjunction with adding and amending content? Cheers, Dave
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Martin_S0 -
What is the best way to hide duplicate, image embedded links from search engines?
**Hello! Hoping to get the community’s advice on a technical SEO challenge we are currently facing. [My apologies in advance for the long-ish post. I tried my best to condense the issue, but it is complicated and I wanted to make sure I also provided enough detail.] Context: I manage a human anatomy educational website that helps students learn about the various parts of the human body. We have been around for a while now, and recently launched a completely new version of our site using 3D CAD images. While we tried our best to design our new site with SEO best practices in mind, our daily visitors dropped by ~15%, despite drastic improvements we saw in our user interaction metrics, soon after we flipped the switch. SEOMoz’s Website Crawler helped us uncover that we now may have too many links on our pages and that this could be at least part of the reason behind the lower traffic. i.e. we are not making optimal use of links and are potentially ‘leaking’ link juice now. Since students learn about human anatomy in different ways, most of our anatomy pages contain two sets of links: Clickable links embedded via JavaScript in our images. This allows users to explore parts of the body by clicking on whatever objects interests them. For example, if you are viewing a page on muscles of the arm and hand and you want to zoom in on the biceps, you can click on the biceps and go to our detailed biceps page. Anatomy Terms lists (to the left of the image) that list all the different parts of the body on the image. This is for users who might not know where on the arms the biceps actually are. But this user could then simply click on the term “Biceps” and get to our biceps page that way. Since many sections of the body have hundreds of smaller parts, this means many of our pages have 150 links or more each. And to make matters worse, in most cases, the links in the images and in the terms lists go to the exact same page. My Question: Is there any way we could hide one set of links (preferably the anchor text-less image based links) from search engines, such that only one set of links would be visible? I have read conflicting accounts of different methods from using JavaScript to embedding links into HTML5 tags. And we definitely do not want to do anything that could be considered black hat. Thanks in advance for your thoughts! Eric**
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Eric_R0 -
Best solution to get mass URl's out the SE's index
Hi, I've got an issue where our web developers have made a mistake on our website by messing up some URL's . Because our site works dynamically IE the URL's generated on a page are relevant to the current URL it ment the problem URL linked out to more problem URL's - effectively replicating an entire website directory under problem URL's - this has caused tens of thousands of URL's in SE's indexes which shouldn't be there. So say for example the problem URL's are like www.mysite.com/incorrect-directory/folder1/page1/ It seems I can correct this by doing the following: 1/. Use Robots.txt to disallow access to /incorrect-directory/* 2/. 301 the urls like this:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James77
www.mysite.com/incorrect-directory/folder1/page1/
301 to:
www.mysite.com/correct-directory/folder1/page1/ 3/. 301 URL's to the root correct directory like this:
www.mysite.com/incorrect-directory/folder1/page1/
www.mysite.com/incorrect-directory/folder1/page2/
www.mysite.com/incorrect-directory/folder2/ 301 to:
www.mysite.com/correct-directory/ Which method do you think is the best solution? - I doubt there is any link juice benifit from 301'ing URL's as there shouldn't be any external links pointing to the wrong URL's.0 -
How do you rank in the "brands for:" section in Google's search results ?
There's a "brands for:" section that appears above the first organic listing for certain search queries. For example, if you search for "dedicated servers" in Google, you will see that a "brands for:" appears. How do you get listed there? Thanks, Brian
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | InMotionHosting0
