Location Pages and Duplicate Content and Doorway Pages, Oh My!
-
Google has this page on location pages. It's very useful but it doesn't say anything about handling the duplicate content a location page might have. Seeing as the loctions may have very similar services.
Lets say they have example.com/location/boston, example.com/location/chicago, or maybe boston.example.com or chicago.example.com etc.
They are landing pages for each location, housing that locations contact information as well as serving as a landing page for that location. Showing the same services/products as every other location. This information may also live on the main domains homepage or services page as well.
My initial reaction agrees with this article: http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide - but I'm really asking what does Google expect? Does this location pages guide from Google tell us we don't really have to make sure each of those location pages are unique? Sometimes creating "unique" location pages feels like you're creating **doorway pages - **"Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names".
In a nutshell, Google's Guidelines seem to have a conflict on this topic:
Location Pages: "Have each location's or branch's information accessible on separate webpages"
Doorway Pages: "Multiple pages on your site with similar content designed to rank for specific queries like city or state names"
Duplicate Content: "If you have many pages that are similar, consider expanding each page or consolidating the pages into one."Now you could avoid making it a doorway page or a duplicate content page if you just put the location information on a page. Each page would then have a unique address, phone number, email, contact name, etc. But then the page would technically be in violation of this page:
Thin Pages: "One of the most important steps in improving your site's ranking in Google search results is to ensure that it contains plenty of rich information that includes relevant keywords, used appropriately, that indicate the subject matter of your content."
...starting to feel like I'm in a Google Guidelines Paradox!
Do you think this guide from Google means that duplicate content on these pages is acceptable as long as you use that markup? Or do you have another opinion?
-
Thanks for the comment Laura!
I was aware of the fact duplicate content wasn't the issue, but it just baffled me that this very obvious black-hat tactic wasn't punished by Google in any way. Even though their guidelines clearly stated doorway pages are a big "no-no".
Let's hope the December 2017 update has a noticeable impact
Have a nice day!
-
The Panda filter is just that, a filter. It doesn't remove pages from the index, and you won't get a manual penalty because of it.
In the case of duplicate content, Google chooses the most relevant or original content and filters out the duplicates. On the other hand, when a website has multiple pages with the same content, that can affect the overall quality of the entire website. This can affect search performance as well.
Then there's the issue of doorway pages, which are duplicate pages created for the purpose of funneling visitors to the same destination. This goes against Google's guidelines, and they confirmed a December 2017 algorithm update that affects sites using doorway pages.
-
Hi Laura,
It seems like this age-old black-hat tactic still works though. Maybe only outside of the US? Check out this SERP: https://www.google.be/search?q=site:trafficonline.be+inurl:seo-&ei=Z0RnWqHED47UwQLs5bkQ&start=0&sa=N&filter=0&biw=1920&bih=960&num=100
You don't have to understand the language to see that this is almost the same identical page, purely setup to rank well for localized terms (city names). Each page has the same exact content but uses some variables as to not have the exact same text: nearby city names, a Google Map embed, and even some variables for the amount of people living in a city (as if that's relevant information for the user). The content itself is really thin and the same for all cities.
The crazy thing is this site ranks well for some city names in combination with their keywords, even though it's very clearly using black-hat SEO tactics (doorway pages) to manipulate rankings for localized search terms. I would think websites that so blatantly violate the Google Guidelines would be completely removed from the search index, but that definitely isn't the case here.
Any thoughts as to why sites like this aren't removed for violating Google's terms and conditions? Or how I could keep telling our clients they can't use black hat tactics because Google might remove them from the index, even though it appears the chance of such a removal is almost non-existent?
Thanks in advance,
Kind regards -
Some great ideas: Content Creation Strategy for Businesses with Multiple Location Pages
-
Yeah it seems like the best logical answer is that each location page needs unique content developed for it. Even though it still kinda feels a little forced.
Goes to show you that Google has really pushed SEO firms to think differently about content and when you have to do something just for SEO purposes it now feels icky.
Yes creating unique content for that page for that location can be seen as useful to the users but it feels a little icky because the user would probably be satisfied with the core content. But we're creating unique location specific content mostly to please Google... not the user.
For example what if Walmart came to this same conclusion. Wouldn't it be a little forced if Walmart developed pages for every location that had that locations weather, facts about the city, etc?
Due to it's brand it's able to get away with the thin content version of location pages: http://www.walmart.com/store/2300/details they don't even use the markup... but any SEO knows you can't really follow what is working for giant brand like Walmart.
-
In response to the extra landing pages, our key thing for our business following on from the above comments is to remember that fresh and unique content is best.
We have spent a lot of money on our websites as well as clients in building extra pages, what we do is have a plan. For example if we have 30 pages to add, we spread this over a period of weeks/months. Rather than bashing them all out together. We do everything in a natural organic manner.
Hope this helps, it is our first post!
-
Welcome to my hell! I have 18 locations. I think it's best practice to have a location page for each location with 100% original content. And plenty of it. Yes, it seems redundant to talk about plumbing in Amherst, and plumbing in Westfield, and plumbing in...wherever. Do your best and make the content valuable original content that users will find helpful. A little local flair goes a long way with potential customers too and also makes it pretty clear you're not spinning the same article. That said, with Google Local bulk spreadsheet uploads, according to the people I've spoken with at Google, your business description can be word for word the same between locations and it won't hurt your rank in the maps/local packs one bit. Hope this helps!
-
These do appear to be contradictory guidelines until you understand what Google is trying to avoid here. Historically, SEOs have tried to rank businesses for geo-specific searches in areas other than where a business is located.
Let's say you run a gardening shop in Atlanta and you have an ecommerce side of the business online. Yes, you want to get walk-in traffic from the metro Atlanta area, but you also want to sell products online to customers all over the country. Ten years ago, you might set up 50 or so pages on your site with the exact same content with the city, state switched out. That way you could target keywords like the following:
- gardening supplies in Nashville, TN
- gardening supplies in Houston, TX
- gardening supplies in Seattle, WA
- gardening supplies in San Francisco, CA
- and so on...
That worked well 10 years ago, but the Panda update put a stop to that kind of nonsense. Google understands that someone searching for "gardening supplies in Nashville, TN" is looking for a brick and mortar location in Nashville and not an ecommerce store.
If you have locations in each of those cities, you have a legitimate reason to target the above search queries. On the other hand, you don't want to incur the wrath of Google with duplicate content on your landing pages. That's why the best solution is to create unique content that will appeal to users in that location. Yes, this requires time and possibly money to implement, but it's worth it when customers are streaming through the door at each location.
Check out Bright Local's recent InsideLocal Webinar: Powerful Content Creation Ideas for Local Businesses. They discussed several companies that are doing a great job with local landing page content.
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
-
Content Page URL Question
Our main website is geared toward the city where we are located and includes the city name in content page URLs. We also have separate websites for three surrounding cities; these websites have duplicate content except the city name: MainWebsite.com
Local Website Optimization | | sharon75025
City2-MainWebsite.com
City3-MainWebsite.com
City4-MainWebsite.com We're restructuring to eliminate the location websites and only use the main website. The new site will have city pages. We have well established Google business locations for all four cities. We will keep all locations, replacing the location website with the main website. Should we remove City-IL from all content page URLs in the new site? We don't want to lose traffic/ranking for City2 or City3 because the content pages have City1 in the URL. Page URLs are currently formatted as follows: www.MainWebsite.com/Service-1-City1-IL.html
www.MainWebsite.com/Service-2-City1-IL.html
www.MainWebsite.com/Service-3-City1-IL.html
www.MainWebsite.com/Service-4-City1-IL.html Thanks!0 -
Meta descriptions in other languages than the page's content?
Hi guys, I need an opinion on the optimization of meta descriptions for a website available in 6 languages that faces the following situation: Main pages are translated in 6 languages, English being primary >> all clear here. BUT The News section includes articles only in English, that are displayed as such on all other language versions of the website. Example:
Local Website Optimization | | Andreea-M
website.com/en/news/article 1
website.com/de/neues/article 1
website.com/fr/nouvelles/article 1
etc. Because we don't have the budget right now to translate all content, I was wondering if I could add only the Meta Titles and Meta Descriptions in the specific languages (using Google Translate), while the content to remain in English. Would this be accepted as reasonable enough for Google, or would it affect the website ranking?
I'd like to avoid major mistakes, so I'm hoping someone here on this forum has a better idea of how to proceed in this case.0 -
Should Multi Location Businesses "Local Content Silo" Their Services Pages?
I manage a site for a medical practice that has two locations. We already have a location page for each office location and we have the NAP for both locations in the footer of every page. I'm considering making a change to the structure of the site to help it rank better for individual services at each of the two locations, which I think will help pages rank in their specific locales by having the city name in the URL. However, I'm concerned about diluting the domain authority that gets passed to the pages by moving them deeper in the site's structure. For instance, the services URLs are currently structured like this: www.domain.com/services/teeth-whitening (where the service is offered in each of the two locations) Would it make sense to move to a structure more like www.domain.com/city1name/teeth-whitening www.domain.com/city2name/teeth-whitening Does anyone have insight from dealing with multi-location brands on the best way to go about this?
Local Website Optimization | | formandfunctionagency1 -
Leveraging the authority of a blog to boost pages on a root domain.
Hi! Looking for some link building advice. For some background, I work for a company that has over 100 locations across the US. So we are deeply involved with local SEO. We also do a ton of evergreen/ national SEO as well and the spectrums are widely different for the most part. We also have a very successful blog in our industry. It really is an SEO’s dream. I do not even need to worry about a link strategy for this because it just naturally snatches them up. I’m trying to find some unique ways to utilize the blog to boost pages on my main root domain, more specifically, at the local level. It is really hard, besides the standard methods for local link building, to get outside sources to link to our local office pages. These pages are our bread and butter, and the pages we need to be as successful as possible. In every market we are in, we are at a disadvantage because we have one page to establish our local footprint and rank, compared to domains that have their entire site pointed at that local area we are trying to rank in. I’ve tried linking to local office pages from successful blog posts to attempt to pass link juice to the local pages, but I haven’t seen much in terms of moving the needle doing this. Are there any crafty ideas on how I can shuffle some internal linking around to capitalize on the blog’s authority to make my local pages rank higher in their markets? Thank you! -Ben
Local Website Optimization | | Davey_Tree0 -
Question about partial duplicate content on location landing pages of multilocation business
Hi everyone, I am a psychologist in private practice in Colorado and I recently went from one location to 2 locations. I'm currently updating my website to better accommodate the second location. I also plan continued expansion in the future, so there will be more and more locations as time goes on. As a result, I am making my websites current homepage non-location specific and creating location landing pages as I have seen written about in many places. My question is: I know that location landing pages should have unique content, and I have plenty of this, but how much content is it also okay to have be duplicate across the location landing pages and the homepage? For instance, here is the current draft of the new homepage (these are not live yet): http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/ And here are the drafts of the location landing pages: http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/denver-office http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/dev/colorado-springs-office And for reference, here is the current homepage that is actually live for my single Denver location: http://www.effectivetherapysolutions.com/ As you can see, the location landing pages have the following sections of unique content: Therapist picture at the top testimonial quotes (the one on the homepage is the only thing I have I framed in this block from crawl so that it appears as unique content on the Denver page) therapist bios GMB listing driving directions and hours and I also haven't added these yet, but we will also have unique client success stories and appropriately tagged images of the offices So that's plenty of unique content on the pages, but I also have the following sections of content that are identical or nearly identical to what I have on the homepage: Intro paragraph blue and green "adult" and child/teen" boxes under the intro paragraph "our treatment really works" section "types of anxiety we treat" section Is that okay or is that too much duplicate content? The reason I have it that way is that my website has been very successful for years at converting site visitors into paying clients, and I don't want to lose aspects of the page that I know work when people land on it. And now that I am optimizing the location landing pages to be where people end up instead of the homepage, I want them to still see all of that content that I know is effective at conversion. If people on here do think it is too much, one possible solution is to turn parts of it into pictures or put them into I-frames on the location pages so Google doesn't crawl those parts of the location pages, but leave them normal on the homepage so it still gets crawled on there. I've seen a lot written about not having duplicate content on location landing pages for this type of website, but everything I've read seems to refer to entire pages being copied with just the location names changed, which is not what I'm doing, hence my question. Thanks everyone!
Local Website Optimization | | gremmy90 -
Page Title Local SEO - 2 places
Hello guys, I am from azores are 9 islands in portugal. I live in São Jorge is one island. My question is. If one person seach by Azores Canyoning or São Jorge Canyoning. Because Azores is one region and São Jorge is one island inside Azores. And i want have this two exact keywords in title page. Canyoning is a service. Azores Canyoning - São Jorge Canyoning | Brand Name what is best way to write this title? Or is not good?
Local Website Optimization | | Flaske0 -
Pages ranking outside of sales area
Hi there Moz Community, I work with a client (a car dealership), that mostly serves an area within 50-100 miles at most from their location. A previous SEO company had built a bunch of comparison pages on their website (i.e. 2016 Acura ILX vs. Mercedes-Benz C300). These pages perform well in their backyard in terms of engagement metrics like bounce rate, session duration, etc. However, they pull in traffic from all over the country and other countries as well. Because they really don't have much of an opportunity to sell someone a car across the country that a customer could easily buy at their local dealership, anyone from outside their primary marketing area typically bounces. So, it drags down their overall site metrics plus all of the metrics for these pages. I imagine searchers from outside their primary sales area are seeing their location and saying "whoah that's far and not what I'm looking for." I tried localizing the pages by putting their city name in the title tags, meta descriptions, and content, but that doesn't seem to really be getting rid of this traffic from areas too far away to sell a car to. My worry is that the high bounce rates, low time on site, and general irrelevancy of these pages to someone far away are going to affect them negatively. So, short of trying to localize the content on the page or just deleting these pages all together, I'm not quite sure where to go from here. Do you think that having these high bouncing pages will hurt them? Any suggestions would be welcomed. Thanks!
Local Website Optimization | | Make_Model1 -
Local SEO + Best Practice for locations
Hi All, Based on a hypothetical scenario, lets say you are a plumber. You live and operate within Chelsea in London. You have established a Google places profile and incorporated schema data to tell Google your fixed place location. In addition you operate in several nearby towns with no fixed location presence. i.e Brentford, Bromley, Catford, Cheswick and Tottenham. I create a feature rich page on 'How to find a quality plumber'. Within the page I incorporate the following description: blah blah, as a quality plumber serving the community of Chelsea, we also offer our services to nearby towns of Brentford, Bromley, Catford, Cheswick and Tottenham. I create hyperlinks for the towns (Brentford, Bromley, Catford, Cheswick and Tottenham) that allow the user see in details a full list of services, operation hours, etc. Naturally all towns will have there own unique content (no duplication). Question
Local Website Optimization | | Mark_Ch
Is the above scenario the correct way to provide local seo or is this approach considered spammy to Google? Thanks Mark0