What are the SEO recommendations for dynamic, personalised page content? (not e-commerce)
-
Hi,
We will have pages on the website that will display different page copy and images for different user personas. The main content (copy, headings, images) will be supplied dynamically and I'm not sure how Google will index the B and C variations of these pages.
As far as I know, the page URL won't change and won't have parameters.
Google will crawl and index the page content that comes from JavaScript but I don't know which version of the page copy the search robot will index. If we set user agent filters and serve the default page copy to search robots, we might risk having a cloak penalty because users get different content than search robots.
Is it better to have URL parameters for version B and C of the content? For example:
- /page for the default content
- /page?id=2 for the B version
- /page?id=3 for the C version
The dynamic content comes from the server side, so not all pages copy variations are in the default HTML.
I hope my questions make sense. I couldn't find recommendations for this kind of SEO issue.
-
Hi everyone,
I have a related question about personalisation too which is a variation on the theme but which I would appreciate some help with.
There is a project afoot within my company to "personalise" the user experience by presenting pages to users which better respond to their interests.
That is to say that, when a user visits our page about "tennis-shoes", the next time they visit the homepage they will be presented with a homepage which focusses on tennis-shoes.
So far so good.
However rather than personalising certain elements of the homepage, the idea is to intercept those users, and 301 them to an entirely different URL, completly hidden from Google, which will contain entirely different content focussing only on shoes.
The top navegation will remain the same.
This sounds like a massive breach of Quality Guidelines on at least two counts to me. It reeks of cloacking and "sneaky redirects", and I am very concerned this will do us way more harm than good.
I'm guessing that the correct way of going about this would be to either generate a great "shoes" page and allow users to navigate to it, visit it, and do whatever they want with it, or to personalise the homepage including some dynamic elements on the same URL, without hiding things from Google or frustrating users by not allowing them to access the page they are trying to access.
Any feedback from the community would be a great help.
Thanks a lot!
-
Brilliant thread guys!
This will be far more discussed in the not so distant future i'm sure!
Dynamic Homepages are becoming more common and I have a client using one so this info has really helped me.
This topic should be a future Whiteboard Friday.
-
Yes, that sounds great! Please let me know how it all goes and if you run into any other hiccups.
Cheers,
B
-
Hi Britney
Thank you for your detailed feedback!
I checked the posts you linked and a few other sources and I think the solution will be the following:
- The default content will be loaded with the parameter free URL, e.g. /product
- Personalised versions of the page will have different (short) parameters, e.g. /product?version=8372762
- The default and the personalised pages will have the same canonical tag (default page)
- Let Google know in the Search Console's URL Parameters settings that the version parameter changes the page content (specifies + let Googlebot decide)
I hope it makes sense.
-
Did some digging and found a few resources stating:
Googlehadan official statement about this in its webmaster guidelines:
"If you decide to use dynamic pages (i.e., the URL contains a ? character), be aware that not every search engine spider crawls dynamic pages as well as static pages. It helps to keep the parameters short and the number of them few. Don't use &id= as a parameter in your URLs, as we don't include these pages in our index."That was many years ago but more recently Google changed its position on that subject. The entry has been removed from Google's guidelines but here's the official statement from Google's blog:
"Google now indexes URLs that contain the &id= parameter. So if your site uses a dynamic structure that generates it, don't worry about rewriting it -- we'll accept it just fine as is.Keep in mind, however, that dynamic URLs with a large number of parameters may still be problematic for search engine crawlers in general, so rewriting dynamic URLs into user-friendly versions is always a good practice when that option is available to you. If you can, keeping the number of URL parameters to one or two may make it more likely that search engines will crawl your dynamic urls."
Click here read the full article
Penalization for personalisation
Let me know if this helps
-
Fascinating question Gyorgy!
I've always been a big fan of dynamic targeting.
It would be a great idea to have different URL parameters for each unique set of content. You might also want to push these pages to fetch & index within Google Search Console (and your sitemap.xml to showcase you're not attempting to cloak, etc.)
This would be a fantastic question for Google reps...I can try to reach out to someone today and let you know what they say.
Cheers,
B
PS. Just curious, how are you pulling in persona data?
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
-
Landing page video scripts - duplicate content concerns
we are planning to create a series of short (<30 sec) videos for landing pages for our clients PPC campaigns. Since our clients all offer the same services (except in different geographical regions of the county) - we were planning to use the SAME script ( approx 85 words) with only the clients business name changed. Our question is : Would these videos be identified as 'duplicate content' - if we are only planning to use the videos on landing pages and only for PPC? -in other words are we in any danger of any kind of consequences from the engines for repeating script text across a series of landing pages featured only at PPC campaigns?
Technical SEO | | Steve_J0 -
Using Product Page Content from an Offline Website
Hi all, We have two websites. One of the website's no longer sells product range A. However, on the second website, we would like to sell range A. We paid a copywriter to write some really good content for these ranges and we were wondering if we would get stung for duplicate content if we took these descriptions from website 1 and placed them on website 2. The products / descriptions are live anymore and haven't been for about 6 weeks. We're ranking for some great keywords at the moment and we don't want to spoil that. Thanks in advance! D
Technical SEO | | 10dales0 -
Windows Acces used for e-commerce site - help needed
Hello everybody, I am working on this e-commerce website built on windows access and it's a nightmare to change the html content on it.has anyone used it before? It doesn't allow me to change the content for the html tags even though it should and i don't have a clue about what to do. Thanks oscar
Technical SEO | | PremioOscar0 -
Duplicate Page Content error but I can't see it
Hi All We're getting a lot of Duplicate Page Content errors but I can't match it up. For example this page: http://www.daytripfinder.co.uk/attractions/32-antique-cottage It is saying the on page properties as follows: Title DayTripFinder - Things to do reviewed by you - 7,000 attractions <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">Meta Description</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">Read Reviews, Browse Opening Hours and Prices. View Photos, Maps. 7,000 UK Visitor Attractions.</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">But this isn't the page title or meta description.
Technical SEO | | KateWaite85
</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">And it's showing five (many others) example pages that share it. Again the page titles and description are different.</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">http://www.daytripfinder.co.uk/attractions/mckinlay-theatre</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">http://www.daytripfinder.co.uk/attractions/bakers-dolphin</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">http://www.daytripfinder.co.uk/attractions/shipley-park-fishing</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">http://www.daytripfinder.co.uk/attractions/king-johns-lodge-and-gardens</dt> <dt style="color: #5e5e5e; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">http://www.daytripfinder.co.uk/attractions/city-hall
</dt> Any ideas? Not sure if I'm missing something here! Thanks!0 -
NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW - Any SEO benefit to these pages?
Hi I could use some advice on a site architecture decision. I am developing something akin to an affiliate scheme for my business. However it is not quite as simple as an affliate setup because the products sold through "affiliates" will be slightly different, as a result I intend to run the site from a subdomain of my main domain. I am intending to NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW the subdomained site because it will contain huge amounts of duplication from my main site (it is really a subset of the main site with some slightly different functionality in places). I don't really want or need this subdomain site indexed, hence my decision to NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW it. However given I will, hopefully, be having lots of people link into the subdomain I am hoping to come up with some sort of arrangement that will mean that my main domain derives some sort of benefit from the linking. They are, after all, votes for my business so they feel like "good links". I am assuming here that a direct link into my NOFOLLOW,NOINDEX subdomain is going to provide ZERO benefit to my main domain. Happy to be corrected! The best I can come up with is to have a "landing page" on my main domain which links into parts of my main domain and then provides a link through to the subdomain site. However this feels like a bad experience from the user's point of view (i.e. land on a page and then have to click to get to the real action) and feels a bit spammy, i.e. I don't really have a good reason for this page other than linking! Equally I could NOINDEX,FOLLOW the homepage of the affiliate site and link back to the main domain from there. However this also feels a bit spammy and would be far less beneficial, I guess, because the subdomain homepage would have many more outgoing links than I envisaged for my "landing page" idea above. Also, it also looks a bit spammy (i.e. why follow the homepage and nofollow everything else?)! The trouble, I guess, is that whatever I do feels a bit spammy. I suppose this is because IT IS spammy! 🙂 Has anyone got any good ideas how I could setup an arrangement like I described above and derive benefit to my main domain without it looking (or being) spammy? I just hate to think of all of those links being wasted (in an SEO sense). Thanks Gary
Technical SEO | | gtrotter6660 -
Does Google pass link juice a page receives if the URL parameter specifies content and has the Crawl setting in Webmaster Tools set to NO?
The page in question receives a lot of quality traffic but is only relevant to a small percent of my users. I want to keep the link juice received from this page but I do not want it to appear in the SERPs.
Technical SEO | | surveygizmo0 -
Wordpress for e-commerce
What plugin should I use to make a webshop taht is good for seo as well? Should I use wordpress indeed or should i use some other open source CMS?
Technical SEO | | sesertin0 -
See any issues with this tabbed content page?
When I view source, and view as Googlebot it's showing as 1 long page of content = good. However, the developer uses some redirects and dynamic page generation to pull this off. I didn't see any issues from a Search perspective but would appreciate a second opinion: Click here Thanks!
Technical SEO | | 540SEO0