Will duplicate product information paragraphs negatively impact our site?
-
We are selling paint and have separate pages for different colour cans, each with their own unique description.
We would like to include a few additional paragraphs of product information below each description, but this will be identical across all the products. Do you think this will be a problem being duplicate content?
-
I wouldn't say there would be massive chances of a penalty here, that being said it's an area where you could be 'adding value' and uniqueness to your pages and you're not doing it. So your pages may be 'less competitive' and you may be missing out on an opportunity. It's more of a competitive missed opportunity than an 'error' per-se
In reality you should have one product page for each product and then just have 'product variants' for stuff like quantity, size, colour etc. On the modern web people find this easier to navigate and since many sites do offer that, they might seem like more competitive places to shop for paint cans than your site. Price does matter, but it's not the sole arbiter of how products are ranked on Google's search engine - other stuff matters too. Unless you have a virtual monopoly on the product (only you can sell it, or only you can sell it at a greatly discounted price due to a special relationship with the supplier) then I would consider the UX and design of your site. No one wants an 'arse-ache' of a browsing experience
Many tools will flag what you are about to do as duplicate content and they're technically right. But instead of going on some crazy copy-writing crusade, think about the architecture of your site. You can still have separate URLs for different product variations if you want, even via parameter-variables (though that's a bit of a 'basic' implementation). If you make it clear to Google through new, more streamlined architecture that they're all actually the same product, the duplicate description(s) won't matter 'as much' (though they'll still be a missed opportunity for more diverse rankings IMO)
You can make it even more apparent to Google that all the different variations are actually the 'same product' by utilising Product schema and some of the deeper stuff like ProductModel which will bind it all together. Whatever you implement, test it here. If this tool throws errors and warnings, keep working away until they're all fixed
Canonical tags are another option but they will decrease your ranking 'footprint' and in this case I wouldn't recommend them, despite 'slight' content duplication risk (which in reality, are mostly negligible)
Final note: you say you have 'unique' descriptions, but remember if they're used elsewhere online they're not unique. If they're unique internally that's great, but if you got them all from a supplier then... obviously loads of other sites are probably using them, which could easily be a big issue for you
-
Hi Justin,
Great question, to help answer that question I will use a quote from Google's support document regarding duplicate content.
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66359?hl=en
"Examples of non-malicious duplicate content could include:
- Discussion forums that can generate both regular and stripped-down pages targeted at mobile devices
- Store items shown or linked via multiple distinct URLs
- Printer-only versions of web pages
"
I think your situation would likely fall under the similar category as "acceptable" like the store items example I highlighted. Keep in mind although duplicate content should really be avoided when possible, Google does NOT actually penalize site's for having it.
Although I would try to keep the overall amount of duplicate content to a minimum, it shouldn't be too big of an issue. Utilize the unique descriptions, in this case, you likely won't have to worry too much about the duplicate content.
I hope that helps!
Best,
Alex Ratynski -
Hi Joe,
Thanks for your help, it would probably be about 50%, but we could look to make this more like 80% unique content if you think this will help.
-
Hello,
How much of the copy is unique per page?
WRT to content originality, I've worked to is 80% unique content per page as a general rule.
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
-
Will redirecting a logged in user from a public page to an equivalent private page (not visible to google) impact SEO?
Hi, We have public pages that can obviously be visited by our registered members. When they visit these public pages + they are logged in to our site, we want to redirect them to the equivalent (richer) page on the private site e.g. a logged in user visiting /public/contentA will be redirected to /private/contentA Note: Our /public pages are indexed by Google whereas /private pages are excluded. a) will this affect our SEO? b) if not, is 302 the best http status code to use? Cheers
Technical SEO | | bernienabo0 -
Site Crawl -> Duplicate Page Content -> Same pages showing up with duplicates that are not
These, for example: | https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php/?utm_campaign=july15&utm_medium=organic&utm_source=blog | 1 | 2 | 29 | 2 | 200 |
Technical SEO | | writezach
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?_ga=1.145821812.1573134750.1440742418 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 2 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?utm_source=tapclicks&utm_medium=blog&utm_campaign=brightpod-article | 1 | 119 | 40 | 4 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?utm_source=tapclicks&utm_medium=marketplace&utm_campaign=homepage | 1 | 119 | 40 | 4 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?utm_source=blog&utm_campaign=first-3-must-watch-videos | 1 | 119 | 40 | 4 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php?_ga=1.159789566.2132270851.1418408142 | 1 | 5 | 31 | 2 | 200 |
| https://im.tapclicks.com/signup.php/?utm_source=vocus&utm_medium=PR&utm_campaign=52release | Any suggestions/directions for fixing or should I just disregard this "High Priority" moz issue? Thank you!0 -
Image Duplication
I'm feeling strong! Ok, so can Google penalise a website which has "duplicated images" - coming from a completely independent website?
Technical SEO | | GaryVictory0 -
Rel canonical for partner sites - product pages only or also homepage and other key pages?
Hello there Our main site is www.arenaflowers.com. We also run a number of partner sites (eg: http://flowershop.cancerresearchuk.org/). We've relcanonical'd the products on the partner site back to the main (arenaflowers.com) site. eg: http://flowershop.cancerresearchuk.org/flowers/tutti_frutti_es_2013 rel canonicals back to: http://www.arenaflowers.com/flowers/tutti_frutti_es_2013). My question: Should we also relcanonical the homepage and other key pages on partner sites back to the main arenaflowers website too? The content is similar but not identical. We don't want our partner sites to be outranking the original (as is the case on kw flower delivery for example). (NB this situation may be complicated by the fact we appear to have an unnatural link penalty on af.com (and when we did an upgrade a while back, the af.com site fell out of the index altogether due to some issues with our move to AWS.) We're getting professional SEO advice on this but wondered what the Moz community's thoughts were.. Cheers, Will
Technical SEO | | ArenaFlowers.com0 -
Does incomplete or private WHOIS information have negative effect on SEO?
I wondered if having incomplete WHOIS information has a negative effect on rankings? Also I know it's possible to keep WHOIS information private, so I wondered if google would think this suspicious and rank a site not as highly as it should? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Silktide0 -
.CA site same as .com site - are both necessary?
Dear Friend, We representa a major national brand in the auto care industry, and they have locations in both US and Canada. There is a primary content site at .com that we have duplicated at .ca. We are hosting the .ca site on a separate IP on a server in Canada - but by in large it is the same site. (there are some minor changes we made to change US English to Canadian English - though minor. When we search Google.ca we generally see strong search results for the .com site, but rarely, if ever any evidence of rankings for the .ca site. The .com site was launched several years ago about 18 months before the .ca site. Why doesn't Google.ca show the .ca site? Is this an issue of duplicate content, and Google.ca simply shows the .com version which it knew about first? Are we wasting our time, money and efforts having both? Thanks, Tim ps. this isn't about location. We use a separate site to locate local shops, and have coordinated that well with Google Places, and when looking for local auto care - we do well in both US and Canada. The sites described above are largetl content sites.
Technical SEO | | lunavista-comm0 -
A client will be translating their entire site into French in addition to English. For SEO purposes, should I host it on the same domain or create its own dedicated domain?
The current site is a long-standing site with good authority and a good number of links. Thanks....
Technical SEO | | JamesBSEO0