Updating existing content - good or bad?
-
Hi All,
There are many situations where I encounter the need (or the wish) to update existing content.
Here are few reasons:
- Some update turned up on the subject that does not justify a new posy / article but rather just adding two lines.
- The article was simply poorly written yet the page has PR as it is a good subject and is online for quite some time (alternatively I can create a new and improved article and 301 the old one to the new).
- Improving titles and sub titles of old existing articles.
I would love to hear your thoughts on each of the reasons...
Thanks
-
Wikipedia updates content all the time and they seem to rank rather well.
From google's perspective they would rather rank up-to-date content, so yes its got to be a good idea to update. An old page might have links to it, and history with google, so if it had up to date content its got to be better than a brand new page.
-
In all the 3 cases mentioned in the post, this seems like it is a good idea not to create new posts/pages and update the existing one. Obviously if the article is poorly written so in that case one should update the page after fixing the content of it instead of creating new pages... same is the case for the other 2 scenarios.
I think this video by SEOmoz contains your answer >> http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-interview-googles-matt-cutts-on-redirects-trust-more
Hope this helps!
-
- hi Fernando,
long time no see.
The site as a tool that is technically accurate however I just want to point out that if you don't have the tag obviously your link will not qualify but you don't need new hosting as it states here
Here's the example of a tagged link that was done appropriately
http://www.feedthebot.com/tools/if-modified/
here's an example of what happens when I put my homepage and with obviously no tag
Does your webpage support the If Modified Since HTTP header?
enter URL: example - www.feedthebot.comNo.
This website does not support the if modified since http header. Scroll down for details.Technical stuff:
This tool checked your HTTP headers and received this response ...
Server Response HTTP/1.1 200 OK
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: WP Engine/1.2.0
Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 03:57:11 GMT
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Connection: keep-alive
Keep-Alive: timeout=20
Expires: Thu, 19 Nov 1981 08:52:00 GMT
Pragma: no-cache
X-Pingback: http://www.blueprintmarketing.com/xmlrpc.php
X-UA-Compatible: IE=Edge,chrome=1
X-Cacheable: SHORT
Vary: Accept-Encoding,Cookie
Cache-Control: max-age=600, must-revalidate
X-Cache: HIT: 13
X-Cache-Group: normal
X-Type: default
There does not appear to be a "last modified header response"Therefore, this tool has determined that this URL does not support if modified since.
Web hosts who do support If Modified Since...
We use and recommend using BlueHost for your hosting needs -
here is some more information on if modified since
http://www.seomoz.org/q/is-the-if-modified-since-http-header-still-relevant
it seems you want to pay a lot of attention when implementing it to the clock on the server as well as on the actual workstation.
http://redmine.lighttpd.net/boards/2/topics/1999
http://trac.nginx.org/nginx/ticket/93
I hope this is of help,
Tom
-
If you are just updating the title, or rewriting the content, then I would go with the same page instead of creating a new one.
IF-MODIFIED-SINCE is the way of telling spiders that the content has/hasn't changed. You can read more here: http://www.feedthebot.com/ifmodified.html
-
Actually does sound familiar somehow even though I know most people are creating new post stating about the change and point to the old one (if there is enough to cover).
What about poorly written articles? Improving titles?
Please explain what you mean by "IF-MODIFIED-SINCE"?
Thanks
-
Matt Cutts from Google pointed out in a WH video that you should update instead of creating new pages with only the updates.
You can point in the old page that the content was updated using "IF-MODIFIED-SINCE".
I can't find the video right now, but I am sure he did say that
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
-
Is my content being fully read by Google?
Hi mozzers, I wanted to ask you a quick question regarding Google's crawlability of webpages. We just launched a series of content pieces but I believe there's an issue.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TyEl
Based on what I am seeing when I inspect the URL it looks like Google is only able to see a few titles and internal links. For instance, when I inspect one of the URLs on GSC this is the screenshot I am seeing: image.pngWhen I perform the "cache:" I barely see any content**:** image.pngVS one of our blog post image.png Would you agree with me there's a problem here? Is this related to the heavy use of JS? If so somehow I wasn't able to detect this on any of the crawling tools? Thanks!0 -
Duplicating relevant category content in subcategories. Good or bad for google ranking?
In a travel related page I have city categories with city related information.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
Would you recommend for or against duplicating some relevant city related in subcategory pages. For visitor it would be useful and google should have more context about the topic of our page.
But my main concern is how this may be perceived by google and especially whether it may make it more likely being penalized for thin content. We already were hit end of june by panda/phantom and we are working on adding also more unique content, but this would be something that we could do additionally and basically instantaneously. Just do not want to make things worse.0 -
Phantom 3 Update?
My site got demolished by this update and I really don't know why and would appreciate if any Mozzers could help me out to understand this. I just found out about this update that happened today and I am kind of shocked and at a loss on what happened. If someone would PM me, I would really appreciate it Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | steve450580 -
SEO before Replatforming - Good Idea?
Hello, We are in the midst of a major replatforming of our current website, the process will take roughly six to nine more months to complete. We are completing revamping our site - the new site will be on the same domain, but almost everything is changing - from the category structure, hierarchy, architecture, different regions on separate URLs will not be on the same with a currency converter, URLs - you name it, we're changing it. There has been internal discussions for some time on whether we should hire an outside firm to help us with our SEO. I have a lot of experience in SEO but my role has changed recently and we have had trouble filling my previous role. We are not looking for help with the replatforming project, we have a great plan in place to preserve link equity, tags, etc. We are looking for general SEO help as if replatforming wasn't on the table. My question is, is this smart to do before replatforming? In my opinion, it's not. Our new site will have completely different URLs and will be so dramatically different. We could have someone do some keyword research, but we have already done the bulk of it. We have thought about and researched keywords for every new page we are creating. But from a technical SEO perspective, I don't see the point in getting someone. In addition, we just had a major SEO audit done last year and we completed the tasks from that audit on the current site; however, most of the changes were technical, not content based. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Colbys0 -
No-index pages with duplicate content?
Hello, I have an e-commerce website selling about 20 000 different products. For the most used of those products, I created unique high quality content. The content has been written by a professional player that describes how and why those are useful which is of huge interest to buyers. It would cost too much to write that high quality content for 20 000 different products, but we still have to sell them. Therefore, our idea was to no-index the products that only have the same copy-paste descriptions all other websites have. Do you think it's better to do that or to just let everything indexed normally since we might get search traffic from those pages? Thanks a lot for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EndeR-0 -
Duplicate content on ecommerce sites
I just want to confirm something about duplicate content. On an eCommerce site, if the meta-titles, meta-descriptions and product descriptions are all unique, yet a big chunk at the bottom (featuring "why buy with us" etc) is copied across all product pages, would each page be penalised, or not indexed, for duplicate content? Does the whole page need to be a duplicate to be worried about this, or would this large chunk of text, bigger than the product description, have an effect on the page. If this would be a problem, what are some ways around it? Because the content is quite powerful, and is relavent to all products... Cheers,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Creode0 -
Duplicate content for swatches
My site is showing a lot of duplicate content on SEOmoz. I have discovered it is because the site has a lot of swatches (colors for laminate) within iframes. Those iframes have all the same content except for the actual swatch image and the title of the swatch. For example, these are two of the links that are showing up with duplicate content: http://www.formica.com/en/home/dna.aspx?color=3691&std=1&prl=PRL_LAMINATE&mc=0&sp=0&ots=&fns=&grs= http://www.formica.com/en/home/dna.aspx?color=204&std=1&prl=PRL_LAMINATE&mc=0&sp=0&ots=&fns=&grs= I do want each individual swatch to show up in search results and they currently are if you search for the exact swatch name. Is the fact that they all have duplicate content affecting my individual rankings and my domain authority? What can I do about it? I can't really afford to put unique content on each swatch page so is there another way to get around it? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AlightAnalytics0 -
Mobile Site - Same Content, Same subdomain, Different URL - Duplicate Content?
I'm trying to determine the best way to handle my mobile commerce site. I have a desktop version and a mobile version using a 3rd party product called CS-Cart. Let's say I have a product page. The URLs are... mobile:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grayloon
store.domain.com/index.php?dispatch=categories.catalog#products.view&product_id=857 desktop:
store.domain.com/two-toned-tee.html I've been trying to get information regarding how to handle mobile sites with different URLs in regards to duplicate content. However, most of these results have the assumption that the different URL means m.domain.com rather than the same subdomain with a different address. I am leaning towards using a canonical URL, if possible, on the mobile store pages. I see quite a few suggesting to not do this, but again, I believe it's because they assume we are just talking about m.domain.com vs www.domain.com. Any additional thoughts on this would be great!0