Redundant categorization - "boys" and "girls" category. Any other suggestions than implementing filtering?
-
One of our clients (a children's clothing company) has split their categories (outwear, tops, shoes) between boys and girls - There's one category page for girls outwear, and one category for boys outwear. I am suspecting that this redundant categorisation is diluting link juice and rankings for the related search queries.
Important points:
- The clothes themselves are rather gender-neutral, girl's sweaters don't differ that much from the boy's sweaters.
- Our keyword research indicates that norwegians' search queries are also pretty gender neutral - people are generally searching after "children's dresses", "shoes for kids", "snowsuits", etc. So these gender specific categories are not really reflective of people's search behavior.
I acknowledge that implementing a filter for "boys" and "girls" would be the best way to solve this redundant categorization, but that would simply be to expensive for our client.
I'm thinking that some sort of canonicalisation would be the best approach to solve this issue. Are there any other suggestions or comments to this?
-
"Why not do parent category by type of clothing - "snowsuites", "sweaters" and so on and then have boy-girls filters inside?"
"I acknowledge that implementing a filter for "boys" and "girls" would be the best way to solve this redundant categorization, but that would simply be to expensive for our client."
That being said, canonicals will help direct the juice to the right (/outwear/) page and away from /outwear/girls and /outwear/boys.
The only other option I can see is to have an overview category (/outwear/) and then deindex the subcategories in robots.
disallow: /outwear/girls*
disallow: /outwear/boys*But that only helps Google with what you already have. If someone directly links the /outwear/boys/ page, that will get lost. So canonicals would seem to be the way to go in the absence of filters.
-
Hi there.
Why not do parent category by type of clothing - "snowsuites", "sweaters" and so on and then have boy-girls filters inside?
Or have clothing categories and have boys-girls filters over everything? This way there is no "issue" with extra or redundant categorization.
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
-
Pages being flagged in Search Console as having a "no-index" tag, do not have a meta robots tag??
Hi, I am running a technical audit on a site which is causing me a few issues. The site is small and awkwardly built using lots of JS, animations and dynamic URL extensions (bit of a nightmare). I can see that it has only 5 pages being indexed in Google despite having over 25 pages submitted to Google via the sitemap in Search Console. The beta Search Console is telling me that there are 23 Urls marked with a 'noindex' tag, however when i go to view the page source and check the code of these pages, there are no meta robots tags at all - I have also checked the robots.txt file. Also, both Screaming Frog and Deep Crawl tools are failing to pick up these urls so i am a bit of a loss about how to find out whats going on. Inevitably i believe the creative agency who built the site had no idea about general website best practice, and that the dynamic url extensions may have something to do with the no-indexing. Any advice on this would be really appreciated. Are there any other ways of no-indexing pages which the dev / creative team might have implemented by accident? - What am i missing here? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | NickG-1230 -
Stuck with canonical URL - main site vs categorys?
Hello, I started to doubt myself. We have a classified advertisements website. On the main www.website.com page, almost all the advertisements are shown. Now we take those advertisements and also split them into categorys Category 1 / category 2 / category 3 / category 4 Now all those categories almost always have the same content as www.website.com except a bit less (because X amount of content is now divided also to 4-5 groups) For raking should i actually tell google that those categories are a copy of www.website.com or they should still be as they are?
Technical SEO | | advertisingcloud0 -
"Ghost" errors on blog structured data?
Hi, I'm working on a blog which Search Console account advises me about a big bunch of errors on its structured data: Structured data - graphics Structured data - hentry list Structured data - detail But I get to https://developers.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/ and it tells me "all is ok": Structured data - test Any clue? Thanks in advance, F0NE5lz.png hm7IBtV.png aCRJdJO.jpg 15SRo93.jpg
Technical SEO | | Webicultors0 -
SEO impact of AJAX category on Magento website?
I am designing a new category for my website. Instead of a grid or list view there is an additional (default) view that implements Owl Carousel. What this means for SEO is that there is going to be a lot of dynamically loaded content and I am not quite sure how to handle that. By default all the user (and Google) will see is product images. Once the product image is clicked more details are shown about the product. Are there any articles that any of you can refer me to on Googles recommendation for handling dynamic content? My initial thought was that with a decent site map and the other available views this wouldn't be a big deal, especially since my categories tend to bog down SEO with links and repetitive terms in the product name (i.e. Flavored This, Flavored That, Flavored Other Term) as well as I'm unsure if I need the "juice" passed through my category product links.. but I'll leave it to the community to confirm that.
Technical SEO | | bearpaw0 -
What is the difference between "Referring Pages" and "Total Backlinks" [on Ahrefs]?
I always thought they were essentially the same thing myself but appears there may be a difference? Any one care to help me out? Cheers!
Technical SEO | | Webrevolve0 -
Schema.org implementation for physician's office vs physician herself?
Hi, Regarding schema.org microdata, which page(s) should have the microdata? 1) http://schema.org/Physician -- appears to be about the office. Since we have all of the contact/address info in the footer on each page, should we do the same with microdata? I can't seem to find a suggested implementation on schema.org Assuming an office has multiple MDs, how should the docs be listed since the physician schema appears to be for the office, not for the individual doctors? Thanks for any insight!
Technical SEO | | Titan5520 -
Missing Meta Tags - "thousands" using WooCommerce?
Recently took a site live for a client using WP/WooCommerce to replace their antiquated shopping cart site and have encountered thousands of "Missing Meta Description Tag" errors. Have researched and tried a couple different approaches, but nothing really seems to fix this problem. I'm happy to continue to research, but have never encountered this problem before. Anyone else encountered similar? If so, how did you fix? Which resources to start with? 2VKDRVx
Technical SEO | | twelvetwo.net0 -
Meta Description On Categories
Is it really necessary to add a meta description to your categories and admin pages? I don't even have that option with my Genesis platform. When i received my first crawl test, those are the things that stick out as errors...
Technical SEO | | brentmitchell0
