Advice regarding Panda
-
I'd like some feedback on what would be a Panda factor(s) on http://www.duhaime.org
The site got hit fairly hard by Panda (60% drop in traffic). Since then we have:
- redesigned the site (responsive and progressive),
- reduce the average links/page to ~35 from over 100,
- Use AJAX to delay the loading of boiler plate and nav elements,
- Improved the search functionality,
- Added more content images (still in progress),
- Removed the citations section to new sub-domain, and
- 1000's of little code fixes and enhancements
The site, by nature of being a legal reference, contains many small, single topic pages. The authority and professionalism of the site demands it doesn't allow much UGC. (The law is not Social Media)
Unfortunately, this means the bulk of the page (1000+) are fairly formulaic - to format otherwise would diminish the value to the user. This doesn't hurt many individual pages as shown by the dominance the "Without Prejudice" page enjoys.
In particular, the citations section was very limited as there is not very much one can say about the 10,000+ law reports in the world. Recognizing this as valuable to lawyers but a likely "low value" target of Panda, we moved it to a sub domain and requested the old directory was removed from the index. This was done on July 28th.
Now...
I'd like some opinions on anything else that might be holding the site back.
Thank you for you time.
-
Time to put that legal knowledge to work! Glad I could help - let me know if you have any more questions.
-
Wow, you have really highlighted how far the coping of the site has gone. This site was created in '96 and many of the definitions are over 10 years old now. I can guarantee the author didn't copy the content unless cited. But, I can see how the definitions of the same thing would come out very similar.
Take http://www.poole.it/cassino/ARCHIVE/TEXTS_legal/duhaime%20online%20legal%20dictionary.htmshows
even with the single (wrong) back link, this would be competing for original content title, right?
Looks like we have to get busy with DCMA requests.
The next step for the citations is a separate domain which is a shame - Google really needs to catch up to reference sites and stop treating all pages on the web the same. Sure, the citations pages don't have to rank at the top but they shouldn't be hurting the rest of the content either.
-
- All of your glossary "Letter" pages are indexed (26 pages with content that is repeated on the individual "Word" pages). Although this is obviously not some intentional or deliberate means at spamdexing, it might appear as low quality to Google.
- Most of your legal definitions on these pages are found elsewhere on the Internet, whether they started out as your original content or not. Example: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22A+barbaric+form+of+corporal+punishment+meted+out+in+the+middle+ages+where+persons+would+be+permanently+blinded+by+the+pressing+of+hot+irons+to+the+open+eyes.%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
- When you combine the above two bullet points, you have 26 pages that contain content that is duplicated on other pages throughout your domain, and then hundreds of pages that contain content that is located elsewhere on the Internet. Classic two way Panda action - duplicating your own content, and having your content duplicated by others.
- The Citations pages are really weak. I know you mentioned there's very little you can do, but really - if there is any way whatsoever to beef these pages up, they need to be. Even if these are on a subdomain, it still isn't a great thing to be associated with. It wouldn't shock me if there were negative consequences, even on a subdomain. (Although given your situation, I think it was a natural first step. It's a tricky situation. See how the move to the subdomain pans out in the next month or two - if things don't start to make a comeback, you really need to figure out a way to beef up the content.)
- A lot of your other content is copied or taken from somewhere. You need to re-write your content or get these websites to re-write theirs.
Example: http://www.duhaime.org/CrimeandSafety/LawArticle-59/Personal-Safety.aspx
Copies: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22In+most+cases+you+are+in+control+of+the+circumstances+in+which+you+place+yourself.+Just+by+being+aware+that+you+are+a+potential+victim+of+a+personal+crime+is+the+first+step+toward+prevention.%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
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
-
Have Your Thoughts Changed Regarding Canonical Tag Best Practice for Pagination? - Google Ignoring rel= Next/Prev Tagging
Hi there, We have a good-sized eCommerce client that is gearing up for a relaunch. At this point, the staging site follows the previous best practice for pagination (self-referencing canonical tags on each page; rel=next & prev tags referencing the last and next page within the category). Knowing that Google does not support rel=next/prev tags, does that change your thoughts for how to set up canonical tags within a paginated product category? We have some categories that have 500-600 products so creating and canonicalizing to a 'view all' page is not ideal for us. That leaves us with the following options (feel it is worth noting that we are leaving rel=next / prev tags in place): Leave canonical tags as-is, page 2 of the product category will have a canonical tag referencing ?page=2 URL Reference Page 1 of product category on all pages within the category series, page 2 of product category would have canonical tag referencing page 1 (/category/) - this is admittedly what I am leaning toward. Any and all thoughts are appreciated! If this were in relation to an existing website that is not experiencing indexing issues, I wouldn't worry about these. Given we are launching a new site, now is the time to make such a change. Thank you! Joe
Web Design | | Joe_Stoffel1 -
Regarding rel=canonical on duplicate pages on a shopping site... some direction, please.
Good morning, Moz community: My name is David, and I'm currently doing internet marketing for an online retailer of marine accessories. While many product pages and descriptions are unique, there are some that have the descriptions duplicated across many products. The advice commonly given is to leave one page as is / crawlable (probably best for one that is already ranking/indexed), and use rel=canonical on all duplicates. Any idea for direction on this? Do you think it is necessary? It will be a massive task. (also, one of the products that we rank highest for, we have tons of duplicate descriptions.... so... that is sort of like evidence against the idea?) Thanks!
Web Design | | DavidCiti0 -
Are these doorway pages or not? Concerned due to Panda 4.0
For a new site we're building, the Products team wants the header (let's call this Product-Header) to have links to every subsection of every section on every page. Since this is a bad idea, I want Product-Header to be coded in such a way that it doesn't appear in the code or the links are nofollow, noindex. I want to instead create static versions of these pages without the Product-Header. The homepage links to the static URL section pages, those main section pages link to static subsection pages, and so on. It's one nice silo. I am concerned though that Google won't like this due to these static pages are being created specifically for search engines. Users could click through to this static parallel site from the homepage, or they could use the dynamic URL site. This is similar to what etsy.com is doing where you can search Google for "mermaid bridal" and get this page https://www.etsy.com/market/mermaid_bridal but the dynamic version of the page does not show up. However you can search on etsy.com for " mermaid bridal" and get https://www.etsy.com/search?q=mermaid bridal&ship_to=US. Could these static versions that show up in search engines be seen as doorway pages? I know ebay.com got spanked for doorway pages and I don't want to do anything that would get this site penalized.
Web Design | | CFSSEO0 -
Simple Wordpress Question regarding Footer Link
I have a client with a site that has the company that built their website's link in the footer. How can I remove this? I am pretty proficient with Wordpress but I am drawing a blank. The site is www.northatlantacleaning.com Thanks and I do extend the courtesy of awarding 'Best Answer' and thumbs up etc to good responses.
Web Design | | Atlanta-SMO0 -
Study regarding Font Size widgets
Has any one seen credible evidence about impact of font size widgets? Do/did people use them? Are they moot in the world of full-page zoom functions?
Web Design | | sprynewmedia0 -
Any advice on Umbraco builds?
Hi there, I'm a php gal really, but am working with a client on a new build which will be in Umbraco. So the question to Seomozzers out there is what should I be aware of and are there any recommendations for plugins/extensions that'll help in ongoing SEO? Thanks!
Web Design | | Shivvyt0 -
Does on page links have an effect on SERP rankings with PANDA
I have been doing some competitive analysis basing my company on others and have noticed a pattern. Very high ranking sites seem to have limited the internal and external on page links on their subdomains to under 100. my site has a lot of links but all are relevant and lead to unique content. I am interested to know if anyone else has noticed this pattern in changes in the SERP results. bIs google now penalizing pages with to many on site nav links? And if a full site restructure is needed to allow google to index and rank these pages or if a it is a non issue and does not need to be addressed. Panda confuses me!!!!! HELP!
Web Design | | Brother220 -
Optimization advice
Hi i am new to optimization and trying to learn how to do this. I am working on our site where we are trying to improve it and get people to come to the site through our articles. Our site is a lifestyle magazine that we are trying to make better. An article we have published on Ryan Giggs affair, we have tried to optimize it but not sure if we have done this correctly with the title and content. Here is the article Manchester United Footballer Ryan Giggs Wife Forgives Affair can someone please look at the article here and see if we have done this correct or what we should have done. any help would be great
Web Design | | ClaireH-1848860