Dating Blog Posts & How Fast Google Picks up on New Pages
-
I had until a few months ago included the original post date of a new blog post on the site. I then removed it and none of my results in Google now include the blog post date, although for some (for articles written about events) Google includes the date of the event where you would usually see the post date. Since I did this, it seems like new blog posts are taking longer to rank on Google, some results are ranking well, and others declined relative to what I would have previously expected.
What's the best thing to be doing? To include a date (considering a lot of my content is not time-relevant) or to keep it as it is now?
The second thing, is I often go through and update my articles with new information and re-post it in my rss feed etc - ie the date becomes new again. How does Google treat this?
Any ideas or comments would be great!
Thanks
-
It is unlikely but for some things possible especially when people are planning trips far in advance (before the info on this years events is available which can sometimes only be a few weeks in advance).
You mean basically copy the content, update it, and put in a redirect?
Thanks
-
How likely is it for users to desire to see the pages on past years?
If not at all, then remove the old pages from your site. Issue solved.
If you feel users may still want to see the old pages, you can canonicalize them to the new page. Google will then not view the old pages as duplicate content.
-
Mm yeah maybe with a link at the top of old ones to say - this applies to 2011, see here for 4th of July 2012?
Then I'd end up with lots of pages with similar competing titles?
It is a difficult one, no?
-
If it was my site, there would likely be a new article each year.
4th of July Celebration!
When: July 4th, 2012
Where: Central Park, NY
Performing Artists will be: Pink, Fleetwood Mac, ....
Tickets are $20
[Insert as many relevant details about the event as possible such as: where to park, how much parking will cost, the time it starts / ends, ?jobs, ?handicap accessibility, etc]
The past year pages would likely 301 redirect to the current year's page. If you felt the need to keep the pages from prior years, then they could possibly canonical to the current year.
-
I'll give you an example and you'll understand what I mean
For instance - I have articles about events which take place every year. Obviously each year there are new details, new elements, new performers etc and the article is totally relevant for the homepage and for the feeds etc again.
I have just been updating and re-posting the pages for the new year (to stop having duplicate pages on the site...)
-
I don't care for the manner in which the articles are being recycled. If the articles are 90% the same and you are just adding a snippet of new info, there is no reason to re-post them at all.
Unless you are posting fresh, new articles then it makes sense that a category page would be crawled faster if your site's navigation is structured with a drill-down style where you click on a category from the home page, then the article.
-
Thanks. It's kind of weird what's happening because my category pages are showing up with the new content faster than the actual article.
I'm not 'manipulating' the date - I'm just not including it. The issue with 'recycling old articles' is that I am updating articles regularly with new information - to add a new article isn't good for the site because it's 90% repetition. Then, when I update them, I re-post them because what's new is important for readers, followers etc, to see. What do you think?
Thanks
-
Dating Blog Posts & How Fast Google Picks up on New Pages
This Q&A post shows as 4 hours old and it is already in Google search results: goo.gl/QHjXb. Google has the ability to pick up new pages in minutes for sites they deem important.
With respect to dates on articles, there are many attempts at manipulation and Google is pretty darn good at detecting them. Some examples:
-
sites which offer a date on their home page or articles that always updates to the current date
-
sites which recycle old articles by updating the date, or republish older articles with a new date
-
sites which do not offer any date for articles in an attempt to hide the age of the information
In brief, I would recommend including the date on all published information. The date provides a critical perspective on information. An example: when I was in school I learned there was 9 planets in our solar system. If I write that "fact" down, the date of the information is important. It seems Pluto has been demoted and there are now only 8 planets in our solar system.
Google looks at some keywords as being more time sensitive and the results of searches are affected by the dates involved.
-
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
-
How & What is the best advice on Keyword Cannibalization & get onpage optimized perfectly?
Hi all mozzers, I am having confusion to understand the fact and importance to target a single or related grouped keywords which is quite broader in terms of relevancy being found within our business. Let's explain more in detail:
Search Behavior | | KammySEO
Suppose we have a website: abc.com deal businesses in "Party Supplies, Party Decorations" Where the term "Party Supplies" being used exact or randomly many places, please see below finalized Titles respective to each landing page: abc.com/birthday/
title - Birthday Party Supplies - Kids Birthday Party Decorations Ideas abc.com/wedding/
title - Wedding Favors - Wedding Party Decorations & Centerpieces abc.com/baking/
title - Buy Baking Supplies - Cupcake & Cake Decorating Supplies abc.com/occasions/
title - Special Occasions Parties Supplies & Events - Party Time My main concern is, do our keyword party supplies gets stuck with "Keyword Cannibalization" ? If yes then what is the best advice you folks like to input here in order to safeguard and optimize best our landing pages for the such broader related search terms within the businesses. I am looking for best answer here0 -
Location Pages
Hi. A client of mine offers multiple services and covers a region of the UK. They want to target each major town/city within this area. However, there are 20 cities and services offered range from 5-15 services. I am in the process of creating a location page for each city, so it can be optimised separately however I am not sure if there is a better way to do it? Or should I create a page for each city & service. So I for example I end up with 10 London pages with each one offering a different service? These can all be optimised for different services within London then? Any suggestions? Thanks
Search Behavior | | YNWA0 -
Banned from Google
Hello experts I need some help. I have a customer that have been banned from Google´s top ranking. I need an expert to get the cusotmer back on the track again.. Cann you help? Regards Peter
Search Behavior | | seopeter290 -
Does Google recognise locality
We have been undertaking some website work recently and have identified that within our own geographical location of Hull, the www.styletech.co.uk website is first on page one. However, when moving approximately 30 miles away we are on Googles fourth page. We are in an independent network area e.g. Kingston Communications rather than BT, would this have an impact on how Google responds?
Search Behavior | | StyleTech0 -
Google Penalisation - Any help would be appreciated!
Hi,
Search Behavior | | ChrisHolgate
We’ve recently received a Google notification of unnatural linking along with a confirmation that we're being penalised. There were a few other sites that we owned that perhaps had too many links pointing to our main domain so we trimmed them down and submitted a reconsideration request and got the following back: "Dear site owner or webmaster of http://www.refreshcartridges.co.uk/,
We received a request from a site owner to reconsider http://www.refreshcartridges.co.uk/ for compliance with Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
We've reviewed your site and we still see links to your site that violate our quality guidelines.
Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes.
We encourage you to make changes to comply with our quality guidelines. Once you've made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results.
If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request.
If you have additional questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support.
Sincerely,
Google Search Quality Team" I want to stress that we have never in the past and do not currently buy any backlinks. The problem that we face now is that our site has been online for best part of a decade, there are thousands of people linking to us and I have absolutely no idea where to start. We don’t use an SEO Company but in the past few months have been using SEOmoz to improve our on-page optimisation. I know it’s a massive ask but if could a member of the SEOmoz community or a staff member quickly take a gander and let us know if anything in particular sticks out like a sore thumb it would mean a great deal to me. Of course, if needed we’ll employ the services of an SEO company but I’m hoping one of you guys will see something immediately obvious that could really help us out! Thanks in advance. Kind regards Chris0 -
Hi guys.. post-penguin my website coming in and out of serps every other day... what reason for that? ie. #11 --> #300+
We had one of the pre-penguin "unnatural links " messages in WMT - then Penguin hit April 24th/25th.. wee then set to work on Link profile... since 19th May we have had numerous search phrases come 'back' into rank pre-penguin for a day ie.. #5 - #10 and then drop the next.. ie 300+ this has been happening across a wide range of key phrases.... in fact it may well be that the key phrases are added to the serps 'briefly' or for a set amount of time... but our ranking checker checks daily so while it appears to be every other day in and out there may be another pattern... but the question is What is Google doing here and Why? any suggestions?
Search Behavior | | Geminineil1 -
Have Google changed something in Analytics
Hi Mozzers, I have a client that gets loads of traffic and since the 15th February there has been a decrease in New Visitors and an Increse in Returning. Traffic levels are the same. The returning is up and new are down by a long long shot. Have Google changed the way these visits are calculated? I can't see anything on the blog - anyone experiencing similar issues Bush
Search Behavior | | Bush_JSM0 -
Long page - good or bad?
Our attorney wrote a dozen articles that range from 300 to 700 words on various topics of the certain law area. These articles are all placed on our FAQ page with anchored table of contents. This page does frequently come up on the first page of the google when people search for the questions discussed in these articles. 90% of these visits are not local therefore they are not potential clients. Attorney views it more like a community service then a marketing tool. However, I think there might be a problem. People read though the page and close it because usually they can find what they were looking for right there, however GA counts it as bounce because they did not browse to another page. Would large number of bounces hurt our standing with Google? Would it be better to separate the page into multiple pages for each article to make visitors browse?
Search Behavior | | SirMax0