Updating content on URL or new URL
-
High Mozzers,
We are an event organisation. Every year we produce like 350 events. All the events are on our website.
A lot of these events are held every year. So i have an URL like
So what would you do. This URL has some inbound links, some social mentions and so on. SO if the event will be held again in 2013. Would it be better to update the content on this URL or create a new one.
I would keep this URL and update it because of the linkvalue and it is allready indexed and ranking for the desired keyword for that event.
Cheers,
Ruud
-
no we use hyphens. Just for the example. And thanks for your answer. I think 3.1 would be an good idea.
I thought just replacing the content would be good because then you refresh your content. You do not lose your link love and the event content would be very similar. We do not really want to rank for the old content. We want a visitor to come to the event page and register for the event.
Have to think about it a little while
-
While I'm here, do you not have hyphens as word separators in your URLs or is it just for these examples that you're not putting them in?
i.e. Why have you gone for www.domainname.nl/eventname2013 vs www.domainname.nl/event-name-2013?
-
Tough one these annual events, few paths you may want to consider.
**1) Create a new url - www.domainname.nl/event-name-2013 **
Reasonable idea if the event is searched by year i.e. they'll search "event name 2013". As you probably can't be sure about what people are going to do I'd suggest not relying on that and keeping the original URL. Make sure and link to all future years from here though (link to 2013, 2014 when it comes, etc.)
PROS - You'll now have a naming convention and never have to worry about this problem again You don't need to worry about what to do with last year's info You build up your site's relevancy for the term with multiple pages on the same topic
CONS - You lose any authority and link equity the main page has built up If the pages are highly similar you may have trouble ranking the newer ones (or older ones, I dunno how Google works it out)
2) Replace it - Simply put up the new content for 2013 and overwrite the 2012 content.
Not great for a number of reasons. Significantly changing the content may lose some of your relevancy and the archived content may still have value to users.
PROS - You get to keep the same URL and it will always be the most recent information (if you update it) You get to keep your authority and link equity (caveat: If the content changes entirely search engines may strongly devalue previous links to that page)
CONS - You lose content You may lose relevancy
3) You update the content with 2013's schedule and place the older content on a new page - http://www.domainname.nl/event-name-2012
This way you can keep working on the existing URL but don't lose the old content.
PROS - You build up your site's relevancy for the term with multiple pages on the same topic
CONS - You may confuse search engines by moving the content they expected to another page
3.1) Canonicalise the 2012 content
As above but you add a canonical tag to the 'archived' page telling search engines that the main page is the one they're looking for
PROS - Users still have access to the older content
CONS - The old content no longer counts for much
4) You add the new content to the main page and keep 2012's underneath
You could simply update the page with a
<header>
combo in HTML5 or demote the previous year's to
s and use
for this year. You can even somewhat hide the 2012 stuff by using css, jquery or js (maybe ajax, I dunno), that would mean that the page can still pretty much look like you want.
PROS - Adding more relevant content to a page can improve the pages quality All content accessible from one location for the user
CONS - If it is year specific you may dilute the relevancy Shouldn't be seen as hiding content, but if there's a lot of keyword heavy text in the hidden divs it may trigger sore sort of alert
What would I do? Depends on the event/type of site I guess. Most likely 3.1 or 4 but as I'm not 100% happy with what canonicalisation does, probably 4.
If anybody wants to jump in with other ideas or other pros and cons there's probably a lot I've not thought about.
</header>
-
No problem my friend and thanks for the explanation. If you are going to repeat the event then there is no point in creating a new page for it. You can just add the new event to the same page mentioned under a different year. So the point is, the URL should not change but the page gets updated with the new event's info. This is very good from SEO standpoint also as the page will be constantly updated with new content and you will still enjoy all the link love that it accumulated over a period of time.
Hope this helps.
Best regards,
Devanur Rafi.
-
Hi Rafi, that is correct what you are saying. But every event has its own page. The question is, if we repeat this event. What would you do. Create a new event page or update the old event page of that event.
Like we would have www.domainname.nl/searchlove (wish we had that event)
And we are going to repeat searchlove in 2013. Would you put all the new data of searchlove 2013 on www.domainname.nl/searchlove or would you create a new url www.domainame.nl/searchlove2013
Sorry if the question was or is a bit difficult to understand (it mainly because of my English)
-
Hi Ruud,
Straight into the meat. If you start adding all the events to the same page, then it would dilute the page's ranking capability as it would have to rank for multiple events (event names) and this is not recommended. So, the best thing for you to do would be, come up with individual even pages and let them rank for the specific event name. Doing this, you will not only be ranking well with even specific pages but also, the size of the website will also grow which is very good for your website going forward as the search engines like big websites with lot of unique content and there are better chances for big sites to become authoritative in the niche when compared to their smaller peers. Hope you got the point.
Good luck.
Regards,
Devanur Rafi.
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
-
I'm struggling to understand (and fix) why I'm getting a 404 error. The URL includes this "%5Bnull%20id=43484%5D" but I cannot find that anywhere in the referring URL. Does anyone know why please? Thanks
Can you help with how to fix this 404 error please? It appears that I have a redirect from one page to the other, although the referring page URL works, but it appears to be linking to another URL with this code at the end of the the URL - %5Bnull%20id=43484%5D that I'm struggling to find and fix. Thanks
Technical SEO | | Nichole.wynter20200 -
Same URL, different Drupal content types
Hi all, I am working in Drupal which isn't always SEO-friendly. I want to convert some of our articles that are currently in an old article type to our new shiny longform template without losing SEO value. The process we use right now is to: change the URL of the old article in the CMS from /article-title to /article-title-old and then make the longform template /article-title in the CMS. Then hit publish. That way we can avoid having to mess with redirects. My concerns are that this will be seen as a bait and switch by Google. They are, after all, two separate pages — node-1 and node-2 on the back end — that are being smushed into the same skin aka same URL. I don't know if updating to the new template wipes out some of the info Google may have deemed important. I guess you could argue it's a redesign by CMS but I'm still not sure. Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | webbedfeet0 -
Purchasing duplicate content
Morning all, I have a client who is planning to expand their product range (online dictionary sites) to new markets and are considering the acquisition of data sets from low ranked competitors to supplement their own original data. They are quite large content sets and would mean a very high percentage of the site (hosted on a new sub domain) would be made up of duplicate content. Just to clarify, the competitor's content would stay online as well. I need to lay out the pros and cons of taking this approach so that they can move forward knowing the full facts. As I see it, this approach would mean forgoing ranking for most of the site and would need a heavy dose of original content as well as supplementing the data on page to build around the data. My main concern would be that launching with this level of duplicate data would end up damaging the authority of the site and subsequently the overall domain. I'd love to hear your thoughts!
Technical SEO | | BackPack851 -
Duplicate Content - Different URLs and Content on each
Seeing a lot of duplicate content instances of seemingly unrelated pages. For instance, http://www.rushimprint.com/custom-bluetooth-speakers.html?from=topnav3 is being tracked as a duplicate of http://www.rushimprint.com/custom-planners-diaries.html?resultsperpg=viewall. Does anyone else see this issue? Is there a solution anyone is aware of?
Technical SEO | | ClaytonKendall0 -
Can URL re writes fix the problem of critical content too deep in a sites structure?
Good morning from Wetherby UK 🙂 Ok imagine this scenario. You ask the developers to design a site where "offices to let" is on level two of a sites hierachy and so the URL would look like this: http://www.sandersonweatherall.co.uk/office-to-let. But Yikes when it goes live it ends up like this: http://www.sandersonweatherall.co.uk...s/residential/office-to-let Is a fix to this a URL re - write? Or is the only fix relocating the office to let content further up the site structure? Any insights welcome 🙂
Technical SEO | | Nightwing0 -
Wordpress URL weirdness - why is google registering non-pretty URLS?
I've noticed in my stats that google is indexing some non-pretty URLs from my wordpress-based blog.
Technical SEO | | peterdbaron
For instance, this URL is appearing google search: http://www.admissionsquest.com/onboardingschools/index.php?p=439 It should be: http://www.admissionsquest.com/onboardingschools/2009/01/do-american-boarding-schools-face-growing-international-competition.html Last week I added the plugin Redirection in order to consolidate categories & tags. Any chance that this has something to do with it? Recs on how to solve this? Fyi - I've been using pretty URLS with wordpress from the very beginning and this is the first time that I've seen this issue. Thanks in advance for your help!0 -
Updating rss feed times without changing content
my question is like the title reads If I have an rss feed in an xml file and from time to time I update the pubdate and time. Will this have a positive effect on my website in terms of the rss aggregators coming to my site thinking that it was recently updated and creating links to these pages or will they be able to determine that there is nothing new by comparing it to the old page that they may have stored. thus doing nothing or maybe even hurting the website.
Technical SEO | | mickey112 -
Content Delivery Network
Hi I have a question My site is hosted on a server in the city of my target audience Should i use a Content Delivery Network anyway? Even if the closest edge location of the cdn is in the neighbor country? Thank you Paulo
Technical SEO | | paulogoncalves0