Does adding lots of new content on a site at one time actually hurt you?
-
When speaking with a client today, he made the comment that he didn't want all of the new content we'd been working to be added to the site all at once for fear that he would get penalized for flooding the site with new content. I don't have any strong data to confirm or refute the claim, is there any truth to it?
-
I agree with all colleagues above, I cant see how your web site will be penalised due to lots of pages uploaded at the same time.
However Adding Too Many Pages Too Quickly May Flag A Site To Be Reviewed Manually. This means thought that you will add hundreds of thousand of link a night. Here is the related via by Matt Cutts:
Hope you find this useful!
-
It is a real estate site and the content is a directory of the various condos available in their community. The pages are all unique and have real valuable content, so I don't think there will be any issues with content quality.
There is new content and blogging that occurs regularly on the site. I think that the client's concern comes from some old concepts that if we're only adding content infrequently, but in mass, that it may be seen as spammy.
-
I agree with Jesse. Earlier this year we added a new data-driven section to our website that included (believe it or not) 83,000 pages, all unique in content since the information is highly technical in nature. No associated penalties have resulted from this.
-
I agree with Jesse for the most part. I think the key is: what kind of content we are talking about? Adding tons of low-value, thin content pages to a site all at once (or even gradually) is probably going to diminish the authority of existing content. I do think that adding thousands of pages that have no page authority to a site that contains pages with a decent amount of authority could, theoretically, dilute the authority of the existing pages depending on site architecture, internal linking and the ratio of existing pages versus new pages. However, I would expect this to be only temporary, and if the new content is great quality, should be nothing to worry about long term.
-
Thanks Jesse, that was my thought exactly. If anything, I see incrementally adding the content as a negative thing, since it will lead to a less than complete user experience.
-
No truth to that whatsoever. That's weird paranoia.
If there was some sort of problem WITH the content, maybe. But there would be no penalty for all new content added.
I've done total site overhauls plenty of times and they get indexed quick with no penalties.. (although I will say the speed of this seems to be in flux, but I digress.)
Don't let the client worry about this. Think about any website that initially launches: why would Google penalize that?
Hope this helps. Paranoia is often the toughest challenge when it comes to dealing with clients/site owners.
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
-
Agonizing over Meta length or content seems to make no sense as Google seems to be ignoring them!
Real frustrating for me to see Google ignoring my 'Meta Descriptions' and 'mining' my site for any description it chooses. For years my meta has always been displayed and was set up with best practices according to MOZ. My site snopro.co.nz and snopro.co.nz/wanaka-ski-hire have plenty of competition in the market but we are the only ones with a huge point of difference, we are web based only, and deliver the ski rental gear. My quality meta was a way I could control the text and use for a good CTR due to offering something unique in the 'Meta' (Rental Delivery). Seems the only way I can 'control' any text is with 'Adwords' ...funny that! Any others out there finding the same? Justin. BTW my meta is - 'Snopro Ski Rental Delivery Wanaka. We deliver & custom fit ski hire in the comfort of your accommodation. Hassle Free. Multi-day save 10%. Book here'
Algorithm Updates | | judsta0 -
Why is old site not being deindexed post-migration?
We recently migrated to a new domain (16 days ago), and the new domain is being indexed at a normal rate (2-3k pages per day). The issue is the old domain has not seen any drop in indexed pages. I was expecting a drop in # of indexed pages inversely related to the increase of indexed pages on the new site. Any advice?
Algorithm Updates | | ggpaul5620 -
Penguin 3.0 Site Dropped after Update
Hi We was hit by the Penguin update a long time ago and we lost a lot of traffic/positions because of this. For a long time we worked really hard to identify all off our links that may have caused us to recieve this penalty. After Months of work we submitted the disavow file and reconsideration request and in June 2014 we recieved confirmation from google in webmaster tools that the manual spam action had been revoked. over time we then started to recieve more traffic and better positions in the serps, however since penguin 3.0 we have dropped again for a range of keywords. many going from page 1 to 2 or page 2 to 3/4 Any ideas what we should do here , any help will be really appriciated as I'm totally confused We havent done any link building at all since the penalty / recovery
Algorithm Updates | | AMG1000 -
Site has disappeared since Panda 4 despite quality content, help!
Our site www.physicalwellbeing.co.uk has lost over 20 first page rankings since the end of May. I assume this is because of Panda 4.0. All content on the site is high quality and 100% unique, so we did not expect to get penalised. Although I read somewhere that if Google can't read particular js anymore they don't rank you as high. The site has not been blacklisted as all pages are showing in Google's index and there are no messages on webmaster tools. We have not taken part in any link schemes and have disavowed all low quality links that were pointing there just in case (after the penalty). Can anybody see anything on www.physicalwellbeing.co.uk that may have cause Panda update to affect it so negatively? Would really appreciate any help.
Algorithm Updates | | search_shop0 -
Diluting your authority - adding pages diluting rankings of other pages?
I'm looking after a site that has around 400 pages. All of these pages rank pretty well for the KW they are targetting. My question is: if we add another 400 pages without doing any link building work, holding DA the same, 1) would the rankings of those 400 previously good pages diminish? and 2) Would the new pages, as more and more new ones are created, rank less and less well?
Algorithm Updates | | xoffie0 -
Do links count in syndicated content?
If I write a press release that goes viral and is syndicated all over do each of those links to my site in the syndications of the press release count and pass page rank with Google? Or does Google only count the link in the original press release? I heard that Google counts all the links for a time then eventually counts only one link from the original content and discounting all the other links as duplicate content. Any truth to this? Thanks mozzers! Ron10
Algorithm Updates | | Ron100 -
Microsites for Local Search / Location Based sites?
Referring to the webinar on SEOMoz about Local Search that was presented by Nifty Marketing (http://www.seomoz.org/webinars/be-where-local-is-going). I have a question my client asked us regarding why we broke out their locations into microsites, and not just used subfolders. So here are the details: The client has one main website in real estate. They have 5 branches. Each branch covers about a 50 mile radius. Each branch also covers a specialized niche in their areas. When we created the main site we incorporated the full list of listings on the main site; We then created a microsite for each branch, who has a page of listings (same as the main site) but included the canonical link back to the main site. The reason we created a microsite for each branch is that the searches for each branch are very specific to their location and we felt that having only a subfolder would take away from the relevancy of the site and it's location. Now, the location sites rank on the first page for their very competitive, location based searches. The client, as we encourage, has had recommendations from others saying this is hurting them, not helping them. My question is this... How can this hurt them when the microsites include a home page specific to the location, a contact page that is optimized with location specific information (maps, text, directions, NAP, call to action, etc.), a page listing area information about communities/events/etc., a page of the location's agents, and of course real estate listings (with canonical back to the main site)? Am I misunderstanding? I understood that if the main site could support the separation of a section into a microsite, this would help local search. Local search is the bread and butter of this client's conversions. AND if you tell me we should go back to having subfolders for each location, won't that seriously hurt our already excellent rankings? The client sees significant visitors from their placement of the location URLs. THANKS!
Algorithm Updates | | gXeSEO
Darlene1 -
If we are getting clicks from a local one box as a citation in the serps's would we see this as the referrer in GA?
If we are getting clicks from a local one box as a citation in the serps's
Algorithm Updates | | Mediative
would we see this as the referrer in GA?0