Significantly reducing number of pages (and overall content) on new site - is it a bad idea?
-
Hi Mozzers - I am looking at new site (not launched yet) - it contains significantly fewer pages than the previous site - 35 pages rather than 107 before - content on the remaining pages is plentiful but I am worried about the sudden loss of a significant "chunk" of the website - significantly cutting the size of a website must surely increase the risks of post-migration performance problems?
Further info - the site has run an SEO contract with a large SEO firm for several years. They don't appear to have done anything beyond tinkering with homepage content - all the header and description tags are the same across the current website. 90% of site traffic currently arrives on the homepage. Content quality/volume isn't bad across most of the current site.
Thanks in advance for your input!
-
Hi Luke
I wouldn't say keyword density is totally irrelevant, but what I mean by that is that you would expect to see on any page the keywords related to the subject of that page. But attempting to add keywords to a page to increase density to make it more indexable is not what you should be doing.
The focus of a page for semantic search needs to be the subject as a whole so content should be written for the whole in much the same way as you would write offline and include related content where relevant.
I'm not sure if there really is a safe percentage as such for keyword density, but suffice to say that the higher the percentage the more likely a page will be seen as spammy. I would have thought in most cases though <3% should be fine.
Peter
-
Hi Peter - sorry yes not that clear! I was asking about Keyword density I suppose - I know many SEOers suggest it's irrelevant, yet I spend much of my time removing penalties from sites and Keyword stuffing is causing issues.
If I see a penalty which I think is stuffing related I check densities and drop to 3% maximum - that appears to have reversed penalty a couple of times.
-
Hi Luke
No problem. You asked: How do you manage onsite keywords in content these days?
I am not clear what you are asking. Please can you clarify?
Peter
-
Thanks Peter for you useful input, as ever. How do you manage onsite keywords in content these days?
It's incredible how often the 301 redirect thing is overlooked by developers managing migrations - oh the number of times I've been called in after the developer has 301'd everything to the homepage (or not even bothered doing any redirects).
-
Hi Luke
For sure, carving away 2/3rds of your previous site is a big chunk, but I don't think that should overly concern you.
If you had said you were thinking of doing this a couple of years ago, I would have encouraged you to think again on the basis that the more pages your site had, the more weight it had, the more pages could be optimised and the more entry points there were from search.
With changes in recent months to Google search, in particular the move to semantic search and away from Boolean search, then having a keyword rich site, with many well optimised correct keyword density pages, shouldn't be the focus any more.
I'm not suggesting that having 35 pages compared to 107 pages is better. What I am saying is that it is better to have 35 sharply focused, high quality pages than 107 pages that don't have the same definition and focus. The measure should most definitely be quality over quantity, both on a page count basis and even on a word count basis.
What I would focus on with your 35 pages is making sure they are well structured (so many on-page SEO rules still apply - so make sure the faulty parts you mentioned are fixed) and the navigation is clear.
I am sure you know this, but make sure that your pages are customer-focused, so that they answer the type of questions your customers are asking in the language of your customer, and where related questions could occur, make sure there are good internal links between related content pages.
Finally, when you do the switch, I would just make sure that you think about your 301 redirects. Where an old page no longer exists on the new site, then redirect it to the closest related page.
I hope that helps,
Peter
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
-
Cached version of my site is not showing content?
Hi mozzers, I am a bit worried since I looked a cache version of my site and somehow content is partially showing up and navigation has completely disappeared. Where could this come from? What should I be doing? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Taysir0 -
New page not being picked up
Hello, We have created a new page for truck rentals but for some reason it does not seem to be picked up. See this report: http://screencast.com/t/npYqeoa5gq The page is: https://www.globecar.com/en/montreal-truck-rentals but our main site is being pickedup instead vs the competition that has their truck page showing up. Can anyone help me understand? Thanks, Karim
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GlobeCar1 -
A/B Testing - Should I add product descriptions on my category landing pages as well as on product pages and if so . how to do this to avoid duplicate content
Hi All, I recently relaunched a new design on my tool hire eCommerce website and now display my products in grid form on my category landing pages as opposed to just a list view which we previously had on the old design. My bounce rates are alot higher than they use to be and my gut instinct is telling me maybe this is wrong . I want to do some a/b testing using a list view. My question is , previously in our list views we just showed the images and pricing and had on page content on the bottom of the page. The user would click on the product image and they would then we taken to the product page which has the product description , t&c, etc etc.. If I was to do this in my a/b testing but change it so we also displayed the product descriptions as well on the category landing pages . Is there a special way to do this as in effect, we would have duplicate content as the product descriptions are also on the product page?. Does anyone have any thoughts on this as to whether its a No No from an SEO point of view ?... Heres a short url link to one of my category pages - http://goo.gl/QJv5gw Historically we use to rank well for the category landing pages and not for the product pages.Our Rankings are down , bounce rates are higher so I am trying to sort both. We have good content on pages etc. Any advice greatly appreciated as always thanks Pete
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeteC120 -
Consolidating MANY separate domains into a much better, single URL: Should I point a landing page or redirect to the new site?
I am consolidating a site for a client who previously, and very foolishly, broke up their domains like so: companyparis.com companyflorence.com companyrome.com etc... I am now done with the new site, which will be at: company.eu with pages as appropriate: company.eu/paris company.eu/florence company.eu/rome This domain, although not entirely new, does not have much authority or rank. In terms of SEO and link-building, is it better to redirect the old domain to the specific page on the new domain: companyparis.com --> company.eu/paris or... is it better to put a landing page at the old domain LINKING to the page on the new domain: companyparis.com --> landing page linking to --> company.eu/paris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | thongly0 -
Amazing decrease of visits in a Good Content Site
Dear Sirs, contributors and aspirants of Seomoz: I have a site called General History (http://general-history.com/) that was created in 2010, and has a current PR of 3, a DA of 23 and a home page authority of 32. It also has 1.690 links, knowing that we have not invested on link building, all the links were built manually via post inserting or viral via social shares. The thing is that in only 5 months, it passed from receiving 14.000 visits/per month to only 1.500. Is that a decrease of 700% in 5 months? I must admint that I earn my life offering SEO to companies, but this is one of my own sites, a site in which my 73 year old father likes to write about General History. I really think, given that he used to be a journalist, that the content not only isn't spam but it is high quality content. As I had Analytics, I started searching for the cause. The first question was... 1.- From what source did I loose the most amount of visitors? Organic, Paid or Social. The answer is organic by far. As I discovered it was an organic loss, I tried to find what content used to have the most visitors. I found 3 posts that brought 80% of the total traffic. How did the people find the content? Well, some of them found the site in the first page of google when searching for "Holocaust facts and figures" for example, but Analytics says that the most people came from image search in Google Images. General history disappeared from the SERPs but progressively, not from one day to another. So then I thought, It can't be a penalization. I contacted google and send them a reconsideration. 5 days later they answered saying that general-history.com is not a spammy site and thus it has not been penalized. For the ones who can read Spanish, here is Google answer: "Estimado webmaster o propietario del sitio http://general-history.com/: Hemos recibido una solicitud del propietario de un sitio para que volvamos a comprobar si http://general-history.com/ cumple las directrices para webmasters de Google. Hemos revisado tu sitio y no hemos detectado acciones manuales del equipo de webspam que puedan perjudicar la clasificación del mismo en Google. No es necesario que presentes una solicitud de reconsideración para el mismo, ya que las incidencias relacionadas con la clasificación que puedan producirse no se derivan de acciones manuales realizadas por el equipo de webspam. Existen otras incidencias relacionadas con tu sitio que pueden perjudicar la clasificación del mismo. Los ordenadores de Google determinan el orden de los resultados de búsqueda a través de una serie de fórmulas denominadas algoritmos. Cada año, se realizan cientos de cambios en los algoritmos de búsqueda, y se utilizan más de 200 señales diferentes para clasificar páginas. A medida que cambian los algoritmos y la Web (incluido tu sitio), se pueden producir fluctuaciones en la clasificación, ya que se actualiza para ofrecer a los usuarios los resultados más relevantes. Si has detectado un cambio en la clasificación y consideras que no se debe simplemente a un cambio de algoritmos, te recomendamos que investigues otras posibles causas, como un cambio importante en el contenido del sitio, en el sistema de gestión de contenido o en la arquitectura del servidor. Por ejemplo, es posible que un sitio no obtenga una buena posición en los resultados de búsqueda si el servidor deja de proporcionar páginas a Googlebot o si el usuario cambia las URL de una gran parte de las páginas del sitio. En este artículo se incluye una lista de otros posibles motivos por los que tu sitio no obtiene una buena clasificación en los resultados de búsqueda. Si sigues sin poder solucionar la incidencia, accede al foro de ayuda para webmasters para obtener asistencia. Atentamente, Equipo de Calidad de búsqueda de Google" They say interesting things like it might be other problems that caused my position decrease like: Site content change, content management, server architecture or change or urls. After receiving this, I thought I should get in the admin panel in wordpress and search for bugs, html or css, php errors and I found that somebody had hijacked my site, entering the wordpress panel and adding a code of into one of my landing pages. That page does not exist anymore. I erased completely. The span code was as follows:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tintanus
General History | General-History General History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-HistoryGeneral History | General-History I thought that would be the problem ! But it was NOT, because Google did not penalize me as you can see in the letter they sent me. I erased the complete page in which the span appeared, I updated my sitemap, re-check my robots.txt, searched my folders via FTP and mucho more... Conclusion? I have no idea why I General-History has lost 700% of its traffic in 5 months.0 -
How Bad is it to Not Have a Home Page?
The site I'm currently developing is far different than any other project I've every worked on in that search traffic is likely to represent only a very small percentage of the total traffic. Because of this, I want to make sure I optimize the site for the people clicking from Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc more so than the BIG G. I can't for the life of me think of a reason to have a home page other than for SEO purposes. I'd much rather throw the user directly into the experience than have him be distracted by a home page. At the same time, I'd like to salvage any search engine traffic that I can. My plan is to 301 redirect chucklebot.com/ to /funny-memes/SOME_RANDOM_IMAGE and then put the content of the current home page at /about. Does that kill any possibility of the site ranking well? Or can the subpages (eg /meme-generator) still rank well if they are properly optimized? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PatrickGriffith0 -
Key page of site not ranking at all
Our site has the largest selection of dog clothes on the Internet. We're been (every so slowly) creeping up in the rankings for the "dog clothes" term, but for some reason only rank for our home page. Even though the home page (and every page on the domain) has links pointing to our specific Dog Clothes page, that page doesn't even rank anywhere when searching Google with "dog clothes site:baxterboo.com". http://www.google.com/webhp?source=hp&q=dog+clothes+site:baxterboo.com&#sclient=psy&hl=en&site=webhp&source=hp&q=dog+clothes+site:baxterboo.com&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=dog+clothes+site:baxterboo.com&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=f4efcaa1b8c328f Pages 2+ of product results from that page rank, but not the base page. It's not excluded in robots.txt, All on site links to that page use the same URL. That page is loaded with more text that includes the keywords. I don't believe there's duplicated content. What am I missing? Has the page somehow been penalized?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BBPets0 -
Reducing pages with canonical & redirects
We have a site that has a ridiculous number of pages. Its a directory of service providers that is organized by city and sub-category of the vertical. Each provider is on the main city page, then when you click on a category, it will only show those folks who offer that subcategory of this service. example: colorado/denver - main city page colorado/denver/subcat1 - subcategory page There are 37 subcategories. So, 38 pages that essentially have the same content - minus a provider or two - for each city. There are approx 40K locations in our database. So rough math puts us at 1.5 million results pages, with 97% of those pages being duplicate content! This is clearly a problem. But many of these obscure pages do rank and get traffic. A fair amount when you aggregate all these pages together. We are about to go through a redesign and want to consolidate pages so we can reduce the dupe content, get crawl budget allocated to more meaningful pages, etc. Here's what I'm thinking we should do with this site, and I would love to have your input: Canonicalize Before the redesign use the canonical tag on all the sub-category pages and push all the value from those pages (colorado/denver/subcat1, /subcat2, /subcat3... etc) to the main city page (colorado/denver/subcat1) 301 Redirect On the new site (we're moving to a new CMS) we don't publish the duplicate sub-category pages and do 301 redirects from the sub-category URLs to the main city page urls. We'd still have the sub-categories (keywords) on-page and use some Javascript filtering to narrow results. We could cut to the chase and just do the redirects, but would like to use canonicalization as a proof of concept internally at my company that getting rid of these pages is a good thing, or at least wont have a negative impact on traffic. i.e. by the time we are ready to relaunch traffic and value has been transfered to the /state/city page Trying to create the right plan and build my argument. Any feedback you have will help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | trentc0