Interlinking from unique content page to limited content page
-
I have a page (page 1) with a lot of unique content which may rank for "Example for sale". On this page I Interlink to a page (page 2) with very limited unique content, but a page I believe is better for the user with anchor "See all Example for sale". In other words, the 1st page is more like a guide with items for sale mixed, whereas the 2nd page is purely a "for sale" page with almost no unique content, but very engaging for users.
Questions:
-
Is it risky that I interlink with "Example for sale" to a page with limited unique content, as I risk not being able to rank for either of these 2 pages
-
Would it make sense to "no index, follow" page 2 as there is limited unique content, and is actually a page that exist across the web on other websites in different formats (it is real estate MLS listings), but I can still keep the "Example for sale" link leading to page 2 without risking losing ranking of page 1 for "Example for sale"keyword phrase
I am basically trying to work out best solution to rank for "Keyword for sale" and dilemma is page 2 is best for users, but is not a very unique page and page 2 is very unique and OK for users but mixed up writing, pictures and more with properties for sale.
-
-
As a new website I think safe bet is to include all content on 1 page. Keyword variation means content stays seperated. Better combine and make 1 powerful page.....thx for the insight
-
Both of those are good solutions - so choose one or the other. If you choose the keyword variation route, then make sure you go through and edit the content on each page to properly reflect the new focus.
-
Page 1 has great statistics. Page 2 is more of a guide with videos, pics and more. If page 1 tried to rank for "NEIGHBORHOOD Homes for Sale" and Page 2 "NEIGHBORHOOD Real Estate" would this be different enough? Or, you feel I should really move all that unique content (pics, videos etc) on lower part of Page 1 and use a 301 redirect and shut down Page 2?
-
The issue is two pages on the same site trying to rank for the same keyword. They're going to be fighting against each other and confusing search engines.
It's better to either combine the pages (option 1), or to give them a separate target keyword (option 2). Option #2 is probably easier, but you'll still need to make the user-friendly page more search friendly, and vice versa. Option 1 is probably better if you can add search-friendly text content beneath the map portion of the page, and ditch page 2.
-
sorry, Nakul. I missed your message and just saw it now. Page 1 and 2 are very different pages. Please see my below response to Kane
-
thanks, Kane. This is the page best for user: http://www.honoluluhi5.com/oahu/honolulu/metro/waikiki-condos/ - I have added stats on lower part of page and will soon add more unique written content so other similar MLS result pages look apart and not too similar. I have noindex, follow on page 2 to n to avoid looking like duplicate content as many other real estate sites will have same listings, just in a different format.
This is the page search engines will like (but not ideal for users): http://www.honoluluhi5.com/waikiki-condos-real-estate/ - short-term I will probably rank better for that page and long-term the page best for the user.
Question: what is the issue trying to rank for similar keyword? As you can see my H1, title tag and meta des are different on those 2 pages, but similar. I am interested in "NEIGHBORHOOD condos for sale" users and not users searching "Guide to NEIGHBORHOOD". Unless it has a negative impact on my pages ranking potential, I believe this is best structure. If you have examples with issues that would be great
-
I would make some slight variations from the two pages. For example, make page 1 "Seattle Homes For Sale" and page 2 "Seattle Home Listings". This avoids the issue of having two pages going after that same keyword and allows you to get more granular for the terms you want to rank for.
If both pages are almost identical content, then I would consider canonicals as a solution, but it doesn't sound to me like that's the case here.
-
Would you say page 2 is a subset of page 1 ? Is there duplicate content between the 2 pages ?If yes, you can consider doing a canonical tag to page 1 on both page 1 and page 2. This way only your page 1 will rank.
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
-
Shall we add engaging and useful FAQ content in all our pages or rather not because of duplication and reduction of unique content?
We are considering to add at the end of alll our 1500 product pages answers to the 9 most frequently asked questions. These questions and answers will be 90% identical for all our products and personalizing them more is not an option and not so necessary since most questions are related to the process of reserving the product. We are convinced this will increase engagement of users with the page, time on page and it will be genuinely useful for the visitor as most visitors will not visit the seperate FAQ page. Also it will add more related keywords/topics to the page.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
On the downside it will reduce the percentage of unique content per page and adds duplication. Any thoughts about wether in terms of google rankings we should go ahead and benefits in form of engagement may outweight downside of duplication of content?0 -
Is it a good strategy to link older content that was timely at one point to newer content that we would prefer to guide traffic and value to
Hi All, I've been working for a website/publisher that produces good content and has been around for a long time but has recently been burdened by a high level of repetitious production, and a high volume in general with pages that don't gather as much traffic as desired. One such fear of mine is that every piece published doesn't have any links pointing to when it is published outside of the homepage or syndicated referrals. They do however have a lot (perhaps too many) outbound internal links away from it. Would it be a good practice, especially for new content that has a longer shelf life, to go back to older content and place links pointing to the new one? I would hope this would boost traffic via internal recircultion and Page Authority, with the added benefits of anchor text boosts.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ajranzato91 -
Dynamic pages
Hello Team, How can we create dynamic pages or more pages on website but maintaining SEO standards.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Obbserv0 -
Need to move highest content pages into a sub-domain and want to minimize the loss of traffic - details inside!
Hi All! So the company that I work for owns two very strong domains in the information security industry. There are two separate sections on each site that draws a ton of long tail SEO traffic. For our corporate site we have a vulnerability database where people search for vulnerabilities to research, and find out how to remediate. On our other website we have an exploit database where people can look up exploits in order to see how to patch an attackers attack path. We are going to move these into a super database under our corporate domain and I want to ensure that we maintain or minimize the traffic loss. The exploit database which is currently on our other domain yields about three quarters of the traffic to the domain. It is obviously OK if that traffic goes directly to this new subdomain. What are my options to keep our search traffic steady for this content? There are thousands and thousands of these vulnerabilities and exploits so it would not make sense to 301 redirect all of them. What are some other options and what would you do?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PatBausemer0 -
Duplicate content reported on WMT for 301 redirected content
We had to 301 redirect a large number of URL's. Not Google WMT is telling me that we are having tons of duplicate page titles. When I looked into the specific URL's I realized that Google is listing an old URL's and the 301 redirected new URL as the source of the duplicate content. I confirmed the 301 redirect by using a server header tool to check the correct implementation of the 301 redirect from the old to the new URL. Question: Why is Google Webmaster Tool reporting duplicated content for these pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEOAccount320 -
Duplicate page content query
Hi forum, For some reason I have recently received a large increase in my Duplicate Page Content issues. Currently it says I have over 7,000 duplicate page content errors! For example it says: Sample URLs with this Duplicate Page Content http://dikelli.com.au/accessories/gowns/news.html http://dikelli.com.au/accessories/news.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sterls
http://dikelli.com.au/gallery/dikelli/gowns/gowns/sale_gowns.html However there are no physical links to any of these page on my site and even when I look at my FTP files (I am using Dreamweaver) these directories and files do not exist. Can anyone please tell me why the SEOMOZ crawl is coming up with these errors and how to solve them?0 -
Differentiating Content
I have a piece of content (that is similar) that legitimately shows up on two different sites. I would like both to link, but it seems as if they are "flip flopping" in ranking. Sometimes one shows up, sometimes another. What's the best way to differentiate a piece of content like this? Does it mean rewriting one entirely? http://www.simplifiedbuilding.com/solutions/ada-handrail/ http://simplifiedsafety.com/solutions/ada-handrail/ I want to the Simplified Building one to be found first if I had a preference.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CPollock0 -
Which is more effective: JQuery + CSS for Tabbed Content or Create Unique Pages for each tab.
We are building a from-scratch directory site and trying to determine the best way to structure our pages. Each general listing page has four sections of specific information. What is a better strategy for SEO: Using tabs (e.g. JQuery + CSS) and putting all content on one page (and will all of the content still be indexible using JQuery?) OR creating unique pages for each section. JQuery: sitename.com/listing-name#section1 Unique Pages: sitename.com/listing-name/section1 If I go with option one, I can risk not being crawlable by google if they can't read through the scripting. However, I feel like the individual pages will not rank if there's a small amount of content for each section. Is it better to keep all the content on one page and focus on building links to that? Or better to build out the section pages and worry about adding quality content to them so that long term there is more specificity for long tail search and better quality search experience on Google? We are also set up to have "../listing-type/listing-name" but are considering removing 'listing type and just having "../listing-name/". Do you think this more advantageous for boosting rankings? I know that was like five questions. I've been doing a lot of research and these are the things that I'm still scratching my head about. Some general direction would be really great! Thank You!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | knowyourbank0