Refreshing old blog content with dates in the URL
-
In today's Whiteboard Friday (Keyword Targeting, Density, and Cannibalization), Rands makes a comment about updating content on pages that have dated URLs and states:
"If I were advising him on SEO, I'd urge him to maintain a single page called "Best Seattle Coffee" or "Best Seattle Espresso" and update that annually (changing the title to 2012, 2013, 2014, etc but leaving the URL the same). I'd also urge him to take the prior year's content and put that on a new URL like "/coffee-from-2012" (or the like)."
- What are the opinions from an SEO perspective to update pages that have dates in the URL to reflect new content? Does this confuse the search engines if they see one date in the URL but another in the page copy?
- If this content is from a blog and they are listed / displayed based on chronological order, this fresh content would be buried. Obviously internal links and other ways to promote the content would be beneficial but Is it a bad UX to move this page to the top of the "list" when it clearly has an older date associated with this fresh content?
-
Thanks, Jane! This is a very valid option, though in the current website architecture coupled with client expectations that could be difficult. I will keep this in mind but am open to other thoughts if anyone has any.
-
Hi there,
It would be much trickier to do this with blog content given that it is naturally archived in a chronological way, unlike static web pages which can be updated with new dates. If you found you had a selection of blog posts that you wanted to update like this, I'd say you needed to turn these into static articles first and use the method Rand suggests going forward. Obviously that would require new URLs and redirects.
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 to rank a keyword?
My competitor has158 ranking keywords but has only 30 anchor texts on his all backlinks. i am only ranking for 2 keywords , how do i increase ranking keywords? whats the strategy?
Whiteboard Friday | | calvinkj0 -
Domain and Sub-Domain Question
Hi, My company owns the domains www.NYSTATEMLS.COM and www.MYSTATEMLS.COM both of these sites are already on there way with a lot going on. I did just review video 5 on technical SEO and Rand was talking about how much harder it is to rank two websites. So i'm wondering what could be done in this area? Should something be done? The website nystatemls.com is necessary because it's dedicated to the state of new york & has been around for a long time. mystatemls.com came later because the business grew and we opened up to the national market. Looking for some insight. Thanks so much, Chris Farcher
Whiteboard Friday | | Cfarcher0 -
Targeted Keyword in the document
Hi, I write long articles 3k and 5k words my question is that I read in Moz article not use your keyword more than 15 times is also apply for 3k articles ??? and if yes than my second question is that I used my targeted keyword in heading also include in 15 times ???
Whiteboard Friday | | Frozen_Fry0 -
Internal linking: Global Nav Bar obscuring link authority?
I was watching Rand's whiteboard on how links in the headers/footers can impact SEO: moz.com/blog/links-headers-footers-navigation-impact-seo If I understood correctly: 1) Google will use the first link in the html that it sees for a given page. Additional links will not be considered for passing weight. 2) Text links in body (carry more weight than) > image links > nav links > footer links If we want to use a global nav bar, is there a simple solution for not obscuring the links in the body content? (It seems very awkward to load the header nav last (and bring it up via css after the page loads), and this also goes against Google wanting people to load above-the-fold content quickly.) If I internally link to a page that was not important enough to get a spot in the global nav, but I include this link in the body as a text link (for example, an accessory specific to that item), is this internal link really getting more weight in Google's eyes because it wasn't in the nav? This seems strange to me. Thanks!
Whiteboard Friday | | HalfPriceBanners0 -
Should this site be using Rel=Canonical VS No Index
I'm currently working on this site https://www.visitliverpool.com/accommodation I've been watching this video by Rand - https://moz.com/blog/rel-canonical but it's still unclear in this scenario. if you use the search facility "check availability" half way down the page the results page (urlparams) are no indexed. Would it be better to index and canonicalise? There is no similar content but I'm concerned that no index will remove the ability for semantic content to be visible to google. LADkajY
Whiteboard Friday | | Andrew-SEO0 -
UX Functions for 10x Content
Hey all, I recently watched the Whiteboard Friday on Good Unique Content and had a question about how we should approach this from a User Experience perspective. If our goal is to create 10x Content (sounds great, I'm in!) isn't this going to mean that we end up with 5000 words of text in a blog post with no way for the reader to approach the content except to start at the top and work their way down? How does the user know that they've found what they want above the fold if what they want is buried in 10K words of text and images? I'm concerned that I'll need to have some kind of in-post navigation to allow users to quickly navigate to the part of the content that's most relevant to them I've tried to overcome this by creating a sort-of visual 'Table of Contents' at the top of my blog post. But I'm wondering if this is a useful feature for users or whether it will detract from the quality of the content above the fold. Has anyone else run into this challenge when trying to create 10x Content?
Whiteboard Friday | | TMHoward861 -
Should ebook content be a download or hosted on site for SEO?
We have written ebook(s) on subjects of interest to our prospects (B-C market). We have taken many recurring questions asked over the years plus helpful graphics and put into short 12+ page ebooks. After filling out form to receive ebook- (first name & email on form) for any option below- Should we: a) send them to Landing page to download ebook to their desktop? b) send them e-mail with link to download ebook? c) send them directly to page on our site with the ebook content? d) something else? My thoughts are to do c) which will put content on site, though 'protected' via gate. This way the search engines can crawl the content. However, if that content is not directly reachable through menu will that degrade the importance of that content? Obviously we want to provide good, helpful information to prospects. We would also love to benefit from that content from a Search point of view if possible. Anyone have experience with this through A/B test or otherwise? Thanks, Steve
Whiteboard Friday | | PhotographerSteve0 -
Is submitting a single piece of video content to a lot of different video sites spam?
In the past I have been told that you can use tools like Tube Mogul to auto submit a single piece of video content to lots of different video sites and that it is not considered spam. After watching Rand's Whiteboard Friday I am more skeptical of this tactic. Here are my list of reasons why doing this would and wouldn't be considered spam. This is not spam because: These video sites are individual sites with an individual user base. This is spam because: Google does not want duplicate content of any kind in the SERPs. I leaning towards spam but have seen this be very effective in the local space. So I'm torn.
Whiteboard Friday | | anjonr0