Is there any problem with my information structure?
-
Hey guyz I have a client who got a very interesting structure that I've ever seen.
He has got a navigation down link, and with that he links every page on his site , with his every each page.
I mean each page link each page with dropdown navigational menu. ( Menu can be crawled .)
And the other interesting thing is in the image .He has a level 1 page that has a huge content in it.
But he links every topic of the content with another link which is anchor text link I mean this (http://site.com/level2page.html#part1).
How Google treats this ?
Is there anything wrong with it ? I mean amount of it .
Thank you! -
Linking with #part1 won't cause issues for indexation and how the site is structured. They're commonly used for internal analytics and other purposes that don't refer back to Id="" or name="" tags on the page.
Regarding the rest of it, I'm afraid I'd have to see example code or the actual page to fully understand your question. If it's still an issue, feel free to leave additional code examples here and I can take a look.
-
come on guyz ı need your asnwers
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
-
Structured data and Google+ Local business page are conflicting
Hi, A few (almost 8 now) months ago we have added structured data to our website. which according to the testing tool should work. (Our url: https://www.rezdy.com) However when searching for our company name, our old local business page from Google+ shows up. I have reached out to google to tell them that we aren't a local business anymore and want the data from the page to be removed. But this all takes painfully long. I want my search result to be shown like the large businesses (examples: Adroll, Hubspot), including logo, twitter feed etc. etc. Will this all work, if so, is there a way to speed up the process, any suggestions?
Technical SEO | | Niek_Dekker1 -
@moz staff Where does OSE get Facebook Share information?
When using OSE, where does it pull the Facebook data from? Open Graph? Like this? https://graph.facebook.com/http://www.moz.com I am trying to find out because my URLs are coming in with completely different information: https://graph.facebook.com/http://www.discoverhawaiitours.com/to/discovertheroadtohana_21a.html We are using the ShareThis plugin and I think it's not reporting the right info.
Technical SEO | | Francisco_Meza0 -
Local searh results instant preview photo problem
A search result that contains my google plus / places page in the local results is not displaying photos correctly in the preview. It shows an image that appears to represent a broken link or missing image, however, when you click on the "See Photos" link it to takes you to the G+ page that displays the photos without any issues. I also checked the google places account and the photos appear fine in my dashboard. It's seems like maybe a 3rd party uploaded photos or something? It may have to do with the recent upgrade to pages at Google +? (Thats another story, thanks for making me create a circular logo and a cover photo that doesn't style well in your mobile app) Anyway, any thoughts? Where are these photos coming from, plus or places account? I submitted the question on google groups and a non googler told me to submit photos from a unrelated account.. This seems like gaming the system to me and when I looked into it, it takes me to the Google + page.. Search URL - I am first result in local, Yale Creek Seasonal Care. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=new+market+mn+snow+removal&oq=new+market+mn+snow+removal&gs_l=hp.3...1801.1801.0.2686.1.1.0.0.0.0.143.143.0j1.1.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.5.hp.nKsMdxTGiW0 Also, I noticed the G+ account says service area is 20 miles from address while I specifically selected an area greater than that in my places account.. So what is it plus or places?!?!? The way they are rolling out this move to plus is frustrating! As a consumer, I prefer listings without the plus page!!
Technical SEO | | dwallner0 -
Question/Concern about URL structure
Hey! I have some doubts concerning structuring a websites URL’s and what would be the best practise for this case. The site has 4 (main) categories with a maximum of 4 products in each category. For example: domain -> category (natural-stones) -> product (flooring) Which I would give the follow url: www.companysite.com//natural-stones/flooring Nothing odd so far, but here is the tricky part: the category isn’t an actual page a user wouldn’t be able to visit. The category is just an item in the mainmenu. If a user hovers over the category in the main menu they will get a dropdown in which they can select a product. E.g. flooring, wall strips etc. My question is: Is the url structure as I suggested: www.companysite.com//natural-stones/flooring the best practise. Even though the category isn’t an actually page. Or would it be better to structure the site: www.companysite.com/flooring My concern with this type of structure would be that the site would seem ‘flat’ with in-depth structure. Or would a third (and maybe best?) option be to create an actual page for the category itself. Thanks for taking the time to help me with my question/concern. If you need more information let me know.
Technical SEO | | RvG0 -
132 pages reported as having Duplicate Page Content but I'm not sure where to go to fix the problems?
I am seeing “Duplicate Page Content” coming up in our
Technical SEO | | danatanseo
reports on SEOMOZ.org Here’s an example: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/williams-sound-ppa-r35-e http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/aphex-230-master-voice-channel-processor http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/AT-AE4100.prod These three pages are for completely unrelated products.
They are returning “200” status codes, but are being identified as having
duplicate page content. It appears these are all going to the home page, but it’s
an odd version of the home page because there’s no title. I would understand if these pages 301-redirected to the home page if they were obsolete products, but it's not a 301-redirect. The referring page is
listed as: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/cd-duplicators None of the 3 links in question appear anywhere on that page. It's puzzling. We have 132 of these. Can anyone help me figure out
why this is happening and how best to fix it? Thanks!0 -
Is it a problem to have a homepage with a slug / URL ?
Hi, We are designing a web site for one of our clients, and using a home made CMS. I don't know how this CMS has been built, but anyways, in the end the homepage has a URL format which looks like this : www.mydomain.com/my-custom-url.html. No www.mydomain.com. Is it dangerous for SEO to have a slug/URL directly on the homepage ? Do you have experiences, cases where it has impacted a site negatively ? The main problem I expect is duplicate content (with Google seeing both www.mydomain.com and www.mydomain.com/my-custom-url.html as being different pages) but apparently the CMS is doing a 302 redirect from the root domain to the URL (I told my colleague it should at least be a 301). Sorry if this question seems like basic SEO knowledge, but I really can't find a definitive answer on the subject. Thank you very much 🙂
Technical SEO | | edantadis0 -
Help us define a category/product structure please
Hi, Apologies in advance for the long winded question... we need some guidance with our category/product/options structure in our shop. We primarily sell car parts and lots of our parts have multiple fitments for what is basically the same part. Some ranges can have 1,000s of products. We can't work out what is an appropriate level of information and granularity for our product structure.We recognise the importance of having fitments and specific terms in the product title and URL, but we also know that having loads of almost identical product pages is a definite negative and fragments our SEO potential. But where's the happy medium? For example, let's say we have a specific brand of brake pad (we'll call it Brako) with 4 different product-models (Super1, Super2, Super3, Super4), each fits 100 different cars, which are made by 10 different manufacturers. We have a few different ways of presenting/splitting up these 400 simple products: (ignore the URLs here, this is just to illustrate the browsing structure & likely product page titles) 1 category for the Brake Brand with 400 product pages inside, 1 product page for each specific combination of brake product-model and car-fitment. /Brako/Brako-Super1-brakes_BMW-M3.html 1 category, 400 product pages, 0 choices on each product page. 1 category for the Brake Brand with 40 products inside, 1 product for each specific combination of brake product-model and car-manufacturer. Each product page would then let you choose from a dropdown which of the 10 specific cars you had. /Brako/Brako-Super1-brakes_BMW.html 1 category, 40 product pages, 10 choices on each product page. 1 category for the Brake Brand with 4 sub-categories inside for the brake product-models with 100 products inside each, 1 product for each specific combination of car-fitment. /Brako/Brako-Super1-brakes/Brako-Super1-brakes_BMW-M3.html 1 category, 4 sub-categories, 40 product pages, 10 choices on the product page. 1 category for the Brake Brand with 4 sub-categories inside for the brake product-models, with 10 products inside each.1 product for each specific combination of brake product-model and car-manufacturer. Each product page would then let you choose from a dropdown which of the 10 specific cars you had. /Brako/Brako-Super1-brakes/brakebrand-Super1-brakes_BMW.html 1 category, 4 sub-categories, 40 product pages, 10 choices on each product page. 1 category for the Brake Brand with 4 products inside, 1 product for each brake product-model. Each product page would then let you choose from 2 dropdowns, each with 10 options: one for car manufacturer, the next for car model. /Brako/Brako-Super1-brakes.html 1 category, 4 product pages, 100 (10x10) choices on each product page. 1 product page containing options to choose all 400 Brako products using 3 drop down boxes: Car Manufacturer, Car Model and Product-Model /Brako/Brako-brakes.html 1 category, 1 product page, 100 (10x10) choices on each product page. Or we could mix it up and split the sub-categories by manufacturer: 1 category for the Brake Brand with 10 sub-categories (1 sub-category for each of the car manufacturers with 40 products inside each), 1 product page for each specific variation of car-fitment and product-model. /Brako/Brako-brakes-BMW/Brako-Super1-brakes_BMW-M3.html 1 category, 10 sub-categories, 40 product pages, 0 choices on the product page. 1 category for the Brake Brand with 10 sub-categories (1 sub-category for each of the car manufacturers with 10 products inside each), 1 product page for each specific variation of car-fitment. Drop dowjn box on the product page lets you choose product-model (Super1-4) /Brako/Brako-brakes-BMW/Brako-brakes_BMW-M3.html 1 category, 10 sub-categories, 10 product pages, 4 choices on the product page. 1 category for the Brake Brand with 10 sub-categories (1 sub-category for each of the car manufacturers with products inside each), 1 product page for each specific variation of product-model. /Brako/Brako-brakes-BMW/Brako-Super1-brakes_BMW.html 1 category, 10 sub-categories, 4 product pages, 10 choices on the product page. Obviously, option 1) is going to be the best search match for someone searching for 'BMW M3 Brako Super1 brakes' but that page will have almost identical content to 100 other pages and very similar content to a further 300 pages, which takes it's quality ranking down a lot. At the other end of the scale of complexity is option 5) which concentrates all search potential for the Brako Super1 down to a single page, which can be well written and have great content, but wouldn't have a match in the title, url or product name for anyone searching for 'BMW M3 Brako Super1 brakes'. 'BMW M3' would be mentioned in the page, but only once in a drop-down along with 100 other cars and possibly once in the content if there's something noteworthy about that application. So which option would you go for and why?
Technical SEO | | DWJames0 -
How long to reverse the benefits/problems of a rel=canonical
If this wasn't so serious an issue it would be funny.... Long store cut short, a client had a penalty on their website so they decided to stop using the .com and use the .co.uk instead. They got the .com removed from Google using webmaster tools (it had to be as it was ranking for a trade mark they didn't own and there are legal arguments about it) They launched a brand new website and placed it on both domains with all seo being done on the .co.uk. The web developer was then meant to put the rel=canonical on the .com pointing to the .co.uk (maybe not needed at all thinking about it, if they had deindexed the site anyway). However he managed to rel=canonical from the good .co.,uk to the ,com domain! Maybe I should have noticed it earlier but you shouldn't have to double check others' work! I noticed it today after a good 6 weeks or so. We are having a nightmare to rank the .co.uk for terms which should be pretty easy to rank for given it's a decent domain. Would people say that the rel=canonical back to the .com has harmed the co.uk and is harming with while the tag remains in place? I'm off the opinion that it's basically telling google that the co.uk domain is a copy of the .com so go rank that instead. If so, how quickly after removing this tag would people expect any issues caused by it's placement to vanish? Thanks for any views on this. I've now the fun job of double checking all the coding done by that web developer on other sites!
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0