Same page Anchor Links vs Internal Link (Cannibalisation)

[ATP]

Hey Mozzers,

I have a very long article page that supports several of my sub-category pages. It has sub-headings that link out to the relevant pages. However the article  is very long and to make it easier to find the relevant section I was debating adding inpage anchor links in a bullet list at the top of the page for quick navigation.

PAGE TITLE

• Keyword 1
• Keyword 2 etc

<a name="'Keyword1"></a>

Keyword 1

Content
<a name="'Keyword2"></a>

Keyword 2

Content

Because of the way my predecessor wrote this article, its section headings are the same as the sub-categories they link out to and boost (not ideal but an issue I will address later).

What I wondered is if having the inpage achor would confuse the SERPS because they would be linking with the same keyword.

My worry is that by increasing userbility of the article by doing this I also confuse them SERPS

First I tell them that this section on my page talk about keyword 1. Then from in that article i tell them that a different page entirely is about the same keyword.

Would linking like this confuse SERPS or are inpage anchor links looked upon and dealt with differently?

[Andy.Drinkwater]

No worries

Don't forget that both rel=canonical and internal linking can send good signals to Google in terms of which page is prominent. A 301 (if used) can be reversed out of if you ever need to do a semi-permanent redirect, but these days, rel=canonical does pretty much the same.

-Andy

[ATP]

Hi Andy, thanks for the answer

I think you have understood me.

Basically the article page needs completely re-writing and restructuring into a supporting article rather than what is is now, which just a well ranking page competing with my landing pages. I know this but until I can decide on the best way to utilise the current content which is good, and write replacement content as I want to keep the page I have done a sort of temporary fix.

This temporary fix was to link out to relevant landing pages in an attempt to signal "This is my actual page about this" etc. This has worked well and has boosted my landing pages and has began spreading the traffic were receiving around the site. But is still some cannibalisation going on.

Until i rewrite it, i want to make navigating the article easier to get some movement around the site. By doing what i mention above, however it means creating inpage links that will be linking to headings with the same keywords that link out to other pages in on the site.

You have confirmed the big fix and what I need to do when i can spare the time.

From my understanding from what you say, the inpage anchors will send signals to google and how I was planning on using them whilst adding userbility will be treated like a new page so would have a negative effect on what im trying to do.

I think I will leave it be until I can free up enough time to re-write the article properly.

Thanks again for a good response.

[Andy.Drinkwater]

Hi,

...are inpage anchor links looked upon and dealt with differently

I would be trying to name your anchor texts as something a little more than just a Keyword. Try and make it answer a short question if you can so that the link makes sense to both the user and Google.

Anchors are handled like a new page if Google decides to index them, which is why you should try and have these as something that is more of a benefit add to the page, rather than anything too short and simple as a keyword. It will satisfy Google and also remove the worry of any issues.

There is no problem in running with a 'quick skip to content' as it will help with usability. Anything you can do to increase that is good.

I hope I have understood what you are asking correctly?

-Andy