Devaluing certain content to push better content forward
-
Hi all, I'm new to Moz, but hoping to learn a lot from it in hopes of growing my business. I have a pretty specific question and hope to get some feedback on how to proceed with some changes to my website. First off, I'm a landscape and travel photographer. My website is at http://www.mickeyshannon.com - you can see that the navigation quickly spreads out to different photo galleries based on location. So if a user was looking for photos from California, they would find galleries for Lake Tahoe, Big Sur, the Redwoods and San Francisco. At this point, there are probably 600-800 photos on my website. At last half of these are either older or just not quite up to par with the quality I'm starting to feel like I should produce. I've been contemplating dumbing down the galleries, and not having it break down so far. So instead of four sub-galleries of California, there would just be one California gallery. In some cases, where there are lots of good images in a location, I would probably keep the sub-galleries, but only if there were dozens of images to work with. In the description of each photo, the exact location is already mentioned, so I'm not sure there's a huge need for these sub-galleries except where there's still tons of good photos to work with.
I've been contemplating building a sort of search archive. Where the best of my photos would live in the main galleries, and if a user didn't find what they were looking for, they could go and search the archives for older photos. That way they're still around for licensing purposes, etc. while the best of the best are pushed to the front for those buying fine art prints, etc. These pages for these search archives would probably need to be de-valued somehow, so that the main galleries would be more important SEO-wise. So for the California galleries, four sub-galleries of perhaps 10 images each would become one main California gallery with perhaps 15 images. The other 25 images would be thrown in the search archive and could be searched by keyword.
The question I have - does this sound like a good plan, or will I really be killing my site when it comes to SEO by making such a large change? My end goal would be to push my better content to the front, while scaling back a lot of the excess. Hopefully I explained this question well. If not, I can try to elaborate further!
Thanks,
Mickey
-
Thanks Rob! That helps a lot. I've been considering beefing up copy content on some of the pages (especially the gallery pages). This kind of gives me a direction to move towards. Devaluing was probably a bad word to use. I mainly just wanted the better content pushed forward without having to actually delete anything. Thanks for the help and also the kind comments on the photography!
Mickey
-
Hi Mickey,
I took a look at your site - first let me say you have some pretty great shots there!
But on to SEO. I think I understand what you're saying you want to do with the site. Really, this comes down to site architecture and the issue you are going to have is that a lot of your pages will be very photo-heavy, meaning you will have very little content to work with while simultaneously struggling against duplicate content penalties because you will have to rely on alt-tags to label your content.
For me, your best bet would be to institute several category pages to lead off your main page and have them showcase some text-based content. For example, writing a small bio (300-500 words) on the location and targeting geo-specific keywords (i.e. California photography). Create these pages for what you want to rank for. If you don't want too many words showing up on a page, you can institute an accordion design so users have to click certain blocks for the content to appear. This still allows search engines to crawl the content, however.
For other pages you don't want ranking, you can place a link leading from your category pages to follow-up pages which feature the images you are less fond of. You can do the same with your search archive. The end result would be something like:
Home Page
-> Category Page -> Search Archive/Secondary Photos
-> Category Page -> Search Archive/Secondary Photos
-> Category Page -> Search Archive/Secondary PhotosThis will place your premium content directly in front of your visitors and will help with ranking after you place textual content on the pages. It also does not involve any "de-valuing" of content on your site - just moves in the positive direction.
Hope this helps with your question and let me know if you need any further clarification.
Best of luck!
Rob
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
-
Content from Another Site
Hi there - I have a client that says they'll be "serving content by retrieving it from another URL using loadHTMLFile, performing some manipulations on it, and then pushing the result to the page using saveHTML()." Just wondering what the SEO implications of this will be. Will search engines be able to crawl the retrieved content? Is there a downside (I'm assuming we'll have some duplicate content issues)? Thanks for the help!!
Technical SEO | | NetStrategies1 -
Question About Thin Content
Hello, We have an encyclopedia type page on our e-commerce site. Basically, it's a page with a list of terms related to our niche, product definitions, slang terms, etc. The terms on the encyclopedia page are each linked to their own page that contains the term and a very short definition (about 1-2 sentences). The purpose of these is to link them on product pages if a product has a feature or function that may be new to our customers. We have about 82 of these pages. Are these pages more likely to help us because they're providing information to visitors, or are they likely to hurt us because of the very small amount of content on each page? Thanks for the help!
Technical SEO | | mostcg0 -
Duplicate Content within Site
I'm very new here... been reading a lot about Panda and duplicate content. I have a main website and a mobile site (same domain - m.domain.com). I've copied the same text over to those other web pages. Is that okay? Or is that considered duplicate content?
Technical SEO | | CalicoKitty20000 -
Content too buried in source code?
Our team is working on a refresh/redesign and am wondering if there's a quantifiable way of determining how high our meta data, H1 and paragraph should be in the source code. Or even whether I should be concerned with that. Our navigation will likely have dozens of links (we're going to keep it to under 100), and this doesn't even factor in the design elements. I am concerned about the content being buried. Are these the kind of concerns I should be having? Is there a measurable way to avoid it?
Technical SEO | | SSFCU0 -
What could be the cause of this duplicate content error?
I only have one index.htm and I'm seeing a duplicate content error. What could be causing this? IUJvfZE.png
Technical SEO | | ScottMcPherson1 -
Duplicate page content
Hello, My site is being checked for errors by the PRO dashboard thing you get here and some odd duplicate content errors have appeared. Every page has a duplicate because you can see the page and the page/~username so... www.short-hairstyles.com is the same as www.short-hairstyles.com/~wwwshor I don't know if this is a problem or how the crawler found this (i'm sure I have never linked to it). But I'd like to know how to prevent it in case it is a problem if anyone knows please? Ian
Technical SEO | | jwdl0 -
Www vs non-www which is better?
Is it better to have all your pages point to the www version or non www version.
Technical SEO | | bronxpad0 -
Where to put content on the page? - technical
The new algo update says any images at the top of the page negatively affect user experience if they are adverts? how does google know if its an advert or relevant banner? When trying to put text as far up as possible on the page, is it ok to make it appear higher in the code but appear further down using css? Or does Google not go from the code top to bottom when working this out, more how it renders? Any advice much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | pauledwards0