Sitemaps for landing pages
-
Good morning MOZ Community,
We've been doing some re-vamping recently on our primary sitemap, and it's currently being reindexed by the search engines.
We have also been developing landing pages, both for SEO and SEM. Specifically for SEO, the pages are focused on specific, long-tail search terms for a number of our niche areas of focus. Should I, or do I need to be considering a separate sitemap for these? Everything I have read about sitemaps simply indicates that if a site has over 50 thousand pages or so, then you need to split a sitemap.
Do I need to worry about a sitemap for landing pages? Or simply add them to our primary sitemap? Thanks in advance for your insights and advice.
-
Yes, any URL that has over 50,000 URL's should have a sitemap_index, within that xml sitemap index should have listed the other category specific URL sitemaps. These are best organized in the hierarchy of the website structure to reinforce your schematic URL structure.
-
John,
Good to know – At this point I only have our primary sitemap submitted to Search Console, but I will create and add a secondary sitemap. I don't see us adding a ton of secondary-like sitemaps, you still suggest making a sitemap index of sorts?
-
Absolutely no harm at all. Do you have an index sitemap that you list all the sub-sitemaps from? If not you should do that as well just for sanity of sitemap management.
-
John,
Thanks so much for the reply – So there's no harm in submitting a secondary sitemap, specifically for landing pages? Great to hear and yes, many of the landing pages overlap for both SEO and PPC.
Thanks!
Brendan -
Hi there! Good question.
First, each individual XML sitemap should only have a maximum of 50k URLs in it. At the scale of millions of pages I always recommend splitting out your sitemaps by type so that you can monitor indexation by section of the site.
If I were you I'd create a separate sitemap for landing pages and exclude the PPC landing pages unless those are the same pages you've created for SEO.
Cheers!
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
-
What happens when we canonical and point to a page which has been redirected to another page? Google response!
Hi all, I would like to know the different scenarios Google going to respond when we use canonical and redirect for duplicate pages. Let's say A to B are duplicate pages with 95% same content and C Doesn't have same content but context wise similar and priority page we expect to rank for. What happens if we canonical from A to B and set redirect from B to C? What if both A and B are pointed to C with canonical? What if A or B deleted and other one is canonical to C? Note: We can noindex or 301 redirect as they have their own visitors. This is more about showing most relevant content to the audience and avoid duplicate content in search results. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Product descriptions & category pages
Hi I wanted to ask if anyone knew how much, if at all, product page titles/descriptions affected the rankings of the category page they're linked from? I am looking for ways to improve the ranking of category pages, but we don't want to put too much content which overshadows the product listings. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | BeckyKey0 -
New Google SERPs page title lengths, 60 characters?
It seems that the new Google SERPs have a shorter page title character length? From what I can gather they are 60 characters in length. Does this mean we all need to now optimise our page titles to 60 characters? Has anyone else noticed this and made any changes to page title lengths?
Algorithm Updates | | Adam_SEO_Learning0 -
Do you think this page has been algorithmically penalised or is it just old?
Here is the page: http://www.designquotes.com.au/business-blog/top-10-australian-business-directories-in-2012/ It's fairly old, but when it was first written it hit #1 for "business directories". After a while it dropped but was receieving lots of traffic for long tail variations of "business directories Australia" As of the 4th of October (Penguin 2.1) it lost traffic and rankings entirely. I checked it's link profile and there isn't anything fishy: From Google Webmaster https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtwbT3wshHRsdEc1OWl4SFN0SDdiTkwzSmdGTFpZOFE&usp=sharing In fact, two links are entirely natural http://blog.businesszoom.com.au/2013/09/use-customer-reviews-to-improve-your-website-ranking/ http://dianajones.com.au/google-plus-local-equals-more-business-blog/ Yet when I search for a close match in title in Google AU, the article doesn't appear within even the first 4 pages. https://www.google.com.au/#q=top+10+Australian+Business+Directories&start=10 Is this simple because it's an old article? Should I re-write it, update the analysis and use a rel=canonical on the old article to the new?
Algorithm Updates | | designquotes0 -
Sitemap Question - Should I exclude or make a separate sitemap for Old URL's
So basically, my website is very old... 1995 Old. Extremely old content still shows up when people search for things that are outdated by 10-15+ years , I decided not to drop redirects on some of the irrelevant pages. People still hit the pages, but bounce... I have about 400 pages that I don't want to delete or redirect. Many of them have old backlinks and hold some value but do interfere with my new relevant content. If I dropped these pages into a sitemap, set the priority to zero would that possibly help? No redirects, content is still valid for people looking for it, but maybe these old pages don't show up above my new content? Currently the old stuff is excluded from all sitemaps.. I don't want to make one and have it make the problem worse. Any advise is appreciated. Thx 😄
Algorithm Updates | | Southbay_Carnivorous_Plants0 -
Do scraped or borrowed articles with my links still pass page rank?
I wrote some articles for Ezine Articles a few years back and i still see links in the ose to my site that are from these articles that were borrowed from the Ezine Articles bank. Do the links in these articles still count toward my site including link juice and anchor text or does google discount them as duplicate content? I was told that Google counts these links for about 3 weeks and then discounts them as duplicate content so it's like they don't exist. Any truth to this or should i make the articles on my site available for people to copy and paste into their blogs as long as they keep my links intact? Thanks, Ron
Algorithm Updates | | Ron100 -
When was the last algorithm update? One of my pages has dropped significantly this week
One of my pages dropped 22 places last week and I'm not sure why - can any body give me some suggestions to why this might have happened?
Algorithm Updates | | lindsayjhopkins0 -
Big site SEO: To maintain html sitemaps, or scrap them in the era of xml?
We have dynamically updated xml sitemaps which we feed to Google et al. Our xml sitemap is updated constantly, and takes minimal hands on management to maintain. However we still have an html version (which we link to from our homepage), a legacy from back in the pre-xml days. As this html version is static we're finding it contains a lot of broken links and is not of much use to anyone. So my question is this - does Google (or any other search engine) still need both, or are xml sitemaps enough?
Algorithm Updates | | linklater0