More Singular KW Targeted Landing Pages vs. Less Multiple KW Targeted Landing Pages
-
So my question is...
I have a adopted a site which currently ranks quite well for some industry competitive keywords with a number of poor quality landing pages which specifically target a singular keyword.
I am wondering if its worth merging some of these pages together into one authoritative, better quality landing page targeting multiple keywords (as the intent for some of these keywords are largely the same).
What i don't want to do is jeopardise the existing rankings in doing so.
The alternative option would just be to improve the content on the existing landing pages without merging.
What are peoples thoughts on this? Are there any positive case studies out there where merging has had a positive effect?
Any help would be great.
Regards,
-
Nick,
I've inherited a number of sites with this same problem, some of them quite large sites with rampant singe-keyword landing pages that required a lot of cleanup. In my opinion, in the long run it's definitely worth the effort to prune where you can and get same/similar content combined into one higher quality page. I've had pretty good success in combining pages into topical focused LPs.
There's been a lot of talk in the SEO world over the last year about "topics, not keywords", and this discussion is exactly where that idea comes into play. With Google's increasing effort at better understanding keyword intent, they've gotten really good at determining synonymous phrases. As a result, sites with single-keyword LPs are suffering (or will eventually) due to content cannibalization. Let's say you have a LP for "blue widgets" and another for "widgets that are blue", eventually those 2 pages are going to compete with each other and Google will choose to rank neither very well.
If you do go down the road to combining pages, here's a few tips:
- Look in Google Analytics for page metrics like organic entrances, conversions, whatever other KPIs are important for you site
- Check Moz metrics like Page Authority and links
- Grab bits of content from the pages going away - just because the overall page is lower quality than others doesn't mean it doesn't have some good content you can
- 301 redirect the old pages to the new one so search engines, people, and links will still lead to relevant content
- Update internal links and your XML sitemap to reflect the changes
Hope that helps, happy optimizing!
-
Hi Nick,
I'm not aware of any studies specifically around this (other Mozzers might chip in with something) but this is a daily struggle for many site owners.
Without seeing the pages or knowing the keywords, my thought would be to improve the existing pages if they are already performing well in Google, but if they are causing concern from a visitors point of view, then that might be a different conversation.
Combining pages isn't as difficult as it sounds as long as you get them right and have checked to see if the keywords are synonymous and to what level - I have found that in doing this in the past, there is a cut-off point where it is prudent not to try and get a page to rank for too much.
Another way of achieving this is to use page anchors to capture some of these additional keywords. I have had better than moderate successes with these in the past as well. Google has no problem in indexing these if they benefit the page and visitors.
I hope this helps a little.
-Andy
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
-
Optimizing a product category vs. a bespoke content page
Hi there, I work for a furniture retailer in the UK and I have a question about ranking for search phrases. Say I'm looking to rank for the keyword phrases: 'Tempur mattress' and 'Tempur mattress liverpool' and I have a category at: www.mysite.co.uk/tempur/ which list all of our mattresses, would I be better trying to optimize this page for those key phrases or would I be better generating a new page, say, www.mysite.co.uk/tempur-mattress-liverpool.html Thank you for your input.
On-Page Optimization | | Bee1590 -
The Keyword density in a landing page is very low . by adding meta keyword tag can improve keyword density?
The Keyword density in a landing page is very low . by adding meta keyword tag can improve keyword density?
On-Page Optimization | | socialhi50 -
Home Page SEO and city specific targeting?
From What I have read you should target one keyword for each page on your site with the exception of the home page. Is this correct? If the most searched keywords for a Dentist in the area are Dentist "city name"
On-Page Optimization | | scott315
Cosmetic Dentist "city name"
Family Dentist "city name" Should you try and add content on the home page with h1 tags of each of these? If so then what about the page title/url Also if you are targeting keyword Dentist "city name" but like 4 different cities, should you have a separate page for each of this cities and then if so would that not be duplicate content with the exception of city name? Thanks1 -
Spammy page titles
Over the last couple of weeks, I have noticed that Google aren't showing the page titles for my online shop anymore. They're set up with a third party plug-in piece of software, and while it's an old version of the software, the developer said it wouldn't be causing issues. They have suggested that I re-write my page titles to be less spammy. The thing is, Google haven't attacked just spammy looking titles, they're just taking a swoop through my whole site and not showing any of my page titles in their search results. I'm getting "Category Name - Shop Name" showing. Here's some of the page titles no longer appearing and I honestly have no idea how to rewrite these to not be spammy. Are there any good articles on what's spammy and what isn't? "Coconut oil - best tasting in Australia. Buy online from <my business="" name="">"</my> "Discount Vitamix Blender. Best deal in Australia. Buy online from <my business="" name="">."</my> "Natural & Organic skin care for the face | buy online in Australia from <my business="" name="">."</my> There are others that are showing the real page titles, but I think it's only a matter of re-indexing before they're all not showing. Any clue?
On-Page Optimization | | sparrowdog0 -
On Page Optimization Report
Does this tool also guard against an instance of over-optimization or keyword-spamming?
On-Page Optimization | | webfeatus0 -
Do I need canonical link on target page?
I've placed in my head tag on duplicate content pages, but do i need to place it on the target page such as http://www.example.com/index.html too?
On-Page Optimization | | CaliB0 -
Is there a SEO penalty for multi links on same page going to same destination page?
Hi, Just a quick note. I hope you are able to assist. To cut a long story short, on the page below http://www.bookbluemountains.com.au/ -> Features Specials & Packages (middle column) we have 3 links per special going to the same page.
On-Page Optimization | | daveupton
1. Header is linked
2. Click on image link - currently with a no follow
3. 'More info' under the description paragraph is linked too - currently with a no follow Two arguments are as follows:
1. The reason we do not follow all 3 links is to reduce too many links which may appear spammy to Google. 2. Counter argument:
The point above has some validity, However, using no follow is basically telling the search engines that the webmaster “does not trust or doesn’t take responsibility” for what is behind the link, something you don’t want to do within your own website. There is no penalty as such for having too many links, the search engines will generally not worry after a certain number.. nothing that would concern this business though. I would suggest changing the no follow links a.s.a.p. Could you please advise thoughts. Many thanks Dave Upton [long signature removed by staff]0 -
Would it be bad to change the canonical URL to the most recent page that has duplicate content, or should we just 301 redirect to the new page?
Is it bad to change the canonical URL in the tag, meaning does it lose it's stats? If we add a new page that may have duplicate content, but we want that page to be indexed over the older pages, should we just change the canonical page or redirect from the original canonical page? Thanks so much! -Amy
On-Page Optimization | | MeghanPrudencio0