Ridding of taxonomies, so that articles enhance related page's value
-
Hello,
I'm developing a website for a law firm, which offers a variety of services.
The site will also feature a blog, which would have similarly-named topics. As is customary, these topics were taxonomies.
But I want the articles to enhance the value of the service pages themselves and because the taxonomy url /category/divorce has no relationship to the actual service page url /practice-areas/divorce, I'm worried that if anything, a redundantly-titled taxonomy url would dilute the value of the service page it's related to.
Sure, I could show some of the related posts on the service page but if I wanted to view more, I'm suddenly bounced over to a taxonomy page which is stealing thunder away from the more important service page.
So I did away with these taxonomies all together, and posts are associatable with pages directly with a custom db table.
And now if I visit the blog page, instead of a list of category terms, it would technically be a list of the service pages and so if a visitor clicks on a topic they are directed to /practice-areas/divorce/resources (the subpages are created dynamically) and the posts are shown there.
I'll have to use custom breadcrumbs to make it all work. Just wondering if you guys had any thoughts on this. Really appreciate any you might have and thanks for reading
-
Thank you for taking the time to respond. Makes a lot of sense, I appreciate it.
-
It is true that having pages with the same "page-name" (the last part following the final slash of a URL, e.g the page-name of this question is "ridding-of-taxonomies-so-that-articles-enhance-related-page-s-value"), which are also topically very similar - can cause 'jumpy' SERPs.
Many feel that the dangers of what is termed 'keyword cannibalisation' are over-egged. This may be true, but I have (myself) assuredly seen examples of it in action. Usually it occurs with most prominence when neither page strongly eclipses the other in terms of SEO authority (e.g: inbound signals like referring domains, citations across the web and general 'buzz' associated with a given URL).
If both pages are new with little authority (or 'popularity') bound to their unique addresses, then certainly Google can get confused. You can end up with problems like, earning a decent ranking for a related keyword - but it hops from page to page every day / week and Google's algorithm bubbles away in the background. This can make it hard to drive traffic to the correct destination.
If both pages are very specific about the keywords which they are targeting, you could turn references of those keywords on the page you don't want to rank - into hyperlinks pointing to the URL which you do want to rank! (sorry that was a bit of a mouthful)
Although TBPR (Tool Bar PageRank) was done away with aeons ago, 'actual' PageRank is still at large within Google's ranking algorithm(s). When one page links to another page with anchor text that matches a keyword, it 'gives away' some of its (ranking) value to the page receiving the link (for the specific keyword or collection of keywords / search entity in question). Think of links as 'votes' from one page to another. The difference between this and real voting is that, for Google not all votes are equal (links from more authoritative pages boost the receiving pages more than links from pages that nobody cares about). Not very progressive but still...
In general we in SEO abused this mechanic between different domains resulting in Google's current clamp-down on EMA (Exact-Match Anchor, in regard to keyword anchor text) linking. That being said: the risk from doing the same thing internally within your own website is extremely minimal, as you are just redistributing SEO authority from one page to another along a specific axiom of relevance.
That's not like when you do it from one domain to another, obviously to leech authority from an external site to your own - which in most occurrences is a violation of Google's Web-Master guidelines.
Do be careful though, don't overdo this. If the content of the page which you don't want to rank ends up stuffed full of hyperlinks, that could make the page look spammy and hurt your CRO (or earn Panda-related algorithmic devaluation).
Just don't go mental, everything should be fine.
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
-
How to 301 Redirect /page.php to /page, after a RewriteRule has already made /page.php accessible by /page (Getting errors)
A site has its URLs with php extensions, like this: example.com/page.php I used the following rewrite to remove the extension so that the page can now be accessed from example.com/page RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME}.php -f
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rcseo
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ $1.php [L] It works great. I can access it via the example.com/page URL. However, the problem is the page can still be accessed from example.com/page.php. Because I have external links going to the page, I want to 301 redirect example.com/page.php to example.com/page. I've tried this a couple of ways but I get redirect loops or 500 internal server errors. Is there a way to have both? Remove the extension and 301 the .php to no extension? By the way, if it matters, page.php is an actual file in the root directory (not created through another rewrite or URI routing). I'm hoping I can do this, and not just throw a example.com/page canonical tag on the page. Thanks!0 -
Big discrepancies between pages in Google's index and pages in sitemap
Hi, I'm noticing a huge difference in the number of pages in Googles index (using 'site:' search) versus the number of pages indexed by Google in Webmaster tools. (ie 20,600 in 'site:' search vs 5,100 submitted via the dynamic sitemap.) Anyone know possible causes for this and how i can fix? It's an ecommerce site but i can't see any issues with duplicate content - they employ a very good canonical tag strategy. Could it be that Google has decided to ignore the canonical tag? Any help appreciated, Karen
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Digirank0 -
What Happens If a Hreflang Sitemap Doesn't Include Every Language for Missing Translated Pages?
As we are building a hreflang sitemap for a client, we are correctly implementing the tag across 5 different languages including English. However, the News and Events section was never translated into any of the other four languages. There are also a few pages that were translated into some but not all of the 4 languages. Is it good practice to still list out the individual non-translated pages like on a regular sitemap without a hreflang tag? Should the hreflang sitemap include the hreflang tag with pages that are missing a few language translations (when one or two language translations may be missing)? We are uncertain if this inconsistency would create a problem and we would like some feedback before pushing the hreflang sitemap live.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kchandler0 -
Google's form for "Small sites that should rank better" | Any experiences or results?
Back in August of 2013 Google created a form that allowed people to submit small websites that "should be ranking better in Google". There is more info about it in this article http://www.seroundtable.com/google-small-site-survey-17295.html Has anybody used it? Any experiences or results you can share? *private message if you do not want to share publicly...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GregB1230 -
Privacy Policy & T&C's SEO related question
With Adwords they request a Privacy Policy and T&C's sometimes for an Ad to be approved. Silly question I know but do you think Google looks out for pages like this to identity websites which are more genuine for organic? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activitysuper0 -
Digital Strategy For CPA (That Targets CPA's)
I have a potential client who is looking for a digital marketing strategy that targets other CPA's. Essentially, they provide cost reduction/tax services that certain CPA's may not provide. As you can imagine, the CPA's are searching for other CPA's with this type of service. I was thinking social/email marketing to keep my company's brand at the top of mind of some of these other CPA's. They have a national practice and can middle market cpa's around the country. I am also gonna recommend they slightly modify their business model so they can reach out to other industry sectors (b2B). Any insights on how to tackle this strategy? What strategies would you consider for them? Does anyone have any CPA's they do business with? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JQC0 -
Include Cross Domain Canonical URL's in Sitemap - Yes or No?
I have several sites that have cross domain canonical tags setup on similar pages. I am unsure if these pages that are canonicalized to a different domain should be included in the sitemap. My first thought is no, because I should only include pages in the sitemap that I want indexed. On the other hand, if I include ALL pages on my site in the sitemap, once Google gets to a page that has a cross domain canonical tag, I'm assuming it will just note that and determine if the canonicalized page is the better version. I have yet to see any errors in GWT about this. I have seen errors where I included a 301 redirect in my sitemap file. I suspect its ok, but to me, it seems that Google would rather not find these URL's in a sitemap, have to crawl them time and time again to determine if they are the best page, even though I'm indicating that this page has a similar page that I'd rather have indexed.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | WEB-IRS0 -
Do inlinks to a 302'd page revert to the original when the 302 ends?
I have a genuine reason for temporarily moving some pages from my site onto a subdomain for a few weeks. If I do this using a 302, what happens to any in-links to the destination page once the the 302 reverses back to the original URL? Is any Google juice from those links lost?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | StuartAnderton1