Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Should I redirect or add content, to 47 Pages?
-
We have an insurance agency website with 47 pages that have duplicate/low content warnings. What's the best way to handle this?
I'm I right in thinking I have 2 options? Either add new content or redirect the page?
Thanks in advance
-
Whether you should redirect or add content to the 47 pages depends on the specific circumstances and goals for those pages.
Redirecting:
When to Redirect: If the 47 pages have low-quality content, are outdated, or are duplicating other content on your site, redirecting might be the best option. Redirecting these pages to more relevant, high-quality pages can help consolidate your site’s authority and improve user experience. Additionally, if any of these pages are receiving low traffic and you have no plans to update them, redirecting can prevent them from dragging down your overall site performance.
SEO Consideration: 301 redirects are ideal if the content is permanently moving. This allows you to preserve most of the SEO value from the old pages.
Adding Content:When to Add Content: If the pages in question have potential but lack sufficient depth or relevance, enhancing them with additional content can be beneficial. By updating these pages with more comprehensive, valuable information, you can improve their ranking potential and better serve your audience’s needs.
SEO Consideration: Ensure that the new content is well-researched, relevant, and optimized for the target keywords. This approach helps maintain or even improve the rankings of these pages.
Recommendation:
Evaluate the current performance of each of the 47 pages. If a significant portion has strong existing backlinks or decent traffic, it may be worth investing in content updates. On the other hand, if the pages are weak and have little SEO value, redirecting could be a smarter strategy.It might even be a mix of both approaches, depending on what you find during your evaluation.
-
@liamjordan193 thanks
-
@ww4686101 said in Should I redirect or add content, to 47 Pages?:
Hi Laurent,
You're absolutely right that you have two main options: adding new content or redirecting the pages. Here’s how you can decide which approach is best:
Add New Content: If the pages have potential value and could offer useful information to your audience, then updating them with fresh, high-quality content is the way to go. Focus on making each page unique and valuable to your users. This will not only address the duplicate/low content warnings but also improve your site's overall SEO.
Redirect: If the pages are redundant or don’t serve a specific purpose anymore, a 301 redirect to a more relevant page might be a better option. This helps consolidate your content, avoid potential penalties, and preserve any link equity those pages might have.
When to Choose Each Option:
Add Content if the pages cover topics that are still relevant, have potential for traffic, or could be expanded into something more comprehensive.
Redirect if the pages are outdated, nearly identical to other pages, or if the content isn’t worth expanding.
In some cases, a mix of both strategies might be ideal. You could add content to some pages and redirect others that are less useful.
Hope this helps!
Brilliant answer, thank you!
-
@laurentjb, The best solution is to consolidate duplicate content by merging similar pages and redirecting outdated or redundant pages to relevant ones using 301 redirects. For low-content pages, either expand the content to add value or combine them with related pages. This improves SEO and enhances the user experience.
-
@laurentjb said in Should I redirect or add content, to 47 Pages?:
We have an insurance agency website with 47 pages that have duplicate/low content warnings. What's the best way to handle this?
I'm I right in thinking I have 2 options? Either add new content or redirect the page?
Thanks in advance
You're correct that you have two main options: either add more valuable content to improve the quality of those pages or redirect them to more relevant, higher-quality pages. Adding new content in Flooring Contractor in Ajax is ideal if the pages have unique value, while redirects are better for pages with little to no potential for improvement. Both approaches help address duplicate/low content warnings and improve your site's SEO.
-
@laurentjb said in Should I redirect or add content, to 47 Pages?:
We have an insurance agency website with 47 pages that have duplicate/low content warnings. What's the best way to handle this?
I'm I right in thinking I have 2 options? Either add new content or redirect the page?To handle duplicate/low content warnings on your insurance agency website:
Add New Content:
Expand and enhance content to make it unique and valuable.
Use targeted keywords and structured data to improve SEO.
Redirect Pages:Use 301 redirects for pages with minimal value, consolidating content to stronger, related pages.
-
Hi Laurent,
You're absolutely right that you have two main options: adding new content or redirecting the pages. Here’s how you can decide which approach is best:
Add New Content: If the pages have potential value and could offer useful information to your audience, then updating them with fresh, high-quality content is the way to go. Focus on making each page unique and valuable to your users. This will not only address the duplicate/low content warnings but also improve your site's overall SEO.
Redirect: If the pages are redundant or don’t serve a specific purpose anymore, a 301 redirect to a more relevant page might be a better option. This helps consolidate your content, avoid potential penalties, and preserve any link equity those pages might have.
When to Choose Each Option:
Add Content if the pages cover topics that are still relevant, have potential for traffic, or could be expanded into something more comprehensive.
Redirect if the pages are outdated, nearly identical to other pages, or if the content isn’t worth expanding.
In some cases, a mix of both strategies might be ideal. You could add content to some pages and redirect others that are less useful.
Hope this helps!
-
@laurentjb The action required depends on the type of page triggering these warnings. If these are blog category/tag results pages, you can add unique identifiers to keep them distinct.
If they are unique pages, I would recommend adding content if you feel that this will provide extra value to users. If they are pages that get no traffic, do not rank for anything on Google/Bing, and do not provide value to users, you can deprecate them and 301 the links to the most relevant page without harming your website.
I hope that helps!
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
-
Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
When to re-write and redirect a blog url?
What are best practices for rewriting (and then redirecting) blog URLs? I refresh old blog posts on our blog every month and many of them have URLs that are too long or could be improved. However, many of them also already get decent organic traffic and I don't want to lose traffic due to a URL redirect. Are there any best practices or "rules" I can follow when deciding whether to re-write and redirect blog URLs?
Content Development | | Emily.R.Monrovia
Thanks!0 -
Multilang site: Auto redirect 301 or 302?
We need to establish if 301 or 302 response code is to be used for our auto redirects based on Accept-Language header. https://domain.com
International SEO | | fJ66doneOIdDpj
30x > https://domain.com/en
30x > https://domain.com/ru
30x > https://domain.com/de The site architecture is set up with proper inline HREFLANG.
We have read different opinions about this, Ahrefs says 302 is the correct one:
https://ahrefs.com/blog/301-vs-302-redirects/
302 redirect:
"You want to redirect users to the right version of the site for them (based on location/language)." You could argue that the root redirect is never permanent as it varies based on user language settings (302)
On the other hand, the lang specific redirects are permanent per language: IF Accept-Language header = en
https://domain.com > 301 > https://domain.com/en
IF Accept-Language header = ru
https://domain.com > 301 > https://domain.com/ru So each of these is 'permanent'. So which is the correct?0 -
What is the best meta description for Category Pages, Tag Pages and Main Article?
Hi, I want to index all my categories and tags. But I fear about duplicating the meta description. for example: I have a tag name "Learn Stock Market", a category name "Learning", and a main article "What is Stock Market". What is your suggestion for meta description of these three pages that looks great for seo google?
On-Page Optimization | | mbmozmb0 -
Duplicate Content with ?Page ID's in WordPress
Hi there, I'm trying to figure out the best way to solve a duplicate content problem that I have due to Page ID's that WordPress automatically assigns to pages. I know that in order for me to resolve this I have to use canonical urls but the problem for me is I can't figure out the URL structure. Moz is showing me thousands of duplicate content errors that are mostly related to Page IDs For example, this is how a page's url should look like on my site Moz is telling me there are 50 duplicate content errors for this page. The page ID for this page is 82 so the duplicate content errors appear as follows and so on. For 47 more pages. The problem repeats itself with other pages as well. My permalinks are set to "Post Name" so I know that's not an issue. What can I do to resolve this? How can I use canonical URLs to solve this problem. Any help will be greatly appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | SpaMedica0 -
Duplicate Content on Event Pages
My client has a pretty popular service of event listings and, in hope of gathering more events, they opened up the platform to allow users to add events. This works really well for them and they are able to garner a lot more events this way. The major problem I'm finding is that many event coordinators and site owners will take the copy from their website and copy and paste it, duplicating a lot of the content. We have editor picks that contain a lot of unique content but the duplicate content scares me. It hasn't hurt our page ranking (we have a page ranking of 7) but I'm wondering if this is something that we should address. We don't have the manpower to eliminate all the duplication but if we cut down the duplication would we experience a significant advantage over people posting the same event?
On-Page Optimization | | mattdinbrooklyn0 -
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 -
Avoiding "Duplicate Page Title" and "Duplicate Page Content" - Best Practices?
We have a website with a searchable database of recipes. You can search the database using an online form with dropdown options for: Course (starter, main, salad, etc)
On-Page Optimization | | smaavie
Cooking Method (fry, bake, boil, steam, etc)
Preparation Time (Under 30 min, 30min to 1 hour, Over 1 hour) Here are some examples of how URLs may look when searching for a recipe: find-a-recipe.php?course=starter
find-a-recipe.php?course=main&preperation-time=30min+to+1+hour
find-a-recipe.php?cooking-method=fry&preperation-time=over+1+hour There is also pagination of search results, so the URL could also have the variable "start", e.g. find-a-recipe.php?course=salad&start=30 There can be any combination of these variables, meaning there are hundreds of possible search results URL variations. This all works well on the site, however it gives multiple "Duplicate Page Title" and "Duplicate Page Content" errors when crawled by SEOmoz. I've seached online and found several possible solutions for this, such as: Setting canonical tag Adding these URL variables to Google Webmasters to tell Google to ignore them Change the Title tag in the head dynamically based on what URL variables are present However I am not sure which of these would be best. As far as I can tell the canonical tag should be used when you have the same page available at two seperate URLs, but this isn't the case here as the search results are always different. Adding these URL variables to Google webmasters won't fix the problem in other search engines, and will presumably continue to get these errors in our SEOmoz crawl reports. Changing the title tag each time can lead to very long title tags, and it doesn't address the problem of duplicate page content. I had hoped there would be a standard solution for problems like this, as I imagine others will have come across this before, but I cannot find the ideal solution. Any help would be much appreciated. Kind Regards5