How would you handle 12,000 "tag" pages on Wordpress site?
-
We have a Wordpress site where /tag/ pages were not set to "noindex" and they are driving 25% of site's traffic (roughly 100,000 visits year to date). We can't simply "noindex" them all now, or we'll lose a massive amount of traffic. We can't possibly write unique descriptions for all of them. We can't just do nothing or a Panda update will come by and ding us for duplicate content one day (surprised it hasn't already). What would you do?
-
Yep, already implemented. Good point though.
-
Definitely. I start with the 30 day view, then go to YTD, then push the start date back to 1/1/2011. That's my 3 step process every time I'm investigating a situation.
I've seen at least 20 of our sites decline in traffic in the past few months due to the April & June Panda updates. The dates of decline in Webmaster Tools (Traffic > Search Queries) line up perfectly with the various recent Panda updates.
Fixing /tag/ issues is one thing...but we have a monumental task of rewriting massive amounts of product descriptions next. We also have a fair amount of "no-indexing" or canonicalizing to do with our syndicated content. We'll be better for it in the end. I only wish I knew about these situations much sooner.
As I tell everyone, protect your unique content with all you've got...and keep duplicate content nowhere near your site. It's just too risky.
-
Additionally, make sure your posts have rel=canonical.
-
Are you looking at your analytics as far back as early 2011?
I'm come across people who were hit on known Panda update day that weren't aware they were ....as strange as it may sound.
-
Thank you both...and, we're thinking alike. I recently went through our 60+ Wordpress sites addressing the issue of non-indexed /tag/ pages and also ensuring they weren't in the sitemap via our Sitemap plugin.
For the sites that had hundreds or thousands of /tag/ pages, but very little traffic in Google Analytics (Search > Organic w/ Landing Page as "primary dimension")...I just went ahead and set them to "noindex").
For sites where the /tag/ pages were driving a fair amount of traffic (10% of site total or more), I had our editors write unique descriptions for the top 50-100 (like we do with category pages) and then we set the rest to "noindex,follow" via the meta robots tag.
For this one site...I just haven't found an easy solution that didn't leave an uneasy feeling in my stomach. It's tough to give up 25% of your traffic in hopes that Google will get it right and rank your real content higher in place of these /tag/ pages.
Uh oh...I just checked Analytics and or organic traffic started creeping down @ July 13th. When I look at just the /tag/ pages in the organic landing pages section, I see that they dropped in traffic @ 50-60%. Something bad is happening. I am setting them to "noindex" immediately.
Definitely can't wait to read your post. I'll be writing my own on www.kernmedia.com in the near future as well.
-
Looking forward to that post, Dan.
-
Hi
I'm actually going to be addressing this exact question on a post for Moz in the coming weeks - so keep an eye out for that.
But in short, here's what I do;
Analytics
- run a report for landing tag pages (with a filter) - over the last three months
- apply an advanced segment to see google only traffic
- dump the report into a CSV
Webmaster Tools
- view a impressions / clicks report by top pages (not keyword) - also zoom out as far as you can
- filter for web only (not images)
- dump the report into a csv
VLookup in Excel
using a VLookup in excel - combine the two reports matching data to the URLs (you'll end up discarding some non-tag pages from wmt) - the end result will be a master spreadsheet, with the following columns;
- URL
- Impressions
- clicks
- avg position
- visits
- pages/visit
- avg visit duration
- % new visits
- bounce rate
(These are all the default report metrics. I actually prefer a custom landing page report in analytics, but this works fine.)
Analyze
Then, you do your sorting, filtering etc - to decide how valuable the tag traffic has been. In general, you're trying to look for an overwhelming reason for the value add of having those pages in there. they might get visits, but what's onsite behavior? maybe they get visits, but perhaps only from a small handle of tag pages?
In the post I do, I'll cover more about how to analyze this report etc.
As Klarke put so well, the actual posts should rank in their place. Those tend to have better results when people land on those.
Remove
If you decide to remove, do so carefully. Do it on a weekend or just before a downtime. If you use Yoast simply select to noindex tag archives.
Also, rememeber to exclude tags from your XML sitemap.
Then watch webmaster tools etc and watch for their removal.
--- I did this process on a site with 9,000 tag pages in the index and results were very good.
-Dan
-
I would "noindex,follow" them. Don't block them with robots.txt.
With that many pages, you're certainly running the risk of being hit by Panda.Those tag pages shouldn't be ranking, instead the individual posts should be in those positions. If I were you, I would take the chance and do the noindex, with the expectation that Google will appropriately rank the posts in their place.
I'd say those are better odds as against losing 50 - 80% of traffic in a panda update.
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
-
Best way to "Prune" bad content from large sites?
I am in process of pruning my sites for low quality/thin content. The issue is that I have multiple sites with 40k + pages and need a more efficient way of finding the low quality content than looking at each page individually. Is there an ideal way to find the pages that are worth no indexing that will speed up the process but not potentially harm any valuable pages? Current plan of action is to pull data from analytics and if the url hasn't brought any traffic in the last 12 months then it is safe to assume it is a page that is not beneficial to the site. My concern is that some of these pages might have links pointing to them and I want to make sure we don't lose that link juice. But, assuming we just no index the pages we should still have the authority pass along...and in theory, the pages that haven't brought any traffic to the site in a year probably don't have much authority to begin with. Recommendations on best way to prune content on sites with hundreds of thousands of pages efficiently? Also, is there a benefit to no indexing the pages vs deleting them? What is the preferred method, and why?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | atomiconline0 -
Rel=prev/next and canonical tags on paginated pages?
Hi there, I'm using rel="prev" and rel="next" on paginated category pages. On 1st page I'm also setting a canonical tag, since that page happens to get hits to an URL with parameters. The site also uses mobile version of pages on a subdomain. Here's what markup the 1st desktop page has: Here's what markup the 2nd desktop page has: Here's what markup the 1st MOBILE page has: Here's what markup the 2nd MOBILE page has: Questions: 1. On desktop pages starting from page 2 to page X, if these pages get traffic to their versions with parameters, will I'll have duplicate issues or the canonical tag on 1st page makes me safe? 2. Should I use canonical tags on mobile pages starting from page 2 to page X? Are there any better solutions of avoiding duplicate content issues?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | poiseo1 -
Crawl Issue Found: No rel="canonical" Tags
Given that google have stated that duplicate content is not penalised is this really something that will give sufficient benefits for the time involved?Also, reading some of the articles on moz.com they seem very ambivalent about its use – for example http://moz.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questionsWill any page with a canonical link normally NOT be indexed by google?Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fdmgroup0 -
SEO for 1,000,000 page site
Dear All, I hope you can help me with another question about doing SEO for a large site: 1 - My domain is 11 year old, all time was a parking domain
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SteveTran2013
2 - We have 10,000 articles - unique content (500-1500 words)
3 - the remaining are automated content, however, they are also unique with data (numbers, figure) We are going to launch it in 2 weeks, and intend to do the following things: Stage 1: first 2 months - only post 10,000 articles with unique content, NO using automated ones.
Link building: get 5-10 authority links pointing to it, either article writings or link pages (authority links Yahoo directory/Dmoz) Stage 2: month 3 to 6: gradually put the automated content online while still posting unique and well written articles.
Link building: Start building links with PR websites, article submission. Do you think there are any problems with this plan? and if 5-10 links can improve our site ranking, given it has a lot of unique content? Thank you very much. BR/Tran1 -
After Receiving a "Googlebot can't access your site" would this stop your site from being crawled?
Hi Everyone,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMA-DataSet
A few weeks ago now I received a "Googlebot can't access your site..... connection failure rate is 7.8%" message from the webmaster tools, I have since fixed the majority of these issues but iv noticed that all page except the main home page now have a page rank of N/A while the home page has a page rank of 5 still. Has this connectivity issues reduced the page ranks to N/A? or is it something else I'm missing? Thanks in advance.0 -
Show wordpress "archive links" on blog?
I here conflicting reports on whether to show wordpress archive links on the blog or not. Some say it is important for viewers to see, others say it is not and creates way too many links. I think both have good points but for SEO purposes, I lean towards removing them. What do Moz users think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seomozinator0 -
How important is the HTML structure for on-page/on-site SEO?
To be more specific, say a page layout has Header, Body, Left Sidebar, Footer sections. Which layout from the following options is more SEO-friendly? Header > Body > Right Sidebar > Footer Body > Header > Right Sidebar > Footer Does it make a big difference to code HTML so that the the copy of the body appears in front of all other sections when spiders crawl a website? Is it worth taking extra steps to make this happen? I am asking this question because our site has a header navigation with a lot of dropdown menus. So I assume that this is "noise" for spiders as it pushes the main content of the page down. Please bear in mind that the question is more geared towards how search engine see the page rather than how it appears to the end user as layout can be controlled by CSS.This question also assumes that all other on-site SEO best practices are followed for both options.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Saugar0 -
Handling Customer Accounts When Merging Sites
Anybody have some good advice as to how to handle customer accounts when merging eCommerce sites? These include email accounts and store accounts. We're trying to limit customer concerns when people discover the sites are merging. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0