Content in forum signatures being spidered, does it matter?
-
Hello,
first post here, just started with SEOmoz so hope it's relevant. Searched a fair bit on this without getting a good answer either way so interested to get some opinions.
The core of the site I run is a forum dedicated to collecting, for the sake of argument let's say cars. A good percentage of the users have signatures which list their collection, for example
1968 Car A - 1987 Car B - 1998 Car D and so on....
These signatures lists can be 20 items or more, some hotlink the signautres back to the relevant post on the forum, some not. The signatures show on every post on which the user makes.
What I'm noting is
a) SEOMoz is reporting a LOT of links on every forum page, due mainly to these signatures I guess.
and of more interest
b) The content of the signatures is being spidered. So for example of you search for '1968 Car A' you might get a couple of good results directly relevant to '1968 Car A' from my site, but you also get a lot of other non-relevant threads as results because the user just happens to have posted on them. Obviously this is much more apparent on the site google search.
So what is the best approach?
Leave as is? Hide the signatures from the BOTs? Another approach?
-
On reflection I've taken the suggested approach of using the nocontent tags for CSE and ensured all signature links are nofollow.
Once again ensured bots can see the signatures due to slight concern about cloaking penalty.
Thanks for your feedback.
-
Rutteger,
If that forum template really removes signatures ONLY for bots, then yes that is cloaking. I wouldn't do that.
The info above was for solving the internal site search problem only, not for Google web search.
However, the additional tips I provided should help with web search. Other than that I wouldn't be too terribly worried about it.
-
Thanks for taking the time to respond.
Although not 100% clear I'm assuming this only applies to custom search rather than google proper?
Never put much time into SEO over the years, always hoped google would figure stuff out. Signature content is defintely being indexed.
For the moment taken the approach of one of the 'SEO' forum templates of not showing signatures to the BOTs. Will see how it goes. Bit reluctant to do this because slightly worried it might be seen as cloaking but hope it'll work out long term...
-
Hello Rutteger,
Regarding SiteSearch, this is from Google Support:
Exclude boilerplate content
"If your pages have regions containing boilerplate content that's not relevant to the main content of the page, you can identify it using the
nocontent
class attribute. When Google Custom Search sees this tag, we'll ignore any keywords it contains and won't take them into account when calculating ranking for your Custom Search engine... To use thenocontent
class attribute, you'll need to tag the boilerplate content, and then modify your context file. This tells Google that you're using thenocontent
class attribute."Read the rest here:
http://support.google.com/customsearch/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2631036I think it is a great idea for you to have members use that field to showcase their collections in this way. It keeps the signature content relevant (at least at the forum level, if not for the thread) and increases internal linking.
Additionally, I would do the following:
- Limit signature privileges to members with a certain number of posts and/or other metrics (e.g. Kudos, points...)
- Do not allow external linking from forum signatures
I will leave this question open as a discussion in case anyone else has first-hand experience with traffic / ranking changes before and after removing signatures from a forum - or with handling the situation in some other way.
Lastly, Google is pretty good at recognizing boilerplate content. They have been dealing with forum signatures for years, and since the area is highly-prone to spam I would imagine they know what the signatures are on most major forum platforms. Thus, I wouldn't fret over it too much unless it is clearly causing you problems in the SERPs.
Good luck!
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
-
CTA first content next or Content first CTA next
We are a casino affiliations company, our website has a lot of the same casino offers. So is it beneficial to put the content over the casino offers, then do a CSS flex, reverse wrap, so the HTML has the page content first, but the visual of the page displays the casinos first and the content after? or just the usual i.e image the HTML as content first, and CSS makes offers come first?
On-Page Optimization | | JoelssonMedia0 -
Duplicate page content
These two URLs are being flagged as 98% similar in the code. We're a large ecommerce site, and while it would be ideal to have unique product descriptions on each page we currently don't have the bandwith. Thoughts on what else might be triggering this duplicate content? https://www.etundra.com/restaurant-parts/cooking-equipment-parts/fryers/scoops-skimmers/fmp-175-1081-fryer-crumb-scoop/ https://www.etundra.com/restaurant-equipment/concession-equipment/condiment-pumps/tablecraft-664-wide-mouth-condiment-pump/ Thanks, Natalie
On-Page Optimization | | eTundra0 -
Does hover over content index well
i notice increasing cases of portfolio style boxes on site designs (especially wordpress templates) where you have an image and text appears after hover over (sorry for my basic terminology). does this text which appears after hover over have much search engine value or as it doesnt immediately appear on pageload does it carry slightly less weight like tabbed content? any advice appreciated thanks neil
On-Page Optimization | | neilhenderson0 -
Magento Duplicate Content Question - HELP!
In Magento, when entering product information, does the short description have to be different than the meta description? If they are both the same is this considered duplicate content? Thanks for the help!!!
On-Page Optimization | | LeapOfBelief0 -
Duplicate Content on Category Pages
Hi Everyone, I have a few category pages within a category for my eCommerce store and I've recently started writing a short description for each. However a lot of these paragraphs can be replicated for the same category. For instance '1 Inch thickness' I'll show all the information, and it'll be very similar to '2 inch thickness' but obviously one is 1 inch and one is 2 inch so I would only be changing one keyword and that is the thickness. I feel that this is helping customers because it has all the information in each category e.g. how to filter your choices. But it might be duplicate content. What would you recommend?
On-Page Optimization | | EcomLkwd0 -
How much content does Google Crawl on your site?
Hi, We've had a debate around the office where some people believe that Google only crawls the first 150-200 words on a page and some people believe that they priority content that is above the fold and other people believe that all content has the same priority. Can you help us? Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | mdorville
Matt0 -
Using a lightbox - possible duplicate content issues
Redesigning website in Wordpress and going to use the following lightbox plug-in http://www.pedrolamas.pt/projectos/jquery-lightbox/ Naming the original images that appear on screen as say 'sweets.jpg'
On-Page Optimization | | Jon-C
and the bigger version of the images as 'sweets-large.jpg' Alt text wise I would give both versions of the images slightly different descriptions. Do you think there would be any duplicate content issues with this? Anything I should do differently? I'm very wary of doing anything that Google is likely to think is naughty, so want to stay on their good side! Cheers
T0 -
Relating forum discussions to improve internal linking
Hi all, I have a matter i would like a discussion about, since I am looking for a good solution. First the case: I have a site with a large community based discussion board. We daily have 40 to 80 active forum threads with average of 200 posts. As it is right now each thread page shows, at the bottom of the thread, the 20 threads with latest activity. From a SEO point of view this is not the best solution, since all thread pages passes link juice to the latest 20 threads. However, the threads change daily so the juice is sprayed around all over the place. What I want to do is related forum threads, such that each thread at the bottom shows up to 10 threads which could be of interest to the reader. In this way one thread will have more or less the same threads at the bottom at all time, unless the relevancy is better for other threads, causing som minor changes to happen over time. The question is, how can one do this? In the backend, the forum has two tables. One holding threads and one holding posts relating to the threads. All in all the system has 66.500 threads, and in total 469.000 posts. Every thread has a title, and the posts are of varying length. The threads have categories, but they are not so distinct that a thread in one category can not be related to a thread in another category. So I would like to make the relevancy from the title of the thread and the content of the forum posts. As of yet I have not come up with a good solution, and i will look forward to reading any feedback for this. I will answer any questions as fast as possible, to get a good discussion goint here. Best regards, Rasmus
On-Page Optimization | | rasmusbang0