Keeping SEO benefit of an old URL by changing content
-
We have a blog written in Oct 2012 that accounts for 30-40% of our traffic (174K pageviews per year/80% bounce rate). We are considering updating the content but are concerned that it will fall off the search engine's map if the content is updated to include information that is not exactly the same, but relevant. The URL would be the same and the original blog content would be shortened with a link to the full blog. The new content would include other FDA products under investigation. Here is the blog: http://myadvocates.com/blog/fda-issues-warning-about-so-called-brain-supplement-prevagen
-
There is a risk, but if the content is relevant its a small one. you could rank better also.
-
When you say "the original blog content would be shortened with a link to the full blog" can you explain that a little bit more? You mean an article like this http://myadvocates.com/blog/fda-issues-warning-about-so-called-brain-supplement-prevagen would be only partial and it would link to the full version somewhere else? And the destination new content is what would contain more FDA products?
Also, it is likely you are getting most of your traffic from only a handful of posts. I would do an 80/20 analysis of your blog content (how I show step by step here) or just eyeball your analytics. To mitigate most of your risk you could leave the top 5-10 posts for traffic the same.
As Cyrus points out here you should be careful with how much you change the contents of the page. Google is good at understanding semantics, which means they are more likely to decide not to pass value through redirects because of changes if those changes are too different than the original content. They also understand document structure, so if you're changing from a full post to another format you should be careful with that too.
-
Keep what you have, but add an update paragraph at the end, this should limit your risk.
-
Google is very good with semantically relevant information and updating posts like this with new results and further information often also provides a fresh content boost. With the volume you're talking about, I'd recommend rolling out the new content in phases so that you can see how it impacts results and decide best for your situation. Cheers!
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
-
Dynamically populated content
We are developing a website for a school that has 19 campuses divided into 8 districts. Ideally, we would like to have one search page that dynamically populates when people search WHILE on the site. The question is what happens when someone does an organic search, will the search engine populate with the schools in that district. For instance, if i search on Google "Austin Schools", will the Austin district-that does not have a unique URL- show up in a Google search? What the generated page looks like is on this link http://imgur.com/stCQcP6. If yes, any special type of coding we need to add to the backend?
On-Page Optimization | | jgodwin0 -
Numerous duplicate destination URLs from within one menu - potential impact for on-page SEO?
Hello all What is your evaluation in regards to a number of links (different anchors) targeting the same destination URL from within one and the same menu (on the same website)? Keeping it brief: Think of a top menu drop down entry, that needs to feature the alphabet (each letter has it's own sub-entries). However, the actual letter itself is not represented by a page (it has no URL either). So far so good. However, when testing the menu on a mobile device, the letter entries are still treated, as if they were non-existent pages - thus throwing a 404 when clicked. In order to avoid people getting a 404 when clicking on any letter, it would be ideal, if they were directed to any main page (the same destination URL though). However, that would mean 26 times the same destination URL from within that menu. Is this approach potentially bad for SEO, hence there would be numerous duplicate destination URLs in place? Please mind, I am not inquiring for help on how to arrange the actual menu. I am concerned about the impact, identical destination URLs could have on the on-page SEO. Many thanks in advance for your help and input!
On-Page Optimization | | Hermski0 -
Local SEO techniques
We have a competitor who has listed all the local villages and towns in the area that he wishes to target. these are listed in his footer and appear on every page. I understand that ideally, each location targeted would have it's own page with unique and relevant content. Is this competitor's approach a good one even though the names are essentially duplicates?
On-Page Optimization | | ojwilliams80 -
Wordpress SEo Plug In
Hi, I am researching SEO plug ins for Wordpress - WordpressSEO by Yoast and All-In-One SEO Pack - and I have a question about implementation: In general, what is the impact these plug ins have on blogs with a large archives? Will they make any changes to old posts that may break incoming links or require me to go back and make edits to each of the old posts? Also, the main thing I want to do is allow for custom total tags. Is there another way to get this functionality? Or should I stick with a plug in because of all the other SEO benefits? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | AmyLB0 -
Canonical URL Tag
Hi, I have two pages that are identical on my site: http://www.absolutepower.nl/creatine-monohydraat and http://www.absolutepower.nl/CREATINE/creatine-monohydraat Should I use the canonical URL tag in this case? Thanks, Jasper
On-Page Optimization | | Japking0 -
An ecomerce seo question
Looking for a few opinions on this please...Trying to reduce the number of pages I have to seo to rank on my websites and at the same time avoid the google over optimisation issues. Previously on our ecomerce websites we would have a category page for, say, 12 times, we would then seo that page for generic terms related to the page; ie, blue dress, cheap blue dress, blue party dress etc. The individual product pages would then be seoed with the title and h1 tags containing the exact product name and the url containing the product name too. This worked fine but we are suffering from some duplicate content issues of late (the products are mixture of few unique items and probably 95% imported affiliate datafeeds) as we have an average of 80,000 products per store we have neither the time nor the staff to rewrite everything (the products update daily directly from the merchants so would need to be done daily) What we are planning on moving toward is blocking the individual product pages from Google and instead putting all efforts into the category pages. The category page will contain plenty of quality unique content related to the category so the only duplicate content would be a line of the product name and price. Whilst we would still rank the category page for broad keywords we also would like to now rank the category page for 16 individual product names as there is a good profit to make made by the sheer volume of product names we plan on ranking for. Obviously we could not get all the products into the url and the page title as that would be silly but would it be acceptable to have multiple h2 tags on the page, each with a different entry, the product names (H1 will be saved for the category name). We can easily bold these keywords to help in the optimisation as per the seo moz onsite analysis tool and we can add image text to ensure the product name is featured at least twice on the page. As so few sites actually seo for the long tail product names, most retailers rank by virtue of their domain quality alone, our onsite seo doesn't have to be 100% but getting the best we can out of the page will help the efforts. Many thanks Carl
On-Page Optimization | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
SEO Domain Values
I always thought that there was no difference in value between a .com and .net, also that hyphens have the same value as the keyphrase without the hyphen. But I have heard Rand lately saying hyphens are spammy - whats the go? Is CarParts.com better than Car-Parts.com or Car-Parts.net etc?
On-Page Optimization | | Ventura0 -
Facebook Comments for SEO
Hi, I read few opinions over the potential value of implementing Facebook Comments on internal pages and I got that search engines don't crawl the content generated7written by Facebook Comments. So do you confirm that from a SEO prospective this is not valuable at all? Would you suggest to implement this for example within every product page like Yelp has? Imagine all the value of UGC lost and not read by search engine crawler... In which case would you suggest to implement FB Comments and why? Thanks a lot! Cheers, Nino
On-Page Optimization | | printi0