How to rank highly without much content?
-
Many pages on the web rank highly - even though they have no keyworded text. They might have listings, or just images. How do they achieve such high rankings? Is it just by getting lots of inbound links?
-
OK. So as long as I add in lots of meta tags, then I don't actually need text on the page to help Google? Meta tags + a headline + lots of good inbound links will be enough?
-
If trusted websites are linking to that page, the anchor text used to link to that page is a huge signal to Google that that page is relevant to those keywords being used in the anchor text. So Google will start to rank that page higher for those keywords, sometimes despite those keywords not even making a single appearance on the page.
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
-
Removing old content
Ahoy! Variously I have heard the opinion that content which does not generate regular search traffic (let's ballpark it at >10 views in any given month) should be noindexed or even removed. Allegedly this would improve the overall quality of the site, rankings and traffic. I remain doubtful. What would you do if the interest in a given matter goes down over time for any (most) given topics of your content and is replaced by "newer" specific interest? Concrete example: I have a website about (book) reviews. Naturally, there will always be new books; old books are not in the media as much and "forgotten". Nevertheless, the reviews (all unique, based on really having read the books, no trace of the standard back cover copy) are obviously still there. Personally I feel that they do not really lose any value - they are still reviews of that one book, even though it is not the most recent one. So, what would you do: Deindex "older" book reviews after a certain time? Even remove them completely? Just let them run? I am looking forward to your opinions - and even your experience if you have done something like this! Nico
Content Development | | netzkern_AG0 -
Shortened page titles and changed urls to match, will this effect my page rankings?
In my recent crawl, I was given a bunch of 200 errors for having titles too long, i rewrote the titles and changed the URLs to match (using wordpress). I was then informed by my boss that changing the URLs like I did (www.website.com/abc ->www.website.com/xyz) may have changed our page rank for those pages and if so i should revert them to the old urls. There are about 14 titles in total that I made these changes to. Would it be quicker to change the URL's to their old names, or better for me to use 301 redirects to point the old urls to the new ones? Will either renaming the urls of the new titled blogs with their old titles or using 301 redirects have better SEO results? Does wordpress automatically make these redirects for me? When I click a link of the old urls I kept saved in a document it still goes to the page.
Content Development | | dclauser0 -
The etiquette of reproducing someone else's content
Hello - Here is a scenario, representative of something that I just saw play out. Site A is a new blog about travel (as an example topic) Site B is an older, established blog about travel Site C is a new blog launched and owned by Site B that focuses on a particular travel niche (luxury travel, for example) Here is what happens next Site A writes an original piece of content Site C then republishes Site A's content, paraphrasing all of the text, but giving Site A credit with a link Site B (the established site) publishes a blurb about the article, directing readers with a link to "read more" on Site C. It credits Site A as the original author, but does not link to it. If you were able to follow that, here is what I would like to know. Did Site C do anything wrong by republishing a paraphrased version of Site A's content, even though it gave credit with a link? Did Site B do anything wrong by linking to Site C (which is for all intents and purposes the same website), but not linking to Site A (the original source)? My sense is that the established blog (Site B) is trying to get it's new publication (Site C) to outrank the original author (Site A) using its own content. In general though, I am curious to get some thoughts on this situation because it raises a few ethical questions that I am not sure about, namely: Is there anything wrong with publishing "spun" content, if it is done well and links back to the source? Is there anything wrong with linking to a republished version of an article on a sister website, rather than linking to the original article. Thanks
Content Development | | timsegraves1 -
Content building: Ratio of blog messages?
What is a good ratio for publishing blog messages on our company website? Which ratio is "Panda-friendly"?
Content Development | | wellnesswooz0 -
Rel=publisher vs G+ badge without
I've read that I should only have a rel="publisher" once on my site (on the home page) in a link that points back to the corporate G+ page. Cool. But, if I want to have a link to the corporate G+ page in the footer of every other page on the site then I assume it's okay as long as I omit the rel="publisher" part, correct? Second question: For blog postings, I assume it's good to include a rel="author" tag in the link to the author's G+ page, right? Even though there is a link to the corporate G+ page in the footer of the same page.
Content Development | | scanlin0 -
Typepad.com blog migration & duplicate content
I've migrated a typepad.com blog with a bunch of content (but little traffic) onto a hosted WordPress site under my own domain name (the way I should've done it in the first place). Now I don't want to confuse Google that the new site is duplicating content from the other site, so would I be better off with: 1) meta-refresh redirecting each typepad.com post to the same post on the new blog, or 2) just killing the typepad.com blog entirely so Google will not find duplicate posts anywhere. In favor of #2 is the fact that these posts get very little traffic today. I figure I will lose more traffic from duplicate content ranking penalties than from losing the posts themselves in the original blog. What do you think?
Content Development | | chriscrabtree0 -
Duplicate content on forums?
I am creating a forum. I am concerned that when I create the forum, users will copy content from other places to post onto my forum. How negative/bad is this in terms of google eyes? I am concerned when people copy press releases and re-post it to the forum. Should I make a rule that all content must be typed and not copied? Or is a little copying okay?
Content Development | | sseibel0 -
Duplicate content and Facebook
If i have content on my site and the same content duplicated on my facebook pages, will google treat this as duplicate content? At the moment when i copy and paste a line of text from the content on my site Facebook is returned first.
Content Development | | Turkey0