How important is quality control for UGC?
-
In this post, http://www.seomoz.org/blog/ugc-gets-an-a-on-google-test-with-panda-update-12260, it mentions that UGC content performed well after the Panda.
One of Google's 23 questions mentions spelling errors. I am wondering how important it is to ensure there aren't any spelling errors or grammar errors in UGC content post-panda?
-
The best type of user generated content is where you make users much place a specific amount into the form.
It could be to win a price or something to emphasize the users to input the amount of content. Because if you have thin content which is spammy and the same all over the web it will not do much for ranks.
I don't really think spelling errors are a big issue, that falls more down into usability, if you are a big brand and you have spelling errors all over your website it will not look professional.But from a UGC point of view I would not worry too much.
-
I think that the bigger threat with UGC is that they will fill your site with spammy links.
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
-
Text to code ratio<10% warning from website audit by SiteChecker.Pro - how important is it?
Hi to everyone, I used Sitechecker.Pro for a website audit of a client website https://bizpages.org and there was this warning (not an error!): TEXT TO CODE RATIO<10% https://sitechecker.pro/app/main/project/1839063/audit/summary How important is this to achieve good ranking? What are good ratios? I undestand that more text needs to be added to improve it? fcdcfbe438
Technical SEO | | astweb0 -
Backlink quality vs quantity: Should I keep spammy backlinks?
Regarding backlinks, I'm wondering which is more advantageous for domain authority and Google reputation: Option 1: More backlinks including a lot of spammy links Option 2: Fewer backlinks but only reliable, non-spam links I've researched this topic around the web a bit and understand that the answer is somewhere in the middle, but given my site's specific backlink volume, the answer might lean one way or the other. For context, my site has a spam score of 2%, and when I did a quick backlink audit, roughly 20% are ones I want to disavow. However, I don't want to eliminate so many backlinks that my DA goes down. As always, we are working to build quality backlinks, but I'm interested in whether eliminating 20% of backlinks will hurt my DA. Thank you!
Technical SEO | | LianaLewis1 -
Better to Remove Toxic/Low Quality Links Before Building New High Quality Links?
Recently an SEO audit from a reputable SEO firm identified almost 50% of the incoming links to my site as toxic, 40% suspicious and 5% of good quality. The SEO firm believes it imperative to remove links from the toxic domains. Should I remove toxic links before building new one? Or should we first work on building new links before removing the toxic ones? My site only has 442 subdomains with links pointing to it. I am concerned that there may be a drop in ranking if links from the toxic domains are removed before new quality ones are in place. For a bit of background my site has a MOZ Domain authority of 27, a Moz page authority of 38. It receives about 4,000 unique visitors per month through organic search. About 150 subdomains that link to my site have a Majestic SEO citation flow of zero and a Majestic SEO trust flow of zero. They are pretty low quality. However I don't know if I am better off removing them first or building new quality links before I disavow more than a third of the links to the site. Any ideas? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
Quality link not indexed after two months
Hi! Bit of an odd one, but I thought I's ask. Recently I wrote an article for Smashing Mag. It's was a great success and not really an SEO exercise at all, but after several weeks my author page hasn't been indexed (http://www.smashingmagazine.com/author/sam-wright/?rel=author). I just assumed give the quality of the site that it wouldn't take that long. I know it's just a case of leaving it, by any thoughts on why its not been picked up?
Technical SEO | | Blink-SEO0 -
Recent Webmaster Tools Glitch Impacting Site Quality?
The ramifications of this would not be specific to myself but to anyone with this type of content on their pages... Maybe someone can chime in here, but I'm not sure how much if at all site errors (for example 404 errors) as reported by Google Webmaster Tools are seen as a factor in site quality, which would impact SEO rankings. Any insight on that alone would be appreciated. I've noticed some fairly new weird stuff going on in the WMT 404 error reports. It seems as though their engine is finding objects within the source code of the page that are NOT links but look a URL, then trying to crawl them and reporting them as broken. I've seen a couple different of cases in my environment that seem to trigger this issue. The easiest one to explain are Google Analytic virtual pageview Javascript calls where for example you might send a virtual pageview back to GA for clicks on outbound links. So in the source code of your page you would have something like: onclick="<a class="attribute-value">_gaq.push(['_trackPageview', '/outboundclick/www.othersite.com']);</a> Although this is obviously not a crawl-able link, sure enough Webmaster Tools now would be reporting the following broken page with a 404: www.mysite.com/outboundclick/www.otherwite.com I've seen other such cases of thing that look like URLs but not actual links being pulled out of the page source and reported as broken links. Has anyone else noticed this? Do 404 instances (in this case false ones) reported by Webmaster Tools impact site quality rankings and SEO? Interesting issue here, I'm looking forward to hear some people's thoughts on this. Chris
Technical SEO | | cbubinas0 -
Why Google not picking My META Description? Google itself populate the description.. How to control this Search Snippets??
Why Google not picking My META Description? Google itself populate the description.. How to control this Search Snippets??
Technical SEO | | greyniumseo0 -
Link Building - Quality,Quantity, or both?
Hello SEOMozzers, As I embark on yet another client's link campaign I ask myself where best to spend resources(time and money) on link building. Typically I provide a mix of blogroll links, article syndication contextual links, social media posting and high PR one way links. I would like to know if anyone here finds one form of link to carry weight over the rest. I have my suspicion and my own theory on it but I would like to know what the moz concensus is.
Technical SEO | | TheGrid0