Condensing content for web site redesign
-
We're working on a redesign and are wondering if we should condense some of the content (as recommended by an agency), and if so, how that will affect our organic efforts. Currently a few topics have individual pages for each section, such as (1) Overview (2) Symptoms and (3) Treatment. For reference, the site has a similar structure to http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/guide/heart-disease-overview-fact.
Our agency has sent us over mock-ups which show these topics being condensed into one and using a script/AJAX to display only the content that is clicked on. Knowing this, if we were to choose this option, that would result in us having to implement redirects because only one page would exist, instead of all three.
Can anyone provide insight into whether we should keep the topic structure as is, or if we should take the agency's advice and merge all the topic content? *Note: The reason the agency is pushing for the merging option is because they say it helps with page load time.
Thank you in advance for any insight!
-
I think the general idea is a good one. Having one very thorough and authoritative page about the common cold should be more powerful than three weaker pages that all compete for the same keywords. In fact, we did something similar last year when we pulled coupons, deals and reviews into a single page, but our review pages hadn't quite taken off and we knew that people don't really search for deals the way they search for coupons, so consolidating made sense to beef up the content in a single authoritative place.
However, in the medical niche I'd be very wary of losing traffic that would have gone to symptom and treatment pages, just knowing (ok, I didn't look anything up, but I can guess) how often those are specifically searched and the indexing issues we've had with content inside collapsible divs. John Mueller has said before that if that content was really so important, you wouldn't be hiding it behind a click. It's a really big risk. If there's a way to test it on a handful of pages before rolling out any sitewide changes, I would absolutely do that.
-
Hey Vanessa. I'd ask a few additional questions about the pages before making a decision...
-
If you were to implement redirects, would the redirect go from Treatment (the page) -> Treatment (the Ajax-loaded content)? Or, would it go from Treatment (the page) -> topic page (and people would have to click a link to view treatment content)? If the redirect goes from the page, to the related content of the page then maybe this isn't too terrible an idea. That would mean the Ajax-loaded page section for treatment would have some unique kind of URL associated with it (like /topic-name#treatment).
-
Next question, though, is how much traffic does this affect? Of the traffic those pages get individually right now, how much of that traffic enters the site on those pages (from any source - direct, referral, social, organic, paid)? If right now almost everybody comes into the site via an overview page and then clicks to Symptoms or Treatment, then probably okay to consolidate those into a single page. That said, if all three pages are landing pages for a reasonable amount of visitors I'd be reluctant to make this kind of change to disrupt the traffic...esp. if the answer to question #1 is no.
-
What about links? Do you have a lot of links pointing to the individual pages within each section? Yes, redirects will help retain the link equity, but with any redirect you lose some. So, if a large percent of the links to your site are to these pages, I'd be hesitant to make any kind of change without further testing/research around the weight and importance of those links.
Along with those questions, I'm also wondering why the agency thinks this would help with load time. Why can't they improve load time on the individual pages? Are they talking about the load time from clicking to the Treatment page from Symptoms? If so, there are probably better ways to address that vs. removing pages from the site. When you run a speed test, what is slowing down the page load? Is it something with the server or content that can be tweaked? I'd start there before trying to consolidate pages and running the risk of disrupting any existing traffic.
I hope that helps as you work toward a decision.
-
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
-
GSC Performance completely dropped off, but Google Analytics is steady. Why can't GSC track my site anymore?
Hey everyone! I'm having a weird issue that I've never experienced before. For one of my clients, GSC has a complete drop-off in the Performance section. All of the data shows that everything fell flat, or almost completely flat. But in Google Analytics, we have steady results. No huge drop-off in traffic, etc. Do any of you know why GSC would all of a sudden be unable to crawl our site? Or track this data? Let me know what you think!
Algorithm Updates | | TaylorAtVelox
Thanks!2 -
Google Search Analytics desktop site to losing page position compared to the mobile version of the site
Looking at Google Search Analytics page position by device. The desktop version has seen a dramatic drop in the last 60 days compared to the mobile site. Could this be caused by mobile first indexing? Has Google had any releases that might have caused this?
Algorithm Updates | | merch_zzounds0 -
Does cached duplicate content hurts seo by Google
If we have duplicate content or pages cached in Google which has been indexed months back, still it hurts the original pages? Old URLs with cache can be seen now in Google when we search for the same URLs.
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
My site dissapeared from google search...
I was ranked for the keyword 'airbnb clone' in 3rd page, my url is http://www.claydip.com/airbnb.html. But today it was not found in the search results...i dont understand...i checked with google webmaster tools, there is no errors in on page optimization....Please help...
Algorithm Updates | | claydip0 -
Should I use canonical tags on my site?
I'm trying to keep this a generic example, so apologies if this is too vague. On my main website, we've always had a duplicate content issue. The main focus of our site is breaking down to specific, brick and mortar locations. We have to duplicate the description of product/service for every geographic location (this is a legal requirement). So for example, you might have the parent "product/service" page targeting the term, and then 100's of sub pages with "product/service San Francisco", "product/service Austin", etc. These pages have identical content except for the geographic location is dynamically swapped out. There is also additional useful content like google map of area, local resources, etc. As I said this was always seen as an SEO issue, specifically you could see in the way that googlebot would crawl pages and how pagerank flowed through the site that having 100's of pages with identical copy and just swapping out the geographic location wasn't seen as good content, however we still always received traffic and conversions for the long tail geographic terms so we left it. Las year, with Panda, we noticed a drop in traffic and thought it was due to this duplicate issue so I added canonical tags to all our geographic specific product/service pages that pointed back to the parent page, that seemed to be received well by google and traffic was back to normal in short order. However, recently what I notice a LOT in our SERP pages is if I type in a geographic specific term, i.e. "product/service san francisco", our deep page with the canonical tag is what google is ranking. Google inserts its own title tag on the SERP page and leaves the description blank as it doesn't index the page due to the canonical tag on the page. Essentially what I think it is rewarding is the site architecture which organizes the content to the specific geo in the URL: site.com/service/location/san-francisco. Other than that there is no reason for it to rank that page. Sorry if this is lengthy, thanks for reading all of that! Essentially my question is, should I keep the canonical tags on the site or take them off since Google insists on ranking the page? If I am ranking already then the potential upside to doing that is ranking higher (we're usually in the 3-6 spot on the result page) and also higher CTR because we can get a description back on our resulting page. The counter argument is I'm already ranking so leave it and focus on other things. Appreciate your thoughts on this!
Algorithm Updates | | edu-SEO0 -
How to Link a Network of Sites w/o Penguin Penalties (header links)
I work for a network of sites that offer up country exclusive content. The content for the US will be different than Canada, Australia, Uk, etc.… but with the same subjects. Now to make navigation easy we have included in the header of every page a drop down that has links to the other countries, like what most of you do with facebook/twitter buttons. Now every page on every site has the same link, with the same anchor text. Example: Penguins in Canada Penguins in Australia Penguins in the USA Because every page of every site has the same links (it's in the header) the "links containing this anchor text" ratio is through the roof in Open Site Explorer. Do you think this would be a reason for penguin penalization? If you think this would hurt you, what would you suggest? no follow links? Remove the links entirely and create a single page of links? other suggestions?
Algorithm Updates | | BeTheBoss0 -
Dramatic drop after rapid rise for new site
just launched a new site edenprairieexperts.com. The site jumped to the first page on yahoo and bing within a couple of days then fell off a cliff and isnt in the top 10 pages. Any reason for this? seems really strange for me. The only think I can think of is I got some really poor quality back links from someone screwing with me. If someone could take a glance at the site or give me some general direction I would appreciate it.
Algorithm Updates | | jjwelu0 -
Regarding google panda: would it be wise to use automatic generated content when there is no content.
Hi guys, i am currently creating a local business directory and was deciding when we first start there will be a lot of business listings without a business decription until the owner of that business come to submit a description. so when if a business listing have no business description would it be better to have an automatic generated business description like this:
Algorithm Updates | | usaccess608
www.startlocal.com.au/retail/books/tas_hobartandsouth/Scene_Magazine_2797040.html the automated genrated description for this listing on that page is:
Scene Magazine is a business that is based in Kingston, 7050, TAS: Hobart And South. Scene Magazine is listed in 2 categories including: Magazines and Periodicals Shops and Book Stores and Shops. Within the Magazines and Periodicals Shops category there are 5 businesses within 25 km of Scene Magazine. Some of those businesses included within the radius of 25 km are Island Magazine, Artemis Publishing Consultants and Bride Tasmania Magazine. would google panda affect this or not and would it be wise to use this auto content when there is no description for a business?0