Dating Blog Posts & How Fast Google Picks up on New Pages
-
I had until a few months ago included the original post date of a new blog post on the site. I then removed it and none of my results in Google now include the blog post date, although for some (for articles written about events) Google includes the date of the event where you would usually see the post date. Since I did this, it seems like new blog posts are taking longer to rank on Google, some results are ranking well, and others declined relative to what I would have previously expected.
What's the best thing to be doing? To include a date (considering a lot of my content is not time-relevant) or to keep it as it is now?
The second thing, is I often go through and update my articles with new information and re-post it in my rss feed etc - ie the date becomes new again. How does Google treat this?
Any ideas or comments would be great!
Thanks
-
It is unlikely but for some things possible especially when people are planning trips far in advance (before the info on this years events is available which can sometimes only be a few weeks in advance).
You mean basically copy the content, update it, and put in a redirect?
Thanks
-
How likely is it for users to desire to see the pages on past years?
If not at all, then remove the old pages from your site. Issue solved.
If you feel users may still want to see the old pages, you can canonicalize them to the new page. Google will then not view the old pages as duplicate content.
-
Mm yeah maybe with a link at the top of old ones to say - this applies to 2011, see here for 4th of July 2012?
Then I'd end up with lots of pages with similar competing titles?
It is a difficult one, no?
-
If it was my site, there would likely be a new article each year.
4th of July Celebration!
When: July 4th, 2012
Where: Central Park, NY
Performing Artists will be: Pink, Fleetwood Mac, ....
Tickets are $20
[Insert as many relevant details about the event as possible such as: where to park, how much parking will cost, the time it starts / ends, ?jobs, ?handicap accessibility, etc]
The past year pages would likely 301 redirect to the current year's page. If you felt the need to keep the pages from prior years, then they could possibly canonical to the current year.
-
I'll give you an example and you'll understand what I mean
For instance - I have articles about events which take place every year. Obviously each year there are new details, new elements, new performers etc and the article is totally relevant for the homepage and for the feeds etc again.
I have just been updating and re-posting the pages for the new year (to stop having duplicate pages on the site...)
-
I don't care for the manner in which the articles are being recycled. If the articles are 90% the same and you are just adding a snippet of new info, there is no reason to re-post them at all.
Unless you are posting fresh, new articles then it makes sense that a category page would be crawled faster if your site's navigation is structured with a drill-down style where you click on a category from the home page, then the article.
-
Thanks. It's kind of weird what's happening because my category pages are showing up with the new content faster than the actual article.
I'm not 'manipulating' the date - I'm just not including it. The issue with 'recycling old articles' is that I am updating articles regularly with new information - to add a new article isn't good for the site because it's 90% repetition. Then, when I update them, I re-post them because what's new is important for readers, followers etc, to see. What do you think?
Thanks
-
Dating Blog Posts & How Fast Google Picks up on New Pages
This Q&A post shows as 4 hours old and it is already in Google search results: goo.gl/QHjXb. Google has the ability to pick up new pages in minutes for sites they deem important.
With respect to dates on articles, there are many attempts at manipulation and Google is pretty darn good at detecting them. Some examples:
-
sites which offer a date on their home page or articles that always updates to the current date
-
sites which recycle old articles by updating the date, or republish older articles with a new date
-
sites which do not offer any date for articles in an attempt to hide the age of the information
In brief, I would recommend including the date on all published information. The date provides a critical perspective on information. An example: when I was in school I learned there was 9 planets in our solar system. If I write that "fact" down, the date of the information is important. It seems Pluto has been demoted and there are now only 8 planets in our solar system.
Google looks at some keywords as being more time sensitive and the results of searches are affected by the dates involved.
-
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
-
I changed my home title and meta description but on google, i still see the old title and meta description. Whats the problem here?
I basically changed the title and meta description of my homepage and when i search on google, it still shows old. Whats the issue?
Search Behavior | | prestigeluxuryrentals.com0 -
Re-Launching Old website with New SEO Friendly Features - What should I track?
Hey Mozers, I was brought on to the team to Optimize the old website to make it more SEO friendly and I was able to get some cool features up. What Analytic Key points should I keep track of? The website launches in 2 weeks and I think Now would be a great time to start gather data bout the old site. I'd like to make sure I keep the website under a microscope to make sure there are as little errors as possible. What am I missing I already have: Page Authority Domain Authority Bounce Rate Time on page Visitors/Sessions Unique Visitors/Sessions
Search Behavior | | rpaiva0 -
Anyone facing issues with Google Analytics today?
For some reason all pages on our site seem to be taking ages to load as they seem to be getting stuck at the "waiting for google-analytics.com"! Anyone else facing similar issues today?
Search Behavior | | prsntsnh0 -
Why are Google ranking changes so drastic?
Hi SEOmoz community I'm sure this question has been asked numerous times before. At the same time there must be plenty of people out there wondering about the same thing: Why are Google ranking changes so drastic? It's like the diva of search engines. When checking the SEOmoz ranking reports, sometimes lots of keywords improve, the next week it's vice versa. Mind though that the ranking changes are not in proportion. While improving keywords climb up by approx. 1 - 10 positions, declining keywords always get a smack with a 15 - 25 position drop, even though these very same keywords are being targeted onsite through new content. It seems to make no difference after all 😉 Is it possible, that keyword fluctuations are stronger for younger sites? The site I am talking about is about a year old. Is it possible that more competitive keywords see more drastic fluctuations? Would be interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks!!
Search Behavior | | Hermski0 -
Blog posts not getting indexed and being outranked by scrapper sites.
Our Google traffic has dropped significantly over the last year and now we're struggling to even get our blog posts indexed. It's been extremely discouraging and we're trying to do what ever we can to fix it. I've included a screenshot of our Google traffic as well as Pages Indexed according to WebmasterTools. http://i.imgur.com/Wu1D8.jpg The Problem Our blog posts are frequently not getting indexed. Many times they are outranked by low authority scraper sites, our Twitter/FB account, etc. Sometimes our homepage will rank instead of the blog post. Sometimes we'll break a news story, get tons of quality backlinks, and still be nowhere in Google. Pretty much the only Google traffic we see is from existing posts. Still 3,200 pages indexed when we have only 1,600 posts. I guess this isn't really a problem... just waiting for the meta noindex to take effect. More details We've seen no duplicate content or other warnings from WebmasterTools. We've been constantly acquiring quality backlinks from credible sites. We deleted the useless content and fixed the canonical issues that were a result of switching servers. History Our site is a news/entertainment blog. The traffic usually has spikes depending on what's going on in the news. Nov 1, 2011 - Site kept maxing out at 30k+ visits so we switched servers. Jan 30, 2012 - Hired a writer so we could focus on other aspects of the site. Apr 19, 2012 - Noticed our posts weren't getting indexed like they used to. Suspected our writer was spinning articles but couldn't find any evidence. 90% of our blog posts were nowhere to be found in Google. Scrapper sites would outrank us for our own stories... even our Twitter account was ranking ahead of us. IF our story would show up in Google it would usually be the home page instead of the blog post. Sep 2012 - Finally got more serious about addressing the problem. Noticed a couple potentially big problems and started making changes. Canonical Issues non-www site didn't redirect to www. It showed 2 different link profiles according to OpenSiteExplorer and 0 backlinks according to Webmaster Tools. Wordpress shortlinks weren't redirecting to the actual permalink. For instance http://www.domain.com/?p=123 and http://www.domain.com/post-example were both getting indexed. For every post there were 4 different versions that Google had to choose from. http://domain.com/?p=123, http://www.domain.com/?p=123, http://domain.com/post-example, and http://www.domain.com/post-example I figured the canonical issues must have happened when we switched servers which was the reason for the drop in WebmasterTools indexed pages and increase in Not Selected pages. FIXED (Sep 15): One we fixed the canonical issue the Indexed Pages went back up however the Not Selected is still the same. Duplicate Content When we first created our site we wanted to have tons of images for each musician/athlete/actor/etc. so we uploaded about 5-10 for each person. We created a blog post for each image with no writing and the exact same post titles. As a result there were TONS of low-quality, similar posts, with virtually identical permalinks. e.g. http://www.domain.com/james-smith1, http://www.domain.com/james-smith2, http://www.domain.com/james-smith3, etc. A crawl on Sep 26 showed over 550 duplicate content warnings. FIXED (Oct 1): We deleted/301 redirected the useless pages (they weren't getting traffic anyways) and by the next crawl the number was almost to 0... which it's at now. We also had TONS of tags (since there're constantly new names in the media) that were getting indexed so we had meta robots noindex them. Questions: Why aren't a majority of our posts getting indexed? Were we penalized or just stuck because of a filter? How long should it take for meta robots to noindex the tags pages? (I did it on Sep 25 but they are still there) If a site is scraping our content (same title, image, excert) but linking to us, should we contact them and tell them to remove it? Is there anything else we need to do start getting our blog posts indexed like they used to? Should we try contacting Google to re-evaluate our site? Sorry, that was a LOT of writing. If anyone wants the URL please let me know so I can PM it to you. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Wu1D8.jpg
Search Behavior | | gfreeman230 -
Google Penalisation - Any help would be appreciated!
Hi,
Search Behavior | | ChrisHolgate
We’ve recently received a Google notification of unnatural linking along with a confirmation that we're being penalised. There were a few other sites that we owned that perhaps had too many links pointing to our main domain so we trimmed them down and submitted a reconsideration request and got the following back: "Dear site owner or webmaster of http://www.refreshcartridges.co.uk/,
We received a request from a site owner to reconsider http://www.refreshcartridges.co.uk/ for compliance with Google's Webmaster Guidelines.
We've reviewed your site and we still see links to your site that violate our quality guidelines.
Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes.
We encourage you to make changes to comply with our quality guidelines. Once you've made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google's search results.
If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request.
If you have additional questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support.
Sincerely,
Google Search Quality Team" I want to stress that we have never in the past and do not currently buy any backlinks. The problem that we face now is that our site has been online for best part of a decade, there are thousands of people linking to us and I have absolutely no idea where to start. We don’t use an SEO Company but in the past few months have been using SEOmoz to improve our on-page optimisation. I know it’s a massive ask but if could a member of the SEOmoz community or a staff member quickly take a gander and let us know if anything in particular sticks out like a sore thumb it would mean a great deal to me. Of course, if needed we’ll employ the services of an SEO company but I’m hoping one of you guys will see something immediately obvious that could really help us out! Thanks in advance. Kind regards Chris0 -
Why are brand, company name queries not showing up on Google SERP1?
I'm a bit confused today at Google's SERPs for a number of queries I've done. The first one that sparked my interest is when I searched for 'pinterest' (no quotes) and pinterest.com was NOT on the first page. In fact, the first pinterest.com result was on page 3 and was the page for somebody named Bil Chamberlain, who himself must be more related to the search term pinterest than pinterest.com itself. I've done this for a variety of search terms, signed out of google, signed in, and some companies' home page, or website in general comes up, and some do not. search for facebook, facebook.com is #1 search for united airlines, united.com's "Club and Lounges" page is on SERP 5. Am I missing something in google's search result methodology? I'd love to be directed to some article or discussion related to this because the last time I checked, most brand name or company name queries turned out company or brand home pages as reesult #1. I very well may just be behind the times. CCpjw
Search Behavior | | Buildings0