How would you handle 12,000 "tag" pages on Wordpress site?
-
We have a Wordpress site where /tag/ pages were not set to "noindex" and they are driving 25% of site's traffic (roughly 100,000 visits year to date). We can't simply "noindex" them all now, or we'll lose a massive amount of traffic. We can't possibly write unique descriptions for all of them. We can't just do nothing or a Panda update will come by and ding us for duplicate content one day (surprised it hasn't already). What would you do?
-
Yep, already implemented. Good point though.
-
Definitely. I start with the 30 day view, then go to YTD, then push the start date back to 1/1/2011. That's my 3 step process every time I'm investigating a situation.
I've seen at least 20 of our sites decline in traffic in the past few months due to the April & June Panda updates. The dates of decline in Webmaster Tools (Traffic > Search Queries) line up perfectly with the various recent Panda updates.
Fixing /tag/ issues is one thing...but we have a monumental task of rewriting massive amounts of product descriptions next. We also have a fair amount of "no-indexing" or canonicalizing to do with our syndicated content. We'll be better for it in the end. I only wish I knew about these situations much sooner.
As I tell everyone, protect your unique content with all you've got...and keep duplicate content nowhere near your site. It's just too risky.
-
Additionally, make sure your posts have rel=canonical.
-
Are you looking at your analytics as far back as early 2011?
I'm come across people who were hit on known Panda update day that weren't aware they were ....as strange as it may sound.
-
Thank you both...and, we're thinking alike. I recently went through our 60+ Wordpress sites addressing the issue of non-indexed /tag/ pages and also ensuring they weren't in the sitemap via our Sitemap plugin.
For the sites that had hundreds or thousands of /tag/ pages, but very little traffic in Google Analytics (Search > Organic w/ Landing Page as "primary dimension")...I just went ahead and set them to "noindex").
For sites where the /tag/ pages were driving a fair amount of traffic (10% of site total or more), I had our editors write unique descriptions for the top 50-100 (like we do with category pages) and then we set the rest to "noindex,follow" via the meta robots tag.
For this one site...I just haven't found an easy solution that didn't leave an uneasy feeling in my stomach. It's tough to give up 25% of your traffic in hopes that Google will get it right and rank your real content higher in place of these /tag/ pages.
Uh oh...I just checked Analytics and or organic traffic started creeping down @ July 13th. When I look at just the /tag/ pages in the organic landing pages section, I see that they dropped in traffic @ 50-60%. Something bad is happening. I am setting them to "noindex" immediately.
Definitely can't wait to read your post. I'll be writing my own on www.kernmedia.com in the near future as well.
-
Looking forward to that post, Dan.
-
Hi
I'm actually going to be addressing this exact question on a post for Moz in the coming weeks - so keep an eye out for that.
But in short, here's what I do;
Analytics
- run a report for landing tag pages (with a filter) - over the last three months
- apply an advanced segment to see google only traffic
- dump the report into a CSV
Webmaster Tools
- view a impressions / clicks report by top pages (not keyword) - also zoom out as far as you can
- filter for web only (not images)
- dump the report into a csv
VLookup in Excel
using a VLookup in excel - combine the two reports matching data to the URLs (you'll end up discarding some non-tag pages from wmt) - the end result will be a master spreadsheet, with the following columns;
- URL
- Impressions
- clicks
- avg position
- visits
- pages/visit
- avg visit duration
- % new visits
- bounce rate
(These are all the default report metrics. I actually prefer a custom landing page report in analytics, but this works fine.)
Analyze
Then, you do your sorting, filtering etc - to decide how valuable the tag traffic has been. In general, you're trying to look for an overwhelming reason for the value add of having those pages in there. they might get visits, but what's onsite behavior? maybe they get visits, but perhaps only from a small handle of tag pages?
In the post I do, I'll cover more about how to analyze this report etc.
As Klarke put so well, the actual posts should rank in their place. Those tend to have better results when people land on those.
Remove
If you decide to remove, do so carefully. Do it on a weekend or just before a downtime. If you use Yoast simply select to noindex tag archives.
Also, rememeber to exclude tags from your XML sitemap.
Then watch webmaster tools etc and watch for their removal.
--- I did this process on a site with 9,000 tag pages in the index and results were very good.
-Dan
-
I would "noindex,follow" them. Don't block them with robots.txt.
With that many pages, you're certainly running the risk of being hit by Panda.Those tag pages shouldn't be ranking, instead the individual posts should be in those positions. If I were you, I would take the chance and do the noindex, with the expectation that Google will appropriately rank the posts in their place.
I'd say those are better odds as against losing 50 - 80% of traffic in a panda update.
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
-
Keyword stuffing on category pages - eCommerce site
Hi there fellow Mozzers. I work for a wine company, and I have a theory that some of our category pages are not ranking as well as they could, due to keyword stuffing. The best example is our Champagne category page, which we are trying to rank for the keyword Champagne, currently rank 6ish. However, when I load the page into Moz, it tells me that I might be stuffing, which I am not, BUT my products might be giving both Moz and Google this impression as well. Our product names for any given Champagne is "Champagne - {name}" and the producer is "Champagne {producer name}. Now, on the category pages we have a list of Champagnes, actually 44 Which means that with the way we display them, with both name of the wine, the name of the producer AND the district. That means we have 132 mentions of the word "Champagne" + the content text that I have written. I am wondering, how good is Google at identifying that this is in fact not stuffing, but rather functionality that makes for this high density of the keyword? Is there anything I can do? I mean, we can change it so it's not listed with Champagne on all the products, but I believe it would make the usability suffer a bit, not a lot - but it's a question of balance and I would like to hear if anyone has encountered a similar problem, if it is in fact a problem?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nikolaj-Landrock2 -
How should I go about repairing 400,000 404 error pages?
My thinking is to make a list of most linked to and most trafficked error pages, and just redirect those, but I don't know how to get all that data because i can't even download all the error pages from Webmaster Tools, and even then, how would i get backlink data except by checking each link manually? Are there any detailed step-by-step instructions on this that I missed in my Googling? Thanks for reading!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DA20130 -
Can you recover from "Unnatural links to your site—impacts links" if you remove them or have they already been discounted?
If Google has already discounted the value of the links and my rankings dropped because in the past these links passed value and now they don't. Is there any reason to remove them? If I do remove them, is there a chance of "recovery" or should I just move forward with my 8 month old blogging/content marketing campaign.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Beastrip0 -
SEO for 1,000,000 page site
Dear All, I hope you can help me with another question about doing SEO for a large site: 1 - My domain is 11 year old, all time was a parking domain
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SteveTran2013
2 - We have 10,000 articles - unique content (500-1500 words)
3 - the remaining are automated content, however, they are also unique with data (numbers, figure) We are going to launch it in 2 weeks, and intend to do the following things: Stage 1: first 2 months - only post 10,000 articles with unique content, NO using automated ones.
Link building: get 5-10 authority links pointing to it, either article writings or link pages (authority links Yahoo directory/Dmoz) Stage 2: month 3 to 6: gradually put the automated content online while still posting unique and well written articles.
Link building: Start building links with PR websites, article submission. Do you think there are any problems with this plan? and if 5-10 links can improve our site ranking, given it has a lot of unique content? Thank you very much. BR/Tran1 -
To "Guest Blog" or "Ghost Blog"?
To "Guest Blog" or "Ghost Blog"? I've been wondering which would be better given G's "authorship" tracking program. "Onreact.Com" indirectly raised this issue in a recent blog post "Google Authorship Markup Disadvantages Everybody Ignores" as : "Google might dismiss your guest articles. Your great guest blogging campaign on dozens of other blogs might fail because Google will count the links all as one as the same author has written all the posts and linked to himself. So maybe the links won't count at all." Assuming all other things are equal, would you use "Guest Author" with G Authorship attribution (if allowed) or just ghost the article and include an in-text link without attribution to you as the author?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JustDucky1 -
How to handle link building to product pages that change regularly?
How do I handle building links to an eCommerce site where the product pages change regularly because product is only available for a certain time frame? Should I focus on building links to the category pages instead?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mj7750 -
Rel=canonical tag on original page?
Afternoon All,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jellyfish-Agency
We are using Concrete5 as our CMS system, we are due to change but for the moment we have to play with what we have got. Part of the C5 system allows us to attribute our main page into other categories, via a page alaiser add-on. But what it also does is create several url paths and duplicate pages depending on how many times we take the original page and reference it in other categories. We have tried C5 canonical/SEO add-on's but they all seem to fall short. We have tried to address this issue in the most efficient way possible by using the rel=canonical tag. The only issue is the limitations of our cms system. We add the canonical tag to the original page header and this will automatically place this tag on all the duplicate pages and in turn fix the problem of duplicate content. The only problem is the canonical tag is on the original page as well, but it is referencing itself, effectively creating a tagging circle. Does anyone foresee a problem with the canonical tag being on the original page but in turn referencing itself? What we have done is try to simplify our duplicate content issues. We have over 2500 duplicate page issues because of this aliasing add-on and want to automate the canonical tag addition, rather than go to each individual page and manually add this tag, so the original reference page can remain the original. We have implemented this tag on one page at the moment with 9 duplicate pages/url's and are monitoring, but was curious if people had experienced this before or had any thoughts?0 -
Has important is it to set "priority" and "frequency" in sitemaps?
Has anyone ever done any testing on setting "priority' and "frequency" in their sitemaps? What was the result? Does specifying priority or frequency help quite a bit?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline2