SEOMOZ and non-duplicate duplicate content
-
Hi all,
Looking through the lovely SEOMOZ report, by far its biggest complaint is that of perceived duplicate content. Its hard to avoid given the nature of eCommerce sites that oestensibly list products in a consistent framework.
Most advice about duplicate content is about canonicalisation, but thats not really relevant when you have two different products being perceived as the same.
Thing is, I might have ignored it but google ignores about 40% of our site map for I suspect the same reason. Basically I dont want us to appear "Spammy". Actually we do go to a lot of time to photograph and put a little flavour text for each product (in progress).
I guess my question is, that given over 700 products, why 300ish of them would be considered duplicates and the remaning not?
Here is a URL and one of its "duplicates" according to the SEOMOZ report:
http://www.1010direct.com/DGV-DD1165-970-53/details.aspx
http://www.1010direct.com/TDV-019-GOLD-50/details.aspxThanks for any help people
-
The point I'm trying to get across is this:
"I asked the question of why these pages are considered duplicate, the answer appears to be : because textually they are even if visually they are not."
I don't think that's the complete answer, or even the most important part of the answer. Surely having mostly similar content across pages won't help, but as I've tried to point out, there are other factors that come into play here. It's not just about the content, but putting the content into context for the search engines. In order for them to understand what it is they're looking it, there's more that's important than just the content.
Michel
-
I think this highlights the fundamental problem with SEO and
eCommerce sites.We are all aware that the ultimate aim for search engines and
therefore ultimately SEO is to add value to users. But is "value" the
same for an eCommerce site as it is for a blog, or a travel information site or
a site offering information on health and advice?In my opinion, it is not. If I am looking to make a purchase, I
am looking for a site that is responsive, easy to navigate, has good imagery to
help me visualise, is secure and doesn’t clutter with in-your-face promotional
info, and of course offers value for money.Unique content therefore doesn’t really factor into it too much. Its hard enough for us, but I can only imagine how difficult it is for a company selling screws or rope, just how much creativity does that take to provide unique content for 3.5 inch brass screws over 2.5 inch steel ones?
The current mantra is to stop worrying about SEO tricks, and
focus on building a site with value. But this particular issue is an indication
we are still not there with that utopia yet.For example, as pointed out in the posts above .. these pages are considered duplicate, because by percentage the variable information is minimal; If you look at our product page we put the functionality of filling in your prescription below the product to make it
easier for the customer, but in order to solve the "percentage unique" issue, we would need to move that onto another page. Basically, we need to reduce value (convenience) to appear to add value (uniqueness).Anyway, little point complaining, I asked the question of why these pages are considered duplicate, the answer appears to be : because textually they are even if visually they are not.
I could be worrying about nothing, I believe all these pages are indexed (through crawling), its just a good proportion of our sitemap is being overlooked, I am assuming its perceived duplication as suggested in SEOMOZ. That in turn makes me concerned google is marking us down as spammy.
I appreciate all your comments.
Thanks
Paul
-
I do not agree. I see these kinds of pages on e-commerce websites on a daily basis. For webshops that sell only a certain kind of product, almost all product pages will look alike.
In this case, the H1 is different, the page title is different, and the description is different. This is only a small portion of the page but that's not uncommon, so I would argue that it cannot be just that.
I would look into URLs, marking up your data using http://schema.org/Product, possibly making small changes to accomodate the tags. For instance splitting up brand, color etc. so that you can mark them accordingly.
-
Tom has this spot on. Google doesn't only look for direct duplication, but also very similar, and these really are I'm afraid.
You need to find ways to make each page unique in its own right - let Google see that no two pages are the same and there is a real reason to rank them.
-
I wonder if the details.aspx has something to do with it?
www.1010direct.com/TDV-019-GOLD-50/details.aspx
www.1010direct.com/DGV-DD1165-970-53/details.aspxBasically, both pages are called details.aspx. Depending on how you look at it, you have 2 pages that are named the same (with mostly similar content, though not unusual for e-commerce websites) in different subfolders. I'm not sure if there's some kind of difference in the way Moz works, and if that's part of why Moz marks this as duplicate content?
Are you unable to create 'prettier' URL's? Such as:
www.1010direct.com/tim-dilsen-019-gold-50-glasses.aspx
www.1010direct.com/dolce-gabbana-dd1165-970-53-glasses.aspxWith or without the aspx of course.
-
I'm not surprised Moz is flagging those pages as duplicate content and I wouldn't be totally surprised if Google did in the future.
Put it this way, the pages are identical bar for a single sentence title description, a price and roughly a 20 word section describing the product. Everything else is identical. It's duplicate.
Look at it another through Google's eyes. Here's how the two pages look when crawled by Google:
(If that doesn't work, try yourself at http://www.seo-browser.com/)
Just look at how much text and HTML is shared between the two pages. Yes, there are key differences on the pages (namely the product), but the Google bot nor the Mozbot is going to recognise those elements when it crawls it.
Presuming Google ignores the site nav, it still has a bunch of text and crawlable elements that are shared - pretty much everything under the product description. It doesn't see the individual images and the flavour text is frankly too small to make any sort of dent in the duplicate content %.
I'd seriously recommend at revising how your product pages look - there's far too much repeated content per page (you can still promote these things on each page but in a much, much smaller way) and the individual descriptions for the products, in my eyes, are not substantial enough.
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
-
International SEO And Duplicate Content Within The Same Language
Hello, Currently, we have a .com English website serving an international clientele. As is the case we do not currently target any countries in Google Search Console. However, the UK is an important market for us and we are seeing very low traffic (almost entirely US). We would like to increase visibility in the UK, but currently for English speakers only. My question is this - would geo-targeting a subfolder have a positive impact on visibility/rankings or would it create a duplicate content issue if both pieces of content are in English? My plan was: 1. Create a geo-targeted subfolder (website.com/uk/) that copies our website (we currently cannot create new unique content) 2. Go into GSC and geo-target the folder to the UK 3. Add the following to the /uk/ page to try to negate duplicate issues. Additionally, I can add a rel=canonical tag if suggested, I just worry as an already international site this will create competition between pages However, as we are currently only targeting a location and not the language at this very specific point, would adding a ccTLD be advised instead? The threat of duplicate content worries me less here as this is a topic Matt Cutts has addressed and said is not an issue. I prefer the subfolder method as to ccTLD's, because it allows for more scalability, as in the future I would like to target other countries and languages. Ultimately right now, the goal is to increase UK traffic. Outside of UK backlinks, would any of the above URL geo-targeting help drive traffic? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Tom3_150 -
Duplicate content
I have two page, where the second makes a duplicate content from the first Example:www.mysite.com/mypagewww.mysite.com/mysecondpageIf i insert still making duplicate content?Best regards,Wendel
Technical SEO | | peopleinteractive0 -
I am Posting an article on my site and another site has asked to use the same article - Is this a duplicate content issue with google if i am the creator of the content and will it penalize our sites - or one more than the other??
I operate an ecommerce site for outdoor gear and was invited to guest post on a popular blog (not my site) for a trip i had been on. I wrote the aritcle for them and i also will post this same article on my website. Is this a dup content problem with google? and or the other site? Any Help. Also if i wanted to post this same article to 1 or 2 other blogs as long as they link back to me as the author of the article
Technical SEO | | isle_surf0 -
How can i resolve Duplicate Page Content?
Hello, I have created one campaign over SEOmoz tools for my website AutoDreams.it i have found 159 duplicate page content. My problem is that this web site is about car adsso it is easy to create pages with duplicate content and also Car ads are placed byregistered users. How can i resolve this problem? Regards Francesco
Technical SEO | | francesco870 -
Omniture tracking code URLs creating duplicate content
My ecommerce company uses Omniture tracking codes for a variety of different tracking parameters, from promotional emails to third party comparison shopping engines. All of these tracking codes create URLs that look like www.domain.com/?s_cid=(tracking parameter), which are identical to the original page and these dynamic tracking pages are being indexed. The cached version is still the original page. For now, the duplicate versions do not appear to be affecting rankings, but as we ramp up with holiday sales, promotions, adding more CSEs, etc, there will be more and more tracking URLs that could potentially hurt us. What is the best solution for this problem? If we use robots.txt to block the ?s_cid versions, it may affect our listings on CSEs, as the bots will try to crawl the link to find product info/pricing but will be denied. Is this correct? Or, do CSEs generally use other methods for gathering and verifying product information? So far the most comprehensive solution I can think of would be to add a rel=canonical tag to every unique static URL on our site, which should solve the duplicate content issues, but we have thousands of pages and this would take an eternity (unless someone knows a good way to do this automagically, I’m not a programmer so maybe there’s a way that I don’t know). Any help/advice/suggestions will be appreciated. If you have any solutions, please explain why your solution would work to help me understand on a deeper level in case something like this comes up again in the future. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | BrianCC0 -
Are RSS Feeds deemed duplicate content?
If a website content management system includes built-in feeds of different categories that the client can choose from, does that endanger them of having duplicate content if their categories are the same as another client's feed? These feeds appear on templated home page designs by default. Just trying to figure out how big of an issue these feeds are in terms of duplicate content across clients' sites. Should I be concerned? Obviously, there's other content on the home page besides the feed and have not really seen negative effects, but could it be impacting results?
Technical SEO | | KyleNeuberger0 -
Duplicate content across multiple domains
I have come across a situation where we have discovered duplicate content between multiple domains. We have access to each domain and have recently within the past 2 weeks added a 301 redirect to redirect each page dynamically to the proper page on the desired domain. My question relates to the removal of these pages. There are thousands of these duplicate pages. I have gone back and looked at a number of these cached pages in google and have found that the cached pages that are roughly 30 days old or older. Will these pages ever get removed from google's index? Will the 301 redirect even be read by google to be redirected to the proper domain and page? If so when will that happen? Are we better off submitting a full site removal request of the sites that carries the duplicate content at this point? These smaller sites do bring traffic on their own but I'd rather not wait 3 months for the content to be removed since my assumption is that this content is competing with the main site. I suppose another option would be to include no cache meta tag for these pages. Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | jmsobe0 -
Duplicate content connundrum
Hey Mozzers- I have a tricky situation with one of my clients. They're a reputable organization and have been mentioned in several major news articles. They want to create a Press page on their site with links to each article, but they want viewers to remain within the site and not be redirected to the press sites themselves. The other issue is some of the articles have been removed from the original press sites where they were first posted. I want to avoid duplicate content issues, but I don't see how to repost the articles within the client's site. I figure I have 3 options: 1. create PDFs (w/SEO-friendly URLs) with the articles embedded in them that open in a new window. 2. Post an image with screenshot of article on a unique URL w/brief content. 3. Copy and paste the article to a unique URL. If anyone has experience with this issue or any suggestions, I would greatly appreciate it. Jaime Brown
Technical SEO | | JamesBSEO0