Updating existing content - good or bad?
-
Hi All,
There are many situations where I encounter the need (or the wish) to update existing content.
Here are few reasons:
- Some update turned up on the subject that does not justify a new posy / article but rather just adding two lines.
- The article was simply poorly written yet the page has PR as it is a good subject and is online for quite some time (alternatively I can create a new and improved article and 301 the old one to the new).
- Improving titles and sub titles of old existing articles.
I would love to hear your thoughts on each of the reasons...
Thanks
-
Wikipedia updates content all the time and they seem to rank rather well.
From google's perspective they would rather rank up-to-date content, so yes its got to be a good idea to update. An old page might have links to it, and history with google, so if it had up to date content its got to be better than a brand new page.
-
In all the 3 cases mentioned in the post, this seems like it is a good idea not to create new posts/pages and update the existing one. Obviously if the article is poorly written so in that case one should update the page after fixing the content of it instead of creating new pages... same is the case for the other 2 scenarios.
I think this video by SEOmoz contains your answer >> http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-interview-googles-matt-cutts-on-redirects-trust-more
Hope this helps!
-
- hi Fernando,
long time no see.
The site as a tool that is technically accurate however I just want to point out that if you don't have the tag obviously your link will not qualify but you don't need new hosting as it states here
Here's the example of a tagged link that was done appropriately
http://www.feedthebot.com/tools/if-modified/
here's an example of what happens when I put my homepage and with obviously no tag
Does your webpage support the If Modified Since HTTP header?
enter URL: example - www.feedthebot.comNo.
This website does not support the if modified since http header. Scroll down for details.Technical stuff:
This tool checked your HTTP headers and received this response ...
Server Response HTTP/1.1 200 OK
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: WP Engine/1.2.0
Date: Thu, 02 May 2013 03:57:11 GMT
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Transfer-Encoding: chunked
Connection: keep-alive
Keep-Alive: timeout=20
Expires: Thu, 19 Nov 1981 08:52:00 GMT
Pragma: no-cache
X-Pingback: http://www.blueprintmarketing.com/xmlrpc.php
X-UA-Compatible: IE=Edge,chrome=1
X-Cacheable: SHORT
Vary: Accept-Encoding,Cookie
Cache-Control: max-age=600, must-revalidate
X-Cache: HIT: 13
X-Cache-Group: normal
X-Type: default
There does not appear to be a "last modified header response"Therefore, this tool has determined that this URL does not support if modified since.
Web hosts who do support If Modified Since...
We use and recommend using BlueHost for your hosting needs -
here is some more information on if modified since
http://www.seomoz.org/q/is-the-if-modified-since-http-header-still-relevant
it seems you want to pay a lot of attention when implementing it to the clock on the server as well as on the actual workstation.
http://redmine.lighttpd.net/boards/2/topics/1999
http://trac.nginx.org/nginx/ticket/93
I hope this is of help,
Tom
-
If you are just updating the title, or rewriting the content, then I would go with the same page instead of creating a new one.
IF-MODIFIED-SINCE is the way of telling spiders that the content has/hasn't changed. You can read more here: http://www.feedthebot.com/ifmodified.html
-
Actually does sound familiar somehow even though I know most people are creating new post stating about the change and point to the old one (if there is enough to cover).
What about poorly written articles? Improving titles?
Please explain what you mean by "IF-MODIFIED-SINCE"?
Thanks
-
Matt Cutts from Google pointed out in a WH video that you should update instead of creating new pages with only the updates.
You can point in the old page that the content was updated using "IF-MODIFIED-SINCE".
I can't find the video right now, but I am sure he did say that
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
-
Is it good or bad to add noindex for empty pages, which will get content dynamically after some days
We have followers, following, friends, etc pages for each user who creates account on our website. so when new user sign up, he may have 0 followers, 0 following and 0 friends, but over period of time he can get those lists go up. we have different pages for followers, following and friends which are allowed for google to index. When user don't have any followers/following/friends, those pages looks empty and we get issue of duplicate content and description too short. so is it better that we add noindex for those pages temporarily and remove noindex tag when there are at least 2 or more people on those pages. What are side effects of adding noindex when there is no data on those page or benefits of it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | swapnil120 -
Why is hosting good for SEO?
I've heard a few people mention this now. I have seen hosting packages range from £5 to £1000 per month, and I understand that each comes with their own amounts of storage space, bandwidth and all. Now I understand that page speed is important to SEO and the type of hosting will dictate your page speed, but other than this why is hosting important to SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moon-boots0 -
If UGC on my site also exists elsewhere, is that bad? How should I properly handle it?
I work for a reviews site, and some of the reviews that get published on our website also get published on other reviews websites. It's exact duplicate content -- all user generated. The reviews themselves are all no-indexed; followed, and the pages where they live are only manually indexed if the reviews aren't duplicate. We leave all pages with reviews that live elsewhere on the web nofollowed. Is this how we should properly handle it? Or would it be OK to follow these pages regardless of the fact that technically, there's exact duplicate UGC elsewhere?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dunklea0 -
Content Aggregation Site: How much content per aggregated piece is too much?
Let's say I set up a section of my website that aggregated content from major news outlets and bloggers around a certain topic. For each piece of aggregated content, is there a bad, fair, and good range of word count that should be stipulated? I'm asking this because I've been mulling it over—both SEO (duplicate content) issues and copyright issues—to determine what is considered best practice. Any ideas about what is considered best practice in this situation? Also, are there any other issues to consider that I didn't mention?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kdaniels0 -
Good or bad adding keywords in Pinterest description?
I added all keywords in description. Will this affect my website, Google takes this as negative way? I am not adding keywords on my own website, but adding keywords to third party website? https://www.pinterest.com/pin/304555993526970292/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bondhoward0 -
I'm updating content that is out of date. What is the best way to handle if I want to keep old content as well?
So here is the situation. I'm working on a site that offers "Best Of" Top 10 list type content. They have a list that ranks very well but is out of date. They'd like to create a new list for 2014, but have the old list exist. Ideally the new list would replace the old list in search results. Here's what I'm thinking, but let me know if you think theres a better way to handle this: Put a "View New List" banner on the old page Make sure all internal links point to the new page Rel=canonical tag on the old list pointing to the new list Does this seem like a reasonable way to handle this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jim_shook0 -
Content Above The Fold (strategies)
Does anyone know if using a wide responsive layout that brings content well above the fold on big screens (but still pushes it down on small screens or mobile devices) is a good option? We have an adsense site that just got destroyed and I'm assuming its this new Google algo that's looking at sites with too big of ads above the fold.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iAnalyst.com0 -
Product pages content
Hi! I'm doing some SEO work for a new client. I've been tasked with boosting some of their products, such as http://www.lawnmowersdirect.co.uk/product/self-propelled-rear-roller-rotary-petrol-lawnmowers/honda-hrx426qx. It's currently #48 for the term Honda Izy HRG465SD, while http://www.justlawnmowers.co.uk/lawnmowers/honda-izy-hrg-465-sd.htm is #2, behind Amazon. Regarding links, there's no great shakes between the pages or even the domains. However, there's major difference in content. I'm happy to completely revamp it, I just wanted to check I'm not missing anything out before starting to rewrite it altogether! Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | neooptic0