Citations for multiple practicioners in an office (real estate, dentists, etc)- Best Practices
-
We're just about to breakout our citations as we've added listings for a few real estate offices and dental offices for the individual real estate agents/dentists.
I didn't see any discussions on best practices, so I thought I'd start the discussion (please point me elsewhere if I missed it)
1. Is it even a good idea to build citations for a practitioner in an office (Dr. Who, Dentist, in addition to Whoville Dental Office)?
2. Name will be different, address will be the same, but what about phone #? Should they use the office phone # and their extension? Or a separate (cell) #?
3. Website citation: Should it go to their "profile" page on the website? Or home page?
Thanks in advance for any input
-
Hi AvalanceSearch,
Great questions. Let me address them in order.
- Personally, I'm not a fan of taking advantage of Google's offer to let partners in a practice build their own Google+ Local pages in addition to the main practice page. My hesitation stems from two things - Google's historic issues with merging similar listings and Google's historic refusal to delete doctor/dentist dupes (read: http://localsearchforum.catalystemarketing.com/google-duplicates-merges/861-dr-dupes-google-local-user-edits.html)
That being said, it is certainly permissible to go this way, just so as you have a sense of historic problems that could potentially come up for clients.
-
It's fine to have a different name and same address in the multi-partner scenario. But, if you can, do give each partner a different phone number at which they can be directly contacted during stated business hours. The main reason for doing so is to lessen the chances of merged listings.
-
Yes, definitely point an individual practitioner's citations to his unique page on the website. Again, this helps reduce the likelihood of merges and provides a better user experience.
Hope this helps!
-
- I would argue there are (as you might expect) pros and cons for both approaches. For example-
- By having "Dr. Who, DDS" and "Whoville Dentistry" as separate entities and creating citations for both, you easily address users who might search for them in both ways. For example, I never can remember the name of my Dentist's office, but I do know his name and that's how I search for him. Same sometimes for other services where you associate with the provider much more than the name of the business.
- One con of the above example, is you now have two (or way more, thinking real estate) separate entities to maintain and twice the work in building citations to them.
-
If it were me I would go with direct line or extension and make sure all citations were formatted exactly the same and reserve the main, primary number for the business entity.
-
It depends on if this is a single-location brick and mortar or one of many branches. If a single location, go for the home page. If multiple locations, to the profile page of that location on the main website. Same for the individual person entity, it should go to their personal profile page on the website.
So those are some thoughts of mine.
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
-
What city to use for citations?
Hey everyone, I have a question about what city to use for citations in this case. My client is a service-area business in the Seattle area. The business is home-based, in Everett, WA, which if you’re not familiar is in the northern part of the Seattle metro area. They only serve clients outside the home. For their GBP that’s no problem, as of course their address isn’t shown. For all the citations we’ll be building though, I’m not entirely sure what we should do. The client does not want their street address anywhere online. So, since their city won't be listed on their GBP, should we still use Everett as the city for all the citations, or should we use Seattle? I'm unsure here because with some citations you have to list a full address, and then you're able to hide the street address later. And since they don't technically have a Seattle address, I'm not if that would be the way to go. But I’m wondering because no one will be searching for “[service] in Everett”, they would search for “[service] in Seattle”. What do you think?
Local Listings | | SamB470 -
What to do with One physical location but serving multiple cities?
Hello everyone, I need help about this. My client sent me this "I have a question about doing local SEO for other locations for the same company.
Local Listings | | Beachflower
The Brisbane data recovery business is linked to Corporate data recovery and are physically based at the same address. Now we have other website for the same business, but named after other cities (eg sydneydatarecovery, melbournedatarecovery etc.). The business has only one physical address, which the one used for Brisbane and Corporate. How can we do Local SEo for the other location website with our Brisbane address.
We do have the Google location registered to a local address we have in each cities, but not display to the public." N.b I already build citation using the address for Brisbane Data Recovery business name. And I didn't know about this before. Please help me to fix this mess.0 -
Placement of products in URL-structure for best category page rankings
Hi! I have some questions regarding the optimal URL-hierarchy placement of products in a marketplace setting where the end goal is to attract traffic to category pages. Let me start off with some background, thanks in advance for the help. TLDR Goal: Increase category page rankings. Alternative 1 - Products and category pages separated, flat product structure. Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory Product / listing page: oursite.com/listing-1 Alternative 2 - Products and category pages separated, hierarchal product structure. Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory Product / listing page: oursite.com/product/category/subcat/listing Alternative 3 - Products placed directly under category page. Category page: oursite.com/category/subcategory Product / listing page: oursite.com/category/subcategory/listing I run a commercial real estate marketplace, which means that our potential search traffic is _extremely _geographic. For example, some common searches are (not originally in english): Office space for lease {City X} Office space for lease {Neighborhood Y} Retail space {Neighborhood Z} And so on... These terms are already quite competitive, where the top results are our competitors geographic and type category pages. For example: _competitor.com/type/city/neighborhood , _is a top result, where the user reaches a landing page that shows all the {type} spaces for lease in {neighborhood}. These users are out to find which spaces are available for lease in these geographical areas, and not individual spaces. I.e. users do not search in the same extent for an individual product, in this case a specific empty space. Our approach has been to place an extreme bias towards a heavy geographical hierarchy. This means that basically any search, resulting in a category page, on our site results in a well structured URL like the following: _oursite.com/type/state/city/district/street, _since we are using Google Maps API's, this is easy and relevant for the user. Our geographical categorization beats our competitors both on extensiveness and usability, especially in long-tail search phrases where our competitors don't care to categorize where we are seeing real search volumes. The hierarchy only extends as far down as the user has searched, for example a lot of our searched just end up being _oursite.com/type/state/city/district. _ Now we are wondering how we should place our products, the empty spaces, in this URL structure. Our original hypothesis was that we should include the products in the original hierarchy, resulting in: oursite.com/category/subcategory/product. Our thinking was that we would both be serving the user with an understandable and relevant URL, and also provide search bots with a logical structure for our site and most importantly content for our category pages. Our landing pages are very dynamic, providing information by relaying graphical information on a map instead of in an SEO-friendly manner. I would however go as far as to say that these dynamic pages provide a ton of value for the user, much more so than our competitors, by describing relevant information about the neighborhood kind of like Trulia, just not in a bot-readable manner. This results in trying to rank them on their own merits being a challenge, whereas we were hoping we could create relevancy by placing products / listings and maybe even blog posts on the topic within the same URL-hierarchy. As of right now our current structure is oursite.com/products/category/subcategory/product. In other words, they are categorized in the same geographical fashion but under a separate URL-path. Our results so far is that we basically only rank for the product pages, and rank extremely poorly for our category pages, which is our ultimate goal to enhance. This is why we developed the above hypothesis. However, what we learned when we did some initial research is that very few e-commerce stores place their products directly below their categories. Most of the major websites we studied, and we looked at quite a few, just go for **alternative 1 **from above. The crux is that most of them choose alternative 1 but simultaneously implement bread crumbs that emulate alternative 3, just without the actual URL's. So, what I'm asking is, what are the actual benefits or downsides of the three alternatives? I feel as if I have a pretty firm grasp on how this could be done, I just need to better understand why most seem to choose to flatline their products or listings in the alternative 1 fashion. Thanks, Viktor
Local Listings | | Viktorsodd0 -
Local Business Registered at not a real Address
Hi, I am working on local SEO for a client of mine and was interested to hear what will be recommended in this case: My client registered his business in a NYC address, for his own business needs. Can I use this address as a second location for the business? There is a secretary taking care of ALL the businesses listed there, but is not a location that services customers. We don't service customers on site at any location because it's a pickup business to begin with, but we do have a fully functional office in NJ Please don't dismiss this right away, it was registered in NYC and not in NJ and all our information on the web cites this address over our NJ one (obviously i'm working on promoting our NJ one, but that's nowhere to be found on the web).
Local Listings | | Rachel_J0 -
Schema.org Best Practices
I am employing some schema.org markup for a dental website, and I am wondering what best practice for using markup is. The NAP is on the footer and on some pages on the sidebar. I was wondering... Should I use schema for the NAP on both the footer and the sidebar or is markup on just one enough? Are there any negative consequences to having the same info marked up twice on the same page? Should I use the itemtype "dentist" or "localbusiness"? Is there an added benefit to either depending how you look at it? My thoughts were that "dentist" is more specific, so that would also imply that it is also a local business... If I use the itemtype "dentist" on the footer and "localbusiness" on the sidebar would that violate best practices or would you get the benefits of both? Would love to hear all of your thoughts! Thanks!!!
Local Listings | | Derrald0 -
SEO best practices for store locator and local pages - 301 or not?
I have been struggling to answer this on my own and now throwing up for the Moz community for a life line. Our company has several location across 6 states. We have local pages that we are working to improve with better content. We also have a store locator that will list the stores but the pages are not the same. See below example. I can't help but feel like I am splitting juice and traffic that should be combined to one page for each location. Any ideas or advice on how we can best combine/funnel the traffic to one optimized page? Here is an example: State local page - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/michigan/ Locator page for state - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/locator/?state=MI City local page - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/michigan/grand_rapids City Locator page - http://www.jakesfireworks.com/locator/?id=183&state=MI
Local Listings | | devonkrusich0 -
Finding citations
Just starting work on a client providing care services in the local area. They have a number of local branches in the area, but no Google+ page (which we will sorting shortly). One of the first things that struck me about the company is the offsite citations are a mess. Their addresses all have different information and they have several phone numbers for each branch. I've been trying to gather a full list so that I can go through them and either change them or ask for log in details if necessary. However, this is time consuming and there is no guarantee that I will get them all. I know that moz local has a tool to do this quickly, but it the grader seems to only work in the USA, we're based in the UK. I'm also trying to use whitespark to get a list, but this is difficult due to all the different phone numbers being used. Does anyone know of another tool that can speed up this process and ensure that I get all the citations?
Local Listings | | maxweb0 -
Are citations the way to go even if there is no Google Places listing
If there are no Google Places / Local listing for a keyword search term, for example... "web design vancouver", do building citations still help in enabling websites to move up the organic rankings?
Local Listings | | Gavo0