Is this spammy/panda problem?
-
We have a property site and have many area pages with listings of properties. For example, one page may have up to 30 properties listed, with 100 words of description on that listing page for that property and then you click 'more info' to get to the page of that property with maybe 200 words in total.
I want to add bullet points for each property on the area page but Im worried that it may be seen by google as spammy even though its usefull to the client.
For example, if I had 30 properties on a page, and 28 of them said next to each picture..
- Property Type: Shared, Open Plan, Single Bed
Would that be a problem for google?
-
Nope - I would always defer to what is better for the user. Remember that whilst there are many components of the algorithm that analyse the page there are also parts that look at engagement - if the changes have a positive impact on engagement and UX as suspected then I would not fear some algorithmic punishment.
Always, always test. Roll it out. Decide on your metrics and test the results by those measurements of what success looks like. If it has a negative impact on ranking or engagement then reconsider - you can always roll back.
It's very easy to get into analysis paralysis when worrying about the search ranking algorithm - do what is right by your users first and you won't go far wrong.
Hope that helps
Marcus
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
-
Redirects Not Working / Issue with Duplicate Page Titles
Hi all We are being penalised on Webmaster Tools and Crawl Diagnostics for duplicate page titles and I'm not sure how to fix it.We recently switched from HTTP to HTTPS, but when we first switched over, we accidentally set a permanent redirect from HTTPS to HTTP for a week or so(!).We now have a permanent redirect going the other way, HTTP to HTTPS, and we also have canonical tags in place to redirect to HTTPS.Unfortunately, it seems that because of this short time with the permanent redirect the wrong way round, Google is confused as sees our http and https sites as duplicate content.Is there any way to get Google to recognise this new (correct) permanent redirect and completely forget the old (incorrect) one?Any ideas welcome!
Web Design | | HireSpace0 -
Privacy Policy: index it/? And where to place it?
Hi Everyone, Two questions, first: should you allow google to index your privacy policy? Second: for a service based site (not e-commerce, not selling anything) should you put the policy in the footer so it's site wide or just on the "contact us" form page? Best, Ruben
Web Design | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Web development - License CSS/Markup/Code
In development of a website, is it typical for the developer to retain rights to the CSS, Markup and other Coding? If so, why is this done?
Web Design | | DemiGR0 -
Duplicate content and blog/twitter feeds
Hi Mozzers, I have a question... I'm planning to add a blog summary/twitter feed throughout my website (onto every main content page) and then started worrying about duplicate content. What is best practice here? Let me know - thanks, Luke PS. I sat down and re: blog feed... thought that perhaps it would help if I fed different blog posts through to different pages (which I could then edit so I could add<a></a> text different from that in blog). Not sure about twitter.
Web Design | | McTaggart1 -
How do I identify what is causing my Duplicate Page Content problem?
Hello, I'm trying to put my finger on what exactly is causing my duplicate page content problem... For example, SEOMoz is picking up these four pages as having the same content: http://www.penncare.net/ambulancedivision/braunambulances/express.aspx http://www.penncare.net/ambulancedivision/recentdeliveries/millcreekparamedicservice.aspx http://www.penncare.net/ambulancedivision/recentdeliveries/monongaliaems.aspx http://www.penncare.net/softwaredivision/emschartssoftware/emschartsvideos.aspx As you can tell, they really aren't serving the same content in the body of the page. Anybody have an idea what might be causing these pages to show up as Duplicate Page Content? At first I thought it was the photo gallery module that might be causing it, but that only exists on two of the pages... Thanks in advance!
Web Design | | BGroup0 -
Is it OK to 301 Redirect http://homepage.com to http://blog.homepage.com?
I don't have a homepage built yet, and I suspect that my blog will be my primary SEO draw in the long term, so I'd like to do a 301 redirect (for the techies, I'm doing it in Django with http.HttpResponsePermanentRedirect ) I just wanted to confirm that this wouldn't cause any problems as Google gets used to my page (it's only been up for a few days) Thanks! -matt
Web Design | | 49wetnoodles0 -
Advice regarding Panda
I'd like some feedback on what would be a Panda factor(s) on http://www.duhaime.org The site got hit fairly hard by Panda (60% drop in traffic). Since then we have: redesigned the site (responsive and progressive), reduce the average links/page to ~35 from over 100, Use AJAX to delay the loading of boiler plate and nav elements, Improved the search functionality, Added more content images (still in progress), Removed the citations section to new sub-domain, and 1000's of little code fixes and enhancements The site, by nature of being a legal reference, contains many small, single topic pages. The authority and professionalism of the site demands it doesn't allow much UGC. (The law is not Social Media) Unfortunately, this means the bulk of the page (1000+) are fairly formulaic - to format otherwise would diminish the value to the user. This doesn't hurt many individual pages as shown by the dominance the "Without Prejudice" page enjoys. In particular, the citations section was very limited as there is not very much one can say about the 10,000+ law reports in the world. Recognizing this as valuable to lawyers but a likely "low value" target of Panda, we moved it to a sub domain and requested the old directory was removed from the index. This was done on July 28th. Now... I'd like some opinions on anything else that might be holding the site back. Thank you for you time.
Web Design | | sprynewmedia0