How to handle "app" pages.
-
Hey guys,
We've got an app - a drag & drop email builder - and we are looking to improve our seo efforts. That being said - we're not sure how to treat pages of the app that wouldn't tell google nothing at all basically (loads of duplicate content, lorem ipsum, etc). They're pages that are used by the clients to build their own templates ex: builder pages they are extremely useful for our clients, but GGL wouldn't prolly make too much sense out of them.
That being said - rather randomly, before we nofollow noindexed them, some of them started ranking (probably given to the really great analytics data we have on them. Loads of clients, loads of time spent on page, etc).
Can we harness them in a better way, or just nofollownoindex them? I don't really see how they can be "canonicalised" since they don't really provide any quality content for Google. Much like MOZ's keyword explorer tool for ex. Mucho quality for us - but not a google fan favorite content-wise.
Thanks for your help
-
Thank you so much for your help!
-
Its too risky to try and produce rankings from this. Its not really valuable content. So no follow no index
-
Hi Don,
Thanks for the help. The pages can't be embedded or changed by clients. They won't be able to copy the content anywhere. The problem is that some of the content is just lorem ipsum text - destined to show clients what can be done within the interface.
Thanks
-
Andy,
I think these pages should be no follow no index. Even though they ranked at one point, there could be issues of duplicate content on other sites that you would not be able to control. Is it possible for people to post these emails onto their sites or embed them some way?
Do these pages eventually get deleted or should be eventually deleted? If so then definitely keep them no index no follow. The issue is if they get index then deleted, there will be rampant 404 errors too.
Thanks,
Don
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
-
Does a JS script who scroll automaticaly into pages could make some content "hidden" ?
Hello everybody, Sorry for my english (I'm French), I will try to do my best... We've got an e-commerce website : kumulusvape.fr
On-Page Optimization | | KumulusVape
On each categories, to improve our conversion rate, we put a javascript to automaticaly scroll into the page to the product list. You can see an example here : http://www.kumulusvape.fr/44-e-liquide-savourea-smookies This script scroll and make some content "hidden".
It's not really a scroll, just changing page position. Do you think that our h1 and our category content could be consider "hidden" by Google ? Thank you very much for your help0 -
Rel="canonical" link should they be to or from an "SEO friendly" url
Thanks for taking the time to review this. So for our example, lets use the following SEO friendly link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry-and-biblical-studies/BA-biblical-studies We'll call this link the SEO VERSION The title of the college is" Pacific Christian College of Minstry and Biblical Studies" The title of the program is "BA Biblical Studies" The QUERY version of the link to this page would be something like: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/index.php?collegeid=22&programid=34 Keep in mind that the meta title, description, and keyword tags for the page are all administerable The SEO VERSION is automatically created from the title of the college, and the title of the program. Each one of these titles can be overidden with a URL slug individually. For instance, the admin could make the link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry/biblical-studies by changing the slug for the college to "pacific-christian-college-of-ministry" and the slug for the program to "biblical-studies". Let's call this version the SLUG VERSION So now we have multiple ways to get to the same content. The question on the table is what is best practice for the rel="canonical" link to keep from getting dinged for duplicate content. Let's say that our SEO VERSION is the canonical link for 1 year. Then the choice was made to optimize the links thru the slugs creating the SLUG VERSION. My assumption is that we would keep the SEO VERSION as the canonical link. But then let's say 6 months later that the title of the program is changed in the admin. Now the SEO VERSION has changed and so has the canonical link. Do we lose the link juice garnered over the last 18 months? It would seem to me, that if we use the QUERY version as the canonical link, then any optimizations or changes affect everything except the canonical link, thus keeping the previous link juice earned. But is having an ugly URL as the canonical link detrimental to SEO? Please advise.
On-Page Optimization | | robertdonnell0 -
Re="tag" Question
Hello, I own the site I putted rel="tag" in categories and product links , its correct? There are a lot of categories and products , I wont get penalized right? Just making sure to know if Im doing it right , thank you for help me 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | matiw0 -
On page "F" and I changed my tags long ago to match everything and still F?
My on-page analysis shows that my title tags are not supporting my keyword..........but they are! My title tag has my EXACT keyword phrase. What gives? Keyword is "San Diego Party Bus" Title is "San Diego Party Bus | xoxoxox | xoxoxoxo" F grade! ????????
On-Page Optimization | | DrewSpinoso0 -
Locating Duplicate Pages
Hi, Our website consists of approximately 15,000 pages however according to our Google Webmaster Tools account Google has around 26,000 pages for us in their index. I have run through half a dozen sitemap generators and they all only discover the 15,000 pages that we know about. I have also thoroughly gone through the site to attempt to find any sections where we might be inadvertently generating duplicate pages without success. It has been over six months since we did any structural changes (at which point we did 301's to the new locations) and so I'd like to think that the majority of these old pages have been removed from the Google Index. Additionally, the number of pages in the index doesn't appear to be going down by any discernable factor week on week. I'm certain it's nothing to worry about however for my own peace of mind I'd like to just confirm that the additional 11,000 pages are just old results that will eventually disappear from the index and that we're not generating any duplicate content. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a way to download a list of the 26,000 pages that Google has indexed so that I can compare it against our sitemap. Obviously I know about site:domain.com however this only returned the first 1,000 results which all checkout fine. I was wondering if anybody knew of any methods or tools that we could use to attempt to identify these 11,000 extra pages in the Google index so we can confirm that they're just old pages which haven’t fallen out of the index yet and that they’re not going to be causing us a problem? Thanks guys!
On-Page Optimization | | ChrisHolgate0 -
Pages vs Posts
What are your thoughts on pages vs posts? I am setting up a new blog for a client but not sure how to structure the content. I may just do posts or a whole bunch of page listed down the sidebar. It seems like my pages always rank better than my posts. Has anyone else noticed this? Could it be because of the dates tied posts?
On-Page Optimization | | SixTwoInteractive0 -
Optimization of home page
Hi there I have an issue which, despite searching hard, I simply cannot find the right solution for. We have an index page that used to rank pretty well for a main industry keyword. However following a revamp of the site last year the kw slipped and no longer brings in decent traffic levels. The problem seems to be that the old static site had a sprinkling of variable anchor text links that brought value to the home page. Instead of the main anchor being "home" we would revert to "main keyword" and variations across the site sometimes in t he content but mainly on the nav bars. However the new CMS design structure restricts us considerably with anchor distribution and so instead we opted for the site logo on the masthead to have an ALT tag for "main keyword" but so as not to game google too much we added .."home" to the tag. Probably pointless but we figured it could do no harm. This ALT text is site wide Problem now is that we have lost the spread of internal nav bar anchors and variety etc. We have slipped in the serps for "main keyword" and I cant help thinking we are not maximising the anchors as we should. So what Im coming to is this.... How can we tell if Google is picking up the ALT tage anchor as the main anchor to rank the site at the expense of all internal text anchors. Despite retaining lots of embedded anchors - according to the Moz metrics these are not being picked up because OSE suggests the ALT tag anchor is taking precedence. The serps probably support this view as well. Should we: a) Vary the masthead ALT if there is no way of avoiding this being the most important link / anchor on the page b) Remove the ALT anchor and instead opt for content links high on the page (we do have nav bar links saying "Home" site wide as well which may overrid the embedded links?) c) Leave the ALT alone and still push for content anchors as described in b) What is the best way to handle this..? Best wishes and thanks Morch
On-Page Optimization | | Morch0