Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
How many pages for a new site for Google to sink it's teeth into
-
Hello,
I've got a high traffic site I'm building. Is 20 articles enough to start or should I start with 40 or 60 to not flop? I've got good internal linking. I've got:
3 10X articles
17 cornerstonesso far.
Worked hard so far. Do I launch? or wait for 40? 60? I know thousands is best. Competitors have much more.
Thank you,
Bob
-
@BobGW said in How many pages for a new site for Google to sink it's teeth into:
Hello,
I've got a high traffic site I'm building. Is 20 articles enough to start or should I start with 40 or 60 to not flop? I've got good internal linking. I've got:
3 10X articles
17 cornerstones
so far.
Worked hard so far. Do I launch? or wait for 40? 60? I know thousands is best. Competitors have much more.
Thank you,You’re in a great position to launch with the 20 articles you have, especially with 3 10X articles and 17 cornerstone pieces. Quality matters more than quantity, and your focus on strong internal linking and content depth is key. While competitors may have thousands of articles, your strategy should be to launch now and continue adding high-quality content consistently. Don’t wait for 40 or 60 articles—start now, monitor performance, and grow from there. Quality content combined with a consistent content plan will help you succeed over time. I fyou still confuse learn more
-
Thank you for your replies. Is there anything else besides internal linking, 50 first links, and on-site SEO that I need to keep in mind that's out of the normal ballpark?
Thank you.
-
"I’d recommend focusing on building quality content first. For example, my soccer online games website, which started with just a few detailed articles on online soccer games, soon grew to include game reviews, player stats, and strategy guides. This variety attracted more traffic and helped us rank higher. It's not just about quantity, but relevance and regular updates. Once you have a solid base, gradually increase your content, just like we did, and consider adding backlinks to boost authority over time."
-
@BobGW said in How many pages for a new site for Google to sink it's teeth into:
Hello,
I've got a high traffic site I'm building. Is 20 articles enough to start or should I start with 40 or 60 to not flop? I've got good internal linking. I've got:
3 10X articles
17 cornerstones
so far.
Worked hard so far. Do I launch? or wait for 40? 60? I know thousands is best. Competitors have much more."I’d recommend focusing on building quality content first. For example, my soccer online games website, which started with just a few detailed articles on online soccer games, soon grew to include game reviews, player stats, and strategy guides. This variety attracted more traffic and helped us rank higher. It's not just about quantity, but relevance and regular updates. Once you have a solid base, gradually increase your content, just like we did, and consider adding backlinks to boost authority over time."
-
For a new website, it's ideal to have at least 10-20 well-optimized pages to help Google crawl and index effectively. Consistent content updates and quality pages improve visibility in search results over time.
-
20 well-optimised articles with good internal linking and a mix of 10X and cornerstone content is a solid start! Quality trumps quantity, especially for a new site. If your articles are highly valuable and target relevant keywords, Google can begin indexing and ranking your site effectively.
I think you don’t need to wait for 40 or 60 articles. Focus on publishing consistently post-launch while promoting your existing content to build authority. Competitors may have more, but even a smaller site can compete with exceptional content and strong SEO practices.
-
@BobGW said in How many pages for a new site for Google to sink it's teeth into:
Hello,
I've got a high traffic site I'm building. Is 20 articles enough to start or should I start with 40 or 60 to not flop? I've got good internal linking. I've got:
3 10X articles
17 cornerstones
so far.
Worked hard so far. Do I launch? or wait for 40? 60? I know thousands is best. Competitors have much more.
Thank you,
BobHi Bob,
20 articles with good internal linking is a solid start, especially with 10X and cornerstone content. You can launch now and continue adding more articles over time. Focus on quality and consistency, and you’ll build up traffic as you grow. Good luck!
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
-
Write new articles or republish old ones?
Hi,
Content Development | | Enrico_Cassinelli
we run a tourism information website about a region in italy, and each year, during special occasions such as christmas, easter and so on we publish an article with a "what to do on Christmas / Easter / .... in the Langhe" (collecting events, activities, etc.). Is it better to "reuse" the old articles and change only the year in the title and of course the content (providing that we are gonna keep the URL without year), or to publish a new one? thanks!0 -
Virtual URL Google not indexing?
Dear all, We have two URLs: The main URL which is crawled both by GSC and where Moz assigns our keywords is: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/ The second one is called a virtual url by our developpers: https://andipaeditions.com/banksy/signedandunsignedprintsforsale/ This is currently not indexed by Google. We have been linking to the second URL and I am unable to see if this is passing juice/anything on to the main one /banksy/ Is it a canonical? The /banksy/ is the one that is being picked up in serps/by Moz and worry that the two similar URLs are splitting the signal. Should I redirect from the second to the first? Thank you
On-Page Optimization | | TAT1000 -
Unsolved Is Moz Able to Track Internal Links Per Page?
I am trying to track internal links and identify orphan pages. What is the best way to do this?
Moz Pro | | WebMarkets0 -
Best practices for publishing sponsored content
Hello, Our website hosts sponsored content from different brands. Should we be listing the sponsor either on the frontend and/or through markup? - Would either way have any sort of an impact? The content itself is already clearly marked as 'sponsored content' but we were more interested in listing the specific sponsor. Also, we’re assuming the outbound links would need to be marked rel="sponsored" but are there any other best practices we should be implementing? Any insight would be appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | Ben-R
Thank you in advance.
Best,0 -
Should I split long form content?
I have quite a long content on my site. By length I mean around 8000-9000 words. I optimized it to cover almost all searches related to a topic. But this length makes me uneasy for some reason. I do not think that users will find what they are looking for in such a long content. However, I don't want to neglect the SEO aspect of the content. I can talk about something like this without sharing the keywords completely: Title + for girls Title + for boys Title + for kids Title + for girlfriend Title + for boyfriend Title + for students As I said, in the current situation, these are all sub-headings (H2) of 8000-9000-word content. When I make a separate content for each of them, I can bring them all closer to 1500-2000 words. However, I am undecided whether this is the right step in terms of SEO and content optimization. What are your views?
SEO Tactics | | mozasea0 -
How will changing my website's page content affect SEO?
Our company is looking to update the content on our existing web pages and I am curious what the best way to roll out these changes are in order to maintain good SEO rankings for certain pages. The infrastructure of the site will not be modified except for maybe adding a couple new pages, but existing domains will stay the same. If the domains are staying the same does it really matter if I just updated 1 page every week or so, versus updating them all at once? Just looking for some insight into how freshening up the content on the back end pages could potentially hurt SEO rankings initially. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bankable1 -
My site shows 503 error to Google bot, but can see the site fine. Not indexing in Google. Help
Hi, This site is not indexed on Google at all. http://www.thethreehorseshoespub.co.uk Looking into it, it seems to be giving a 503 error to the google bot. I can see the site I have checked source code Checked robots Did have a sitemap param. but removed it for testing GWMT is showing 'unreachable' if I submit a site map or fetch Any ideas on how to remove this error? Many thanks in advance
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SolveWebMedia0 -
Brackets vs Encoded URLs: The "Same" in Google's eyes, or dup content?
Hello, This is the first time I've asked a question here, but I would really appreciate the advice of the community - thank you, thank you! Scenario: Internal linking is pointing to two different versions of a URL, one with brackets [] and the other version with the brackets encoded as %5B%5D Version 1: http://www.site.com/test?hello**[]=all&howdy[]=all&ciao[]=all
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mirabile
Version 2: http://www.site.com/test?hello%5B%5D**=all&howdy**%5B%5D**=all&ciao**%5B%5D**=all Question: Will search engines view these as duplicate content? Technically there is a difference in characters, but it's only because one version encodes the brackets, and the other does not (See: http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_urlencode.asp) We are asking the developer to encode ALL URLs because this seems cleaner but they are telling us that Google will see zero difference. We aren't sure if this is true, since engines can get so _hung up on even one single difference in character. _ We don't want to unnecessarily fracture the internal link structure of the site, so again - any feedback is welcome, thank you. 🙂0