Multiple products with legitimate duplicate descriptions
-
We are redeveloping a website for a card company who have far too many products to write unique descriptions for each. Even if they could I don't think it would be beneficial to the user. However they do have unique descriptions for each range which is useful for users viewing an individual card.
Which is better practice:
a) Ignore the duplicate content issue and supply the user with info about the range
b) Provide clear enticing links to find out more about the range which will leave the individual card page a little void of content.
Many thanks
-
Many thanks Alex, already on all of the points mentioned above but always nice to get some validation for plans of action... half the time that's more satisfying than coming up with them!
-
Also make sure all your page titles are unique. While descriptions don't matter that much, titles should be unique or at the very least descriptive and targeted for your keywords.
-
Sounds like you have a good handle on it. As Mike recommends, focusing on the more category-style pages is definitely more appealing to a user looking to browse the site. At the end of the day, beyond SEO, the end-user is really what you care about. Another suggestion might be to make the single card pages more like category pages. Show cards from the same category, suggest similar cards or categories. Related links are one of the best ways to promote pageviews and get both the end-user as well as a googlebot interested in "crawling" more pages. That's a bonus on all fronts.
-
Sorry again I should have been clearer it is not really the meta data I am concerned about at this point more the benefit of on-page content. I think the bigger issue is that for organic search traffic card pages are almost redundant and focus, as Mike says should be on the range pages which should encourage browsing.
-
Although in additon there is the issue about the card page lacking in enticing content which could reduce the chance of a conversion. Becuase this is a predominently visual subject pehaps I am just worrying about the lack of text as it fundamentally goes against usual SEO rather than benfitting usability.
-
Apologies, I should have said greetings cards, so this is indeed very helpful, thank you
-
Meta descriptions won't get you penalized for duplicate content so there's no need to worry about that. The descriptions are really just what you see in the Google Search. Users are more likely to click a link that has a nice descriptive description that leads them into the content you're looking for. Of course a custom description is always best for each individual page/product, but in some cases the time isn't worth it.
I'm not sure what you mean with clear links on B, but A is a perfectly fine solution if there are just too many pages. A good options might be to create a generic description that uses the product name as a variable. ie: "My (Car) is red", "My (Cart) is red", etc.
-
What sort of cards are we talking about? I immediately think "greeting cards" when you say that but I don't want to just assume that's the case. But if it is then from a personal user experience standpoint I would say that I would be more likely to search a specific range & gain more from finding a category page for a range of cards in the SERPs than I would from a page with an individual card on it. I.E. I'm more likely to search "birthday cards" or "get well cards" or "thank you cards" than I would to search "that birthday card with a grumpy cat that has balloons and a smushed cake". In which case I'd say go with robust category pages and, if possible, consider canonicalizing the individual cards to the category if you're going to also use the content of the parent category on the individual pages. If it's not greeting cards... well then I wrote all of this for nothing. (unless its playing cards... what I wrote might work for that as well)
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
-
Optimising meta tags: How to write them perfectly without duplicating? Impact of using different keywords?
Hi friends, Generally most of the articles about tags are either title rag or header tags, but not about both. I would like to know how to write perfect title and header tags. How much they must be relevant and different? Can we use the same tags for title and H1? If we are planning to rank for different keywords, can that different keywords can be used? I'm really curious to see some interesting answers for this. Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
If we have all products on-site for indexing, do we get dinged by Google for not transacting on-site?
I am trying to do research on the SEO impact of having an off-site transactional website. For example, Pepsi.com lists all product information on their site but guides visitors to transact on Amazon or Walmart. What impact, if any, does guiding the customer to a separate transactional site have on SEO? In short, if we have all products on-site for indexing, do we get dinged by Google for not transacting on-site?
Algorithm Updates | | KaylaV0 -
SEO Myth-Busters -- Isn't there a "duplicate content" penalty by another name here?
Where is that guy with the mustache in the funny hat and the geek when you truly need them? So SEL (SearchEngineLand) said recently that there's no such thing as "duplicate content" penalties. http://searchengineland.com/myth-duplicate-content-penalty-259657 by the way, I'd love to get Rand or Eric or others Mozzers aka TAGFEE'ers to weigh in here on this if possible. The reason for this question is to double check a possible 'duplicate content" type penalty (possibly by another name?) that might accrue in the following situation. 1 - Assume a domain has a 30 Domain Authority (per OSE) 2 - The site on the current domain has about 100 pages - all hand coded. Things do very well in SEO because we designed it to do so.... The site is about 6 years in the current incarnation, with a very simple e-commerce cart (again basically hand coded). I will not name the site for obvious reasons. 3 - Business is good. We're upgrading to a new CMS. (hooray!) In doing so we are implementing categories and faceted search (with plans to try to keep the site to under 100 new "pages" using a combination of rel canonical and noindex. I will also not name the CMS for obvious reasons. In simple terms, as the site is built out and launched in the next 60 - 90 days, and assume we have 500 products and 100 categories, that yields at least 50,000 pages - and with other aspects of the faceted search, it could create easily 10X that many pages. 4 - in ScreamingFrog tests of the DEV site, it is quite evident that there are many tens of thousands of unique urls that are basically the textbook illustration of a duplicate content nightmare. ScreamingFrog has also been known to crash while spidering, and we've discovered thousands of URLS of live sites using the same CMS. There is no question that spiders are somehow triggering some sort of infinite page generation - and we can see that both on our DEV site as well as out in the wild (in Google's Supplemental Index). 5 - Since there is no "duplicate content penalty" and there never was - are there other risks here that are caused by infinite page generation?? Like burning up a theoretical "crawl budget" or having the bots miss pages or other negative consequences? 6 - Is it also possible that bumping a site that ranks well for 100 pages up to 10,000 pages or more might very well have a linkuice penalty as a result of all this (honest but inadvertent) duplicate content? In otherwords, is inbound linkjuice and ranking power essentially divided by the number of pages on a site? Sure, it may be some what mediated by internal page linkjuice, but what's are the actual big-dog issues here? So has SEL's "duplicate content myth" truly been myth-busted in this particular situation? ??? Thanks a million! 200.gif#12
Algorithm Updates | | seo_plus0 -
Hi guys, I have a question about linking to a product page for linkbuilding. Does that count adversely vs. linking to a homepage?
Hi - so until now we have been building links via blog posts and articles and linking them to the homepage. It seems the ranking of some of my top keywords has fallen so had a few questions/concerns: Does it affect the rankings adversely if I link to the product page vs the homepage? What is rule of thumb for increasing rankings of inside pages/keywords and building links to them? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | DGM0 -
Multiple Listings in Results fading Local SEO
Lately I am noticing multiple listings for results seem to be fading away. Example is one domain being listed twice for a search phrase The Home page for example and an Internal Page. Is anyone else seeing this? Safe to say Google wants to see 10+ individual domains per results page?
Algorithm Updates | | bozzie3110 -
Is it ok to repeat part of a meta-description across multiple pages?
For example, what if I was to conclude each meta-description tag with the line... "Free shipping for orders over $90." The rest of the meta-description tag on every page is unique, but the last sentence would be the same or at least similar. Thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | B-man0 -
Duplicate Content
Hi guys, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOvNtPGGeHc http://themovies2012.info/wanderlust Will google know what site copy the content and what site own the content? The description on youtube is exactly the same as my review on themovies2012.info, but in the description on youtube i put link to my website... Will google know the difference?
Algorithm Updates | | prunarevic0 -
Duplicate Content & www.3quarksdaily.com, why no penalty?
Does anyone have a theory as to why this site does not get hit with a DC penalty? The site is great, and the information is good but I just cannot understand the reason that this site does not get hit with a duplicate content penalty as all articles are posted elsewhere. Any theories would be greatly appreciated!
Algorithm Updates | | KMack0