Product Listing Pages
-
Hi
I had a question regarding product pages and the best way to display the page for SEO.
For example, is it best to have a page for - Blue Euro Containers including a table of the capacity options you can buy..
Or, have each product split out so it has it's own product page - 60L Blue Euro Container, etc etc
I know a lot of the information will be fairly similar, with the capacity being the one major difference - is this a bad thing?
Some of our product tables are too big and the idea was to split them out.
Thanks!
-
Brilliant thank you.
Another question I have is, obviously titles need to be unique, so if the only difference is capacity, & my titles are something like Euro container 50L & Euro container 80L - is this just going to be seen as keyword spamming?
I can't make the titles hugely different if the products are part of the same 'range'
Is there a better way? Or is the alternative not to split the products?
-
Thanks everyone! I'm still a bit torn on what to do, I understand the implications of both.
I'm working on one page so debating on whether to test this and see how it goes but splitting them out.
The other problem we have is in our pages with multiple products, the tables are not user friendly and need dev time to sort them out which isn't as straight forward as we'd like.
Thanks!
-
Hi Becky,
I would not create separate product URL if the size/color are the only variations in the product description. If you do this, you're risk creating duplicate content since there's not enough unique content for each page other than the title itself.
Create one page for the product, describe all relevant information for the user, and use filters to display the size and/or color variations.
Here's an example from Amazon and how they handle products with size/color variations:
http://www.amazon.com/Rubbermaid-Access-Storage-Tote-Large/dp/B00BEUDXIG/
use filters to display variations and always use the canonical tag to point to the main URL.
Good luck!
Eliza
-
I have had good results using individual product pages with the exception that products that only differ by color, size and material type, can be listed on the same page and create new options like color, size and material so you can list the item by its basic name but by users picking the option types they want, they get the blue 3 foot long granite slab, or the green, 2 foot wide concrete slab.
Have had my pages come up rather nicely from this, not to mention customers stay on the page and fiddle with options rather than click back or 10 other buttons on the site.
-
Hi there
Kissmetrics and InFlow both have great resources for getting started with eCommerce SEO and how to avoid common issues.
I personally like individual product pages - you are able to add unique product descriptions, individual schema tags, unique images, targeted URL structures, and more, all allowing you to compete better in targeted organic search for that particular product.
So, again, my vote are individual product pages. But beyond SEO, take into consideration your users - what would make them most likely to find the product they are looking for and convert? Remember, you always have the ability to A/B test your designs before committing!
Let me know if this helps - good luck!
Patrick
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
-
Sizable decrease in amount of pages indexed, however no drop in clicks, impressions, or ranking.
Hi everyone, I've run into a worrying phenomenon in GSC and im wondering if anyone has come across something similar. Since August, I have seen a steady decline in the number of pages that are indexed from my site, from 1.3 million down to about 800,000 in two months. Interestingly, my clicks/impressions continue to increase gradually (on the same pace they have been for months) and I see no other negative side affects resulting from this drop in coverage. In total I have 1.2 million urls that fall into one of three categories, "Crawled - currently not indexed", "Crawl anomaly", and "Discovered - currently not indexed" Some other notes - all of my valid, error, and excluded pages are https://www. , so I don't believe there is an issue with different versions of the same site being submitted. Also, my rankings have not changed so I tentatively believe that this is unrelated to the Medic Update. If anyone else has experienced this or has any insight to the problem I would love to know. Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | Jason-Reid0 -
Does Google ignores page title suffix?
Hi all, It's a common practice giving the "brand name" or "brand name & primary keyword" as suffix on EVERY page title. Well then it's just we are giving "primary keyword" across all pages and we expect "homepage" to rank better for that "primary keyword". Still Google ranks the pages accordingly? How Google handles it? The default suffix with primary keyword across all pages will be ignored or devalued by Google for ranking certain pages? Or by the ranking of website improves for "primary keyword" just because it has been added to all page titles?
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Why do we have so many pages scanned by bots (over 250,000) and our biggest competitors have about 70,000? Seems like something is very wrong.
We are trying to figure out why last year we had a huge (80%) and sudden (within two days) drop in our google searches. The only "outlier" in our site that we can find is a huge number of pages reported in MOZ as scanned by search engines. Is this a problem? How did we get so many pages reported? What can we do to bring the number of searched pages back to a "normal" level? BT
Algorithm Updates | | achituv0 -
Do you think this page has been algorithmically penalised or is it just old?
Here is the page: http://www.designquotes.com.au/business-blog/top-10-australian-business-directories-in-2012/ It's fairly old, but when it was first written it hit #1 for "business directories". After a while it dropped but was receieving lots of traffic for long tail variations of "business directories Australia" As of the 4th of October (Penguin 2.1) it lost traffic and rankings entirely. I checked it's link profile and there isn't anything fishy: From Google Webmaster https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtwbT3wshHRsdEc1OWl4SFN0SDdiTkwzSmdGTFpZOFE&usp=sharing In fact, two links are entirely natural http://blog.businesszoom.com.au/2013/09/use-customer-reviews-to-improve-your-website-ranking/ http://dianajones.com.au/google-plus-local-equals-more-business-blog/ Yet when I search for a close match in title in Google AU, the article doesn't appear within even the first 4 pages. https://www.google.com.au/#q=top+10+Australian+Business+Directories&start=10 Is this simple because it's an old article? Should I re-write it, update the analysis and use a rel=canonical on the old article to the new?
Algorithm Updates | | designquotes0 -
A Serious drop in Pages crawled per day
On 21st April ,I spotted a sudden decrease in pages crawled per day.Previously it was about 5,000 bust after the drop it reached to 225.From the crawl rate never spiked. Here is my website url - http://www.wpstuffs.com/ 8fQHW2G.png
Algorithm Updates | | vividvilla0 -
Would Google Remove Pages for Inactivity?
Hi, I've been watching the Total Indexed number for 4 domains that I work with for the last few months. In Google Webmaster Tools three of them were holding steady up until August-September, when suddenly they started declining by hundreds of thousands of URLs a week. I've asked my IT department and they say they haven't done anything technically different in the last few months that would affect indexation. I've also searched on google and on search marketing blogs to see if anyone else has experience this to no avail. As you can see in the image, the "Not Selected" pages have not increased so it appears this is not due to duplicate content (of which we have a lot). However, the "Ever Crawled" number is increasing. The only reasonable answer that I can conclude is that Google is now de-indexing inactive URLs? Anyone have a better answer? yIYDm.jpg
Algorithm Updates | | OfficeFurn0 -
Do practitioner listings for the same business need to have different categories?
I'm trying to figure out an issue with practitioner listings, and I wanted to ask more about this because in this Q&A thread ( http://www.seomoz.org/q/multiple-businesses-at-the-same-address-avoiding-google-places-trouble ) it was stated that each listing needs to have a different category. Sorry if this question is redundant, I just wanted to make sure I have a clear understanding before proceeding.... I'm managing local listings for a senior healthcare center that has 4 locations, and multiple practitioners at each location. I'm trying to figure out how to best handle the multiple practitioner listings, most of which appear to be scraped. I was going to claim, verify and begin managing them. However, they all fall under the same category, "practitioner." What I've gathered from the response in the above Q&A thread is that I need to have a different category for each practitioner to please Google Places, despite the fact that "practitioner" is the best/most accurate category available in Google's pre-set categories. Is my interpretation correct? I'm confused because Google's guidelines say you can create a separate listing for each practitioner, which to me implies that it would be ok to use the practitioner category for each one. But then again, I want to make sure before proceeding. Thanks, Kim
Algorithm Updates | | TECHSEO35
#TECHSEO Account Manager0 -
Best Practices for Page Titles | RSS Feeds
Good Morning MOZers, Quick question for the community: when creating an RSS feed for one of your websites, how do you title your RSS feed? Currently, the sites I'm managing use the 'rss.xml' for the file name, but I was curious to know whether or not it would, in any way, benefit my SERP if I were to add my domain to precede the 'rss.xml', i.e. 'my-sites-rss.xml' or something of that nature. Beyond that, are there any 'best practices' for creating RSS feed page titles or is there a preferred method of implementation? Anybody have any solutions
Algorithm Updates | | NiallSmith0