Reducing duplicate content
-
Callcatalog.com is a complaint directory for phone numbers. People post information on the phone calls they get. Since there are many many phone numbers, obviously people haven't posted information on ALL of the phone numbers, THUS I have many phone numbers with zero content. SEOMoz is telling me that pages with zero content looks like duplicate content with each other..
The only difference between two pages that have zero coments is the title and phone number embedded in the page. For example, http://www.callcatalog.com/phones/view/413-563-3263 is a page that has zero comments..
I don't want to remove these zero comment phone number pages from the directory since many people find the pages via a phone number search.
Here's my question: what can I do to make google / seomoz think that thexe zero comment pages is not dupliicate content?
-
no not at all. but i would not worrie, as there is little info on them they are not really going to do much for you, when they are filled in, they will no longer be duplicates.
If they only ave a phhone number and title, they are not going to do anythiung for you -
I think Joel Hit is right.
Still the pages are very similar but again, is not something you should be afraid of.
As far as improving bounce rate you should think about A/B testing.
A few things you can try:
-
add a [next] / [show another result] / [ not the number you are looking for ? ] button that should at least drop the BR.
-
add a side bar with additional navigation options that links internally
just a few ideas - hope it helps.
- play with the informational layout including your ads (adsesne)
-
-
ok, so if google still indexes it then they DO NOT consider it duplicate?
Lol. Good point. You are right !
-
ok, so if google still indexes it then they DO NOT consider it duplicate?
-
If you add a no index on those pages they won't show in the search results and lose the entire purpose - the effect will be the same with removing the pages.
People are getting on those pages for sure - probably a lot of people overall.
-
Eyepaq -- very interesting. Any additional thoughts as to how to improve bounce rate then?
-
I've seen stats form a similar website - I've never thought that so many people are looking for phone numbers - it's incredible.
Now getting to the point, in my personal opinion you should do nothing. Especially don't remove those pages as that's suicide.
Even if the SeoMoz tool is showing duplicate content issues on the site - duplicate content within your site is NEVER a penalty situation. You will never get in trouble for having the same content or similar content on more pages within your site.
The only down side is that duplicate pages will compete to each other in search results but in your case they won't as you are looking for a single keyword for each page (with or without comments on it - the exact phone number that is).
The main goal is to get to a page after looking for that particular phone number so in your case multiple pages from your site with similar content won't compete - you are safe from all points of view.
You should never remove the pages with no comments from the site as it will drop your organic # by a lot - I've seen stats from a similar website and, like in your case, only a few pages had comments/names and 90% were blank pages with the number in h1 on the top only and those pages received a lot of organic direct hits.
The bounce rate however was high - so you might want to give some extra options within that page beside the number and the form as this can even increase your adsense ctr if done with extra care. If you already have a lot of traffic I would suggest A/B testing for the empty pages.
-
if I added a no index meta tag, then wouldn't it not show up in the google search index? Google lists many of my no-content pages and people show up on them. Any other ideas?
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
-
Canonical tag on webstore products to avoid Duplicate Page Content ?
Hi, I would like to have an opinion on what how we are planning to solve the issue with Duplicate Page Contents that MOZ PRO is showing us. MOZ Pro is showing us a lot of pages with duplicate content as High Priority Issue. Mainly the problem is with products which have very few differences between them, e.g. pink bike model X and red bike model X. So we decided to implement a canonical tag on these products, and the pink bike model X will now have a canonical pointing to the red bike model X. So hopefully we will be ranking higher with our red bike model X and our pink bike model X will disapear from the index. Am I right ? Is it a good practice, since we will loose long tails indexes? I check each canonical in the Search Console, and we have extremely few searched for "pink bike model X" most of searches are "bike model X". Thank you in advance for your opinion. Isabelle
Moz Pro | | isabelledylag0 -
Duplicate Content for Default Document Domains
I've noticed recently that within the Moz Crawl Report I keep seeing duplicate content for one of our pages that pulls from a default document. The pages are product pages, one ending in releases/ and the other ending in releases/index and are both identical pages. Normally in these situations I would prefer to make sure that every link is being sent to the releases/ page, however according to Moz, the releases/index page is actually ranking better and has a higher internal link count. Can someone advise me on the best way to deal with this situation? Hopefully I've explained myself well enough! Thanks Sam
Moz Pro | | BlueLinkERP0 -
Duplicate URLs
A campaign that I ran said that my client's site had some 47,000+ duplicate pages and titles. I was wondering how I can possibly set that many 301 redirects, but a Moz help engineer said it has a lot to do with session IDs. See this set of duplicate URLs: http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring (clearly the main URL for the page)
Moz Pro | | AlanJacob
http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring?PIPELINE_SESSION_ID=0ac00a2e0ad53eb90cb0b0304d178fc1
http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring?PIPELINE_SESSION_ID=0ac3039d0ad4af2720b3ccd2238547ab
http://www.lumberliquidators.com/ll/c/engineered-hardwood-flooring?PIPELINE_SESSION_ID=0ac071ed0ad4af292684b0746931158f To a crawler, that looks like 4 different pages, when it's clear that they're actually all different URLs for the same page. I was wondering if some of you, maybe with experience in site architecture, would have insight into how to address this issue? Thanks Alan0 -
Duplicate Page Content, Indexing and Rel Canonical Just DOUBLED! Need Advice to Fix
Last Friday (Penguin 5/2.1) my website shot way off the grid and I noticed in my MOZ PRO Campaign dashboard that all of the following just doubled in numbers on my website: duplicate page content, Google indexing, and rel canonicals. I also noticed that some of my pages, images, tags and categories now added a /page/2/ or a -2. I just changed noindex for tags, but indexing for media, pages, posts, and categories. I'm currently using All In One SEO for a plugin. Any advice would be much appreciated as I'm stuck on the issue. relconical.png Duplicate-Page-Content.png [Duplicate Content II](Duplicate Content II) index1.png
Moz Pro | | CelebrityPersonalTrainer0 -
Duplicate pages with canonical links still show as errors
On our CMS, there are duplicate pages such as /news, /news/, /news?page=1, /news/?page=1. From an SEO perspective, I'm not too worried, because I guess Google is pretty capable of sorting this out, but to be on the safe side, I've added canonical links. /news itself has no link, but all the other variants have links to "/news". (And if you go wild and add a bunch of random meaningless parameters, creating /news/?page=1&jim=jam&foo=bar&this=that, we will laugh at you and generate a canonical link back to "/news". We're clever like that.) So far so good. And everything appears to work fine. But SEOMoz is still flagging up errors about duplicate titles and duplicate content. If you click in, you'll see a "Note" on each error, showing that SEOMoz has found the canonical link. So SEOMoz knows the duplication isn't a problem, as we're using canonical links exactly the way they're supposed to be used, and yet is still flagging it as an error. Is this something I should be concerned about, or is it just a bug in SEOMoz?
Moz Pro | | LockyDotser0 -
Duplicate page content showing up with proper use of canonical tag
Hi, In the Crawl diagnostics reports, I'm getting lots of duplicate errors warnings e.g. duplicate page title. In most cases these are tracking urls and the page has a canonical tag pointing to the original page. It would be helpful if the crawl analysis reports could separate these out from ones that are of genuine concern. It can also happen when there's a noindex tag on a page. Thanks, Leigh
Moz Pro | | Leighm0 -
Duplicate page title
I own a store www.mzube.co.uk and the scam always says that I have duplicate page titles or duplicate page. What happens is thn I may have for example www.mzube.co.uk/allproducts/page1. And if I hve 20 pages all what will change from each page is the number at the end and all the rest of the page name will be the same but really the pages are if different products. So the scans think I have 20 pages the same but I havent Is this a concern as I don't think I can avoid this Hope you can answer
Moz Pro | | mzube0 -
Duplicate page error from SEOmoz
SEOmoz's Crawl Diagnostics is complaining about a duplicate page error. I'm trying to use a rel=canonical but maybe I'm not doing it right. This page is the original, definitive version of the content: https://www.borntosell.com/covered-call-newsletter/sent-2011-10-01 This page is an alias that points to it (each month the alias is changed to point to the then current issue): https://www.borntosell.com/covered-call-newsletter/latest-issue The alias page above contains this tag (which is also updated each month when a new issue comes out) in the section: Is that not correct? Is the https (vs http) messing something up? Thanks!
Moz Pro | | scanlin0