Should we crawl user profiles?
-
Hi there,
We have a service whereby we measure people's personalities and reputation.
We would like to be able to search: "Reputation of XXX" and you would find the particular reputation profile of that person.
However the differences for each page are limited. Effectively the name, and a few numbers that measure such reputation.
Would crawling these profiles affect us due to "thin content"? Would you consider any alternative strategy?
Thanks!
-
Yes, you probably wont do too well in rankings if you just have a single number/name difference for many pages. Maybe add in more unique information related to that person? e.g. where you got your information, where you got information from, last 3 tweets/status updates, etc. Although this is all aggregate content (which Google still considers inferior to unique content) it should help you rank in addition to giving your users more useful information.
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
-
Rank brain and User stats
We have a company that has very good link metrics (much better than competitors), great content, conversions and generates 3x the amount of turnover the other companies do. The issue is we are being challenged on our number one keywords by this competitor selling lower value items to get to 70% of the same amount of customers as us and I feel we can put this down to Rank brain and us having a strong sales force and due to this very few make it back to the websites (30% are new and 70% are repeat and for repeat we have a strong sales force unlike that competitor which catch the reorder before the make it back to the site again) so we lose the ctr, brand etc from the repeat not returning (the competitor only sells though the website so all return) In effect they have 500 customers and we have 200 so Ctr, brand, back to serp would be stronger could this effect the rankings? If you look at it like this Two companies with 500 customers (200 new and 300 repeat) 500 customers to the first all have to order online so 500 customers going back to serps, CTR up due to them searching to get the site up etc 500 customers for the second but 300 (the repeat) go though the sales lines and find the number on the email or agents call them when predicted to order again so never have to go back to the site = 40% less CTR and staying on the site customers
Algorithm Updates | | BobAnderson0 -
Is "Author Rank," User Comments Driving Losses for YMYL Sites?
Hi, folks! So, our company publishes 50+ active, disease-specific news and perspectives websites -- mostly for rare diseases. We are also tenacious content creators: between news, columns, resource pages, and other content, we produce 1K+ pieces of original content across our network. Authors are either PhD scientists or patients/caregivers. All of our sites use the same design. We were big winners with the August Medic update in 2018 and subsequent update in September/October. However, the Medic update in March and de-indexing bug in April were huge losers for us across our monetized sites (about 10 in total). We've seen some recovery with this early June update, but also some further losses. It's a mixed bag. Take a look at this attached MOZ chart, which shows the jumps and falls around the various Medic updates. The pattern is very similar on many of our sites. As per JT Williamson's stellar article on EAT, I feel like we've done a good job in meeting those criteria, which has left we wondering what isn't jiving with the new core updates. I have two theories I wanted to run past you all: 1. Are user comments on YMYL sites problematic for Google now? I was thinking that maybe user comments underneath health news and perspectives articles might be concerning on YMYL sites now. On one hand, a healthy commenting community indicates an engaged user base and speaks to the trust and authority of the content. On the other hand, while the AUTHOR of the article might be a PhD researcher or a patient advocate, the people commenting -- how qualified are they? What if they are spouting off crazy ideas? Could Google's new update see user comments such as these as degrading the trust/authority/expertise of the page? The examples I linked to above have a good number of user comments. Could these now be problematic? 2. Is Google "Author Rank" finally happening, sort of? From what I've read about EAT -- particularly for YMYL sites -- it's important that authors have “formal expertise” and, according to Williamson, "an expert in the field or topic." He continues that the author's expertise and authority, "is informed by relevant credentials, reviews, testimonials, etc. " Well -- how is Google substantiating this? We no longer have the authorship markup, but is the algorithm doing its due diligence on authors in some more sophisticated way? It makes me wonder if we're doing enough to present our author's credentials on our articles, for example. Take a look -- Magdalena is a PhD researcher, but her user profile doesn't appear at the bottom of the article, and if you click on her name, it just takes you to her author category page (how WordPress'ish). Even worse -- our resource pages don't even list the author. Anyhow, I'd love to get some feedback from the community on these ideas. I know that Google has said there's nothing to do to "fix" these downturns, but it'd sure be nice to get some of this traffic back! Thanks! 243rn10.png
Algorithm Updates | | Michael_Nace1 -
Celebrity Profile On The Side of Google For High Profile Person
Hello! When I google "Justin Timberlake" I see web search results and a sidebar. See image below: http://screencast.com/t/qwYeiFZQRzT How does one get their results to display like this? Is this something that Google creates automatically or is it something the celebrity initiates/creates on their behalf. Does the celebrity have any options to choose from as to what displays on this sidebar? What is this called? I look forward to your response. qwYeiFZQRzT
Algorithm Updates | | InternetRep0 -
If our link profile is too "blog link" heavy, will that be all that bad?
We own a site that lends itself extremely well to getting boat loads of links, only down side is that those on the boat are all bloggers. We are selling a product that retails for $6.89 per unit. They are for women. Our target market is any woman/girl who is between 14 and 50. Even better, our cost per unit is only about $0.40. So what we've been doing is sending them out by the hundreds to legit fashion blogs all the way down to blogspot mommy bloggers and the reviews have poured in, literally all of them positive. Moral of the story, we have a good product, and no shortage of bloggers that would be willing to write us up a legit, human written (by a red-blooded American none-the-less) on almost exclusively legit blogs. We're not trying to manipulate what they say, how they link to us, what anchor text they use or anything. We're just sending them product, asking that they do a review and give us a link and that's it. Our worry is that given the nature of the site and the product offering, it's going to be easy to get these legit blog links, but more difficult to get links that "aren't on blogs". Is this going to hurt us, or will Big Google be kind and realize this isn't shady manipulation. It's legit part of our ongoing effort to get the word out. Further evidence that our campaign isn't to manipulate (although we all know we're in it for the links) is that so far 75% of our sales have been driven by these reviews. A few of the bigger sites that have done reviews have each directly resulted in 10+ sales from that single review. So what are all ya'll's thoughts? I suspect we'll be OK, but wanted some others to provide their views.
Algorithm Updates | | AarcMediaGroup0 -
Profile Picture Display Next to Map on Google Search
On a recent Google search, I noticed that the top result also displayed the Google map of the location next to it but aside from that, it also displayed that business' Google+ Profile picture. I'm wondering how that is done. We have a Google+ account as well with an image associated with our business. At this point, the map doesn't even display for our business, but how does one get the map and the profile picture to appear on search results? Here's a link to the search result in question:
Algorithm Updates | | atuomala
http://www.google.com/search?q=tech+squad&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS511US511&aq=f&oq=tech+squad&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS511US511&sclient=psy-ab&q=tech+squad+wi&oq=tech+squad+wi&gs_l=serp.3..0l2j0i30l2.6041.6590.0.6592.3.3.0.0.0.0.79.158.2.2.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.4.psy-ab.DoA-PSlyt-A&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.42768644,d.cGE&fp=b5d841bb1ab219dc&biw=1440&bih=785 tech_squad_serp.jpg0 -
Since authorship markup requires a domain email, how can a community website allow users to link their Google+ profile?
It seems that Google now requires authors to have a valid email on the domain. This is easy for the traditional web publication. But what about community websites like SEOmoz? How can a community website allow users to link their Google+ profile? Will community websites like SEOmoz be required to 1. Give all users a domain email 2. Ask users to validate the email address with Google? Seems overly complicated.
Algorithm Updates | | designquotes0 -
HI, i am pro member of Seo moz, i just want to know , How much time take Seomoz for Crawl Diagnostics.
HI, i am pro member of Seo moz, i just want to know , How much time take Seomoz for Crawl Diagnostics. Because last evening i have changes in my website pages as seomoz suggested but i am not getting any changes in Crawl Diagnostics.
Algorithm Updates | | jaybinary0 -
Is URL appearance defined by crawling or by XML sitemap
I am having a problem developing a sitemap because I have long URLs that are made by zend. They go like this: http://myagingfolks.com/professionals/20661/social-workers/pennsylvania-civi-stanger Because these URL's are long and are fed by Zend when I try to call them all up, to put on the sitemap, the system runs out of memory and crashes. Do you know what part of a search result, in google, say, comes from the URL? Would it be fine for me to submit to google only www.myagingfolks.com/professionals/20661. Does the crawler find that the URL is indeed http://myagingfolks.com/professionals/20661/social-workers/pennsylvania-civi-stanger or does it go with just what the sitemap tells it?
Algorithm Updates | | Jordanrg0