Forum Moderators: skibum
My problem, and the reason for my question, is pretty straightforward. The new site I am creating will be an amalgamation of two of my previous sites, plus some new content. Now I have read on this forum (somewhere can't remember exactly) that Google don't like the same content, i.e., identical articles on different websites.
In effect this is what will be happenning with my new website, all the articles on sites 1 and 2 will be repeated on the new site.
Because of the links to my site(s) in other forums I cannot simple 'close down' the two older sites. I would much prefer to keep them running so that anyone clicking on a link in a forum will immediately get access to the information they want.
Rather than 'upset' Google are there any other companies that do a similar thing to Adsense that I could perhaps enrol in and then remove the Google adsense code and insert an alternative?
I'm sure I did read something about an alternative some years ago, but can't remember exactly what the company was called (advantage comes to mind, but I might be wrong.)
Does anyone have any suggestions?
I'm open to suggestions
all the articles on sites 1 and 2 will be repeated on the new site.
Duplicate content! You are unlikely to rank naturally very well in the SERPs.
The duplicate content is not intentional. I simply have two sites which woiuld do better if they were actually one. As my sites are IT support related it is better for me to have one support site covering all Microsoft Windows versions rather than two separate ones, one covering Vista the other XP.
I would have thought that once the new site is up and running that most of my visitors freom my two other sites will migrate to the new one, but while they are earning money via advertising I may as well keep them going. I would rather have changed the the advertising supplier than have the other two sites compete against the Google ads.
The potential for damage to your site is not from Google Adsense, but from Google SEARCH; Google does not wish to bore searchers with multiple pages listed that have identical content ... so duplicates tend not to be easily found in a search. And it may be the NEW site that suffers, not the two old ones.
A better solution - if you are committed to the new domain - is to 301 permanently redirect visitors from the old sites to the new; this is not a move to be made without thought and preparation, however, so you'd be wise to read up on it first.
For example, it would be much easier and simpler if the new folder structure is the same, allowing one site-wide 301, rather than having to deal with individual files and folders.
Google does not wish to bore searchers with multiple pages listed that have identical content ... so duplicates tend not to be easily found in a search. And it may be the NEW site that suffers, not the two old ones.
Hmmm. On a frequent basis, I seem to find the same content on different sites when I search.
If Google really did a good job of not having duplicate content show up in search results, that would remove a significant portion of the concern about content thieves - not to mention the thieves' motivation for copying your content.
FarmBoy
I'd certainly not recommend it.
Google's imperfection is understandable; what we humans see as 'duplicate' may be the same product description - but surrounded by different navigation and trimmings ... not necessarily duplicate by Google's definition.
But in the case described here, I'd imagine a higher-than-average risk. Wouldn't you?
But in the case described here, I'd imagine a higher-than-average risk. Wouldn't you?
I really don't know. There is no shortage of articles, blog posts, etc. that warn of the dire consequences of duplicate content, but as to how much is fiction and how much is factual, I have no idea.
On a related note, if you read SEO forums, there is no shortage of warnings of dire consequences if you do this or if you don't do that. I don't spend a lot of time chasing the latest fads and I'm sure I do some things others would tell me will cause me to suffer in the rankings. Yet I have maintained the number one spot for the top five search terms for my main site for a long time. So when I read similar things now, I stop to think whether what I'm reading has substance.
Sometimes I don't know and just have to rely on my own judgement based on whatever solid information I can find.
FarmBoy
I have two IT support websites, one referencing Windows XP support and the other Windows Vista support. About 5 years ago I was given the opportunity to 'piggyback' the XP site as a subdomain on someone elses website. When Windows Vista launched I was again offered the same deal (it cost me nothing to run my sites from this other domain).
Currently the XP support site has a monthly visit total of around 28,000, whereas the Vista site averages 60-65,000 per month. Okay it's not a lot of traffic but it does bring in a regular monthly paycheck from Google. Once again, not a fortune, but i'm happy.
When Vista launched in Jan 2007 I added another tab to my XP site for Vista support then decided to create a separate website for Vista. I simply wanted one site with the name XP and the other Vista rather than amalgamating the two sites under an XP masthead.
A few months ago I managed to buy the Winuser.co.uk (this site isn't even parked yet)domain name and decided to amalgamate all the XP sitew and Vista site under the one domain (this is where the duplicate content comes in because, to all intent and purpose, the XP and Vista site would still be running.)
The new content will revolve around Microsoft Windows 7 but as this operating system will not be available for 12 months or so I thought it would be easier to transfer the XP and Vista sites to the new domain and then add the new content as and when it was available.
That was my theory, anyway. I'm not particularly 'up' on the workings of Google. I just put the code on my site and it does what it has to do. Channels etc are beyond me and I couldn't even tell you which page took the most ad money. CPM/CPC just lose me. I could probably earn more money from my site but I simply don't have the time to try different things.
To be honest I never even took the search rankings into account. For me the websites are a past time rather than a business. I admit that I have learnt more since posting this question than in the four years Google has been running on my site.
As it stands at the moment it looks as if I may have to follow Quadrille's advise and, rather than leave the sites running, insert a 301 to redirect people to the new domain - that is assuming the Domain I am using for my XP and Vista sites accepts 301's. If not I may simply have to insert a redirect code onto each and every page.
Whichever way it is goping to take a few months before I get the content of both sites amalgamated into the new site. I would have perhaps waited until the release of Windows 7 when I could add this content too, but I am now paying for the new site and, without contatn being displayed on it, it is simply dead money.
