Forum Moderators: phranque
There can/will be about 1000+ pages.
This site is going to stick to one main topic, however, I can easily divide the main topic in about 20 sub topics.
I am tempated for making 20 sub domains for following reasons
1) It is going to be very easy to manage.
2) I can easily track what part of the whole site is getting maximum hits. [I plan to have seperate IP and hosting account for each sub domain]
I am little worried about
1) Confusing people about where to link back.
2) Google. [It is silly, but sence Google famous PR0 and PR2, there is no saying what is next ;)]
3) All the sub domains *will* have lot of cross linking, as the left hand menu on each page will be linking to each sub topic (sub domain)
Now do you guys think I will be better off working on just 1 domains and having tons of content as sub directories or would I be better of working with sub domains.
or, I will be hurting my site by diluting the link backs to seperate sub domains or by interlinking it?
Or you think, besides making it easy for me, I will also be helping the PR of each site - as I am sure there will be good amount of links coming back, and each sub domain will be having original content and will be linking back to other sub domains.
Please help - I am suppose to be starting to work on this monstor in less then 2 weeks.
I mean what if I just cross link only from main page of each sub domain. Cuz, it would really save tons of time and be very easy in updating/modifying web sites.
But still thought of Google famous PR0 and PR2 *bites* :(
I am a huge fan of sub-domains. Run a site search for canonical and you’ll see the posts I’ve made regarding them. My faith in them, as I’ve used them and suggested clients use them, is stronger with every Google update.
Canonicals can be incredibly useful for structuring a site around themes, particularly if you can fill out each of the topics. If you want the separate canonicals to find homes in the directories then approach each as if it stands alone. As to navigation and crosslinking, that’s another story but if it’s any help I’ve seen very large and high PR sites with fairly simple and extensively crosslinked navigation using canonicals. I do caution restraint though with any linking campaign.
As you see though, my approach is not popular with some so I’ve tried to stay low profile on this as a discussion topic. Just had to weigh in here though because I’m bothered when I don’t see them defended. I see canonicals as a real benefit to structuring a large site and in nearly three years of using them I have never had a problem nor do I anticipate one.
If you do decide on them and feel like it please post on your results.
Zeal, I can say for certain, doesn't really care how many pages from a site are listed so long as each one contains unique and content that will be of a non-commercial interest to surfers. I have over 200 pages listed at Zeal for a single site.
As for DMOZ, it's tougher, but then again, DMOZ in general is tougher. I've submitted probably 60-80 pages to DMOZ over the months - 8 of them are in there - none of which are my front/main page, which I'm told is still rotting in the queue since March. I've found, with some exceptions in areas that are "completely unique to the directory", that if there's some information there and it takes the editor more than a couple minutes to sift through it, it'll likely get listed, regardless of whether it's a deep-link or not. (I'm told that this is a fairly unique thing - to have DMOZ list deep-linked pages, but I think rather it's a matter of persistence and catching your editor on a good day more than anything else).
I've been considering adding a sub-domain or two for my site, not for directory listing purposes, but for sheer depth of crawl reasons. I'm wondering if it would help and be worth the massive undertaking involved in getting incoming links pointing in the right place. Obviously, I can set it up so that the old pages still show where the links are coming in, but then I've got duplicate content problems. Or do I?
G.
but for sheer depth of crawl reasons…if it would help and be worth the massive undertaking involved in getting incoming links pointing in the right place - Grumpus
Well Grumpus, this is what I try to do. When I theme a canonical to in essence stand alone {fresh and unique content} I’ve found this to be a nice lure that draws external linking. Spiders run through our sites.
Obviously, I can set it up so that the old pages still show where the links are coming in…
Could you explain that to newbies and those lurking that wonder how that works?
…but then I've got duplicate content problems
Are you asking if you’d have duplicate content problems if you redirect?
explain that to newbies
In essence, when you create a subdomain, it really points to a page or directory within the main domain - deeper in the tree. If I leave the pages where they sit now, the listings I have in search engines will still go to a page that works and shows the content that listing describes (without using a redirect). BUT, that leaves a problem with the fact that "myfile.mydomain.com" and "mydomain.com/myfile" will contain identical content which can get me hurt in the long run. (and since most links are coming into the latter one, Google is likely to keep the old version in the index anyway).
I'm not certain what the penalties are for redirects. I guess that's where my question lies. If I move "mydomain.com/myfile" to "mydomain.com/myNewFile" then point "myfile.mydomain.com" to "/mynewFile" and redirect "/myfile" to the subdomain address, it'll eliminate the channces for a duplicate penalty, but the redirect penalty could hit.
I'm wodering what's better:
1) Leave the thing where it is and forget it.
2) Just put up the subdomain and hope dupe penalties don't hit.
3) Use a Meta Refresh with a "page has moved" note on it.
4) Use a Response.Redirect to just send the user, and the bot to the new page.
Right now, I'm leaning toward #1. Suggestions?
G.
