Forum Moderators: open
Some of my articles have up to 20 sub-topic while some have only 3.
What are your opinions about the same. Is there a user and Google friendly way to structure large articles?
Any response will be greatly appreciated.
Thank You.
And, if you include subnav within the articles section to link to the various parts of each article, and the other articles, so much the better, from both a user and SEO point of view.
Thank you
I may be misunderstanding, but if the articles are broken up, and all the content is original, then I don't see a problem at all.
As I read the question, the concern isn't about the content of the articles being duped, but it's about a list of, say, up to 20 text-rich links being repeated verbatim on up to 20 subpages of the article.
I worry that since theses links are going to be common to all the sub-topic pages of a particular article...
I think that dividing an article up into "20 sub-topics" and using your links these way is probably much too many for the user as well as the search engines. Twenty sounds like a whole section of a website... or at least like several articles... not like one article.
3, 4, or 5 pages is much more what I'm used to seeing in an article... though I've occasionally seen up to a dozen or so pages on extensive product comparisons, which can include introductions and an overview, a page on each product, and then several pages of conclusions.
Generally, though, you don't find all of the links to all of the articles on each page, unless the links are just page numbers (which, in my opinion, is a terrible way both for visitors and search engines).
What are your opinions about the same. Is there a user and Google friendly way to structure large articles?
If the article truly has different logical sections, like the product comparison example I cite above, then dividing the article up works well for both users and Google.
Dividing the article up improves the focus of each section (ie, page), and providing a descriptive link to each section lets both Google and the readers know what the section is about. Separate pages contain optimizing elements like titles and headings that allow you to optimize the content further than you might if the pages were all combined in one.
Generally, the articles I've seen divided like this might have a table of content links at the beginning, and perhaps a recap at the end... and then at the bottom of each page you might have a "Previous - Blue Widgets" and a "Next - Red Gizmos" kind of link, which would navigate you through the article.
Repeating article links more than that is excessive, in my opinion, and probably would be seen as duped material. As a reader, I'd find it a drag.
Google is also taking some pains to filter links that are too similar, and, if you had too much repetition, they might well think you're playing games with them, which is what I know you're trying to avoid.
Welcome to the forums, btw.
Is it wise to do this:
Put the article's table of contents in a separate page titled & H1'd "Table Of Contents" and "included" on every page of the article.
This will surely be more convenient while making the site. The user will never see the difference.
I know if the navigation etc. is done by includes on every page, google is cool with that.
What does google think about putting the same include (containing 20 text-rich links being repeated verbatim) on some pages but not all the pages of a site?
Thanks
So while I agree with RC that five or less is most common, if it really makes sense to break it into 20 then so be it.
And, that would not IMO be enough to get you into any trouble with the SE's at all, regardless of weather you handle it as table of contents above all segements of the article, or common nav elements to just that article's 20 pages. FWIW.
Just as an FYI, if it is done via includes, the SE's will see the nav elements, but that as noted should be no problem in this case.
I've had battles, though, with coders, who... because they use includes... tend to like to template page content. Much of what they want to template is, in my opinion, probably better off not being templated.
I also agree that if you really need 20 sections for an article, go ahead and do that. But whether you have 5 sections or 20 sections, I myself would not put all the Contents links on every page. That's a monolithic block of links for users, and it's a monolithic block of links for search engines... and all the link blocks are the same.
I know if the navigation etc. is done by includes on every page, google is cool with that.
Google won't zap your pages as dupes because of common links on every page. But it's generally felt that Google might not weigh global nav link anchor text as much as links from paragraphs within your pages. It's also generally felt that Google likes "natural" variation in link text.
What's "natural" in your situation is debatable. I could make arguments that because most designers like to copy and paste, identical links are in fact more natural, so varying the text might be seen as manipulation. But I tend to go with observations that Google is combatting link spam and scraper spam by downgrading links when the anchor text is all the same, so I'd vote for some variation.
On the other hand, I do think that if you had 20 links on every page and started varying those on each page, that would be seen as unnatural. That's why I suggest just a table of contents and then two links, one customized for the next section and one customized for the previous section, on every page.
Incidentally, from what I'm observing, I'd say your repeated block of links would give you a bunch of trouble on Yahoo right now.
Put the article's table of contents in a separate page titled & H1'd "Table Of Contents" and "included" on every page of the article.
If I understand you correctly, this sounds like you want to optimize the page for the phrase "Table Of Contents," which makes no sense to me whatsoever. It's a little like having a title and heading saying "Welcome to Our Home Page." Instead of "Table of Contents," how about something like "The History of Mechanical Widgets," or whatever your overall topic is?
And be sure to include several introductory paragraphs, optimized for "the history of mechanical widgets" in addition to your contents links. You don't want a page of all links, but you do want text on the page that relates to your title and heading, and which contains your target phrases.
