17 replies to this topic

[remi2611]

hi,
Just i little question. My client owns 2 sites that are both fully duplicated and indexed (approx 18k pages indexed in yahoo for both of them) : one is a governemental site and the other one is not. Duplicate content is wrong but what would be the best way to resolve this issue ... ?

[EGOL]

We don't know why they created dupe sites for this content. Perhaps there is a special reason?

If I owned them and if they were 100% duplicates, I would do a page by page 301 redirect to merge them. I would probably move them to the .gov but there may be special reasons why they are using the other domain.

[SEO Honolulu]

I totally agree with egol on that. For the sake of branding and better site activity tracking, I would see if it's possible to bring everything over to the domain/site that gets more traffic and produces better conversions (contacts, purchases, etc.).

I have a client who was doing the exact same thing and after bringing them over to 1 URL, they're traffic increased, conversions increased, and both Google and Y! treated the site with more ranking love on their keywords.

[Halfdeck]

A few questions

1) What are their home page toolbar PageRanks (TBPR)?
2) How many results do you see when you run a site:www.domain.com/* query? (for example, if the domain name is car.com, type "site:www.car.com/*" into Google and look at the number of results)

[remi2611]

1. PR7 for the .com and PR6 for the .gov
2. almost the same results for both of them...

My question is ... because of the high number of pages indexed (18k), shouldnt i be penalized by redirecting everything from the .gov to the .com at once ?

Ive heard that it's better to do not more than 5k pages at once...

Thanks gentlemans

Remi

Edited by remi2611, 04 August 2007 - 09:42 PM.

[rustybrick]

Are both currently ranking well?

Do they both have the same design and navigational architecture?

Are they hosting on the same server or server farm?

[remi2611]

Are both currently ranking well?
yes

Do they both have the same design and navigational architecture?
yes same design and navigation

Are they hosting on the same server or server farm?
yes same server

[phaithful]

My 2 cents.

If both are ranking well, don't do a thing. You're now occupying 2 spots (or possibly more if you have indents) out of 10.

However, make sure you have a plan ready if you notice a drop due to duplicate content. More likely than not, 1 of the sites that is deemed "less trusted" will drop off the SeRPs and the other will retain it's rankings. However if you notice that your rankings decrease and one of the sites has been pushed off (probably into supplemental) than you'll need to have a 301 plan in place to leverage the links from the now unranked site.

With regards to the 5k page limit, I've never been so confident on the 301 redirect limits. I've 301 some pretty big sites... 1k, 5k, 10k... whatever it maybe, you'll definitely want to do your 301 redirects in phases. The initial phase being the benchmark... and manageable subsequent phases more for a QA perspective than from a SEO perspective.

At this point just treat it as any other 301 domain name change. Initially 301 redirect a small subset of your pages that has decent rankings ("2nd SeRP page" type of stuff). Hopefully you'll see some the accumulation of links take effect and your ranking will increase. Take note of the time it takes for the 301s to kick in, this will be your benchmark for all the other pages and will help you forecast future changes.

Then systematically move all the other pages. I assume that you site is broken up into a logical information architecture. Use the IA as a way to approach the move.

This is all under the assumption that you're currently happy with your overall ranking and that you're ranking within the Top 3 for your major keywords. If you're not, the benefits of pro-actively 301 redirecting one of your sites to the other may help you get into that coveted #1 or #2 position.

You'll probably want to do some number crunching to figure out if on average a foot print of 1 placement out of 10 at a higher position is better than 2 placements at a lower position. More likely than not, if you're 2 placements are in positions 6 or below, you're better off going for the 1 placement at a higher ranking.

Yet another approach would be to cannibalize one of the sites in order to promote newer smaller niche sites. Since I'm unsure what the content is, but I know it's content that is appropriate to a .gov site... it would be the equivalent of taking the "Water Conservation pages" and 301 redirecting them to the new "Water Department Website" that has it's own TLD.

Edited by phaithful, 06 August 2007 - 11:07 PM.

[rustybrick]

I agree.

I would keep things in place for now.

But I would get things ready to do a massive 301 redirect from one site to the other, just in case one site is deindexed.

Also, I would move one site to a different server and I would change the design and fundamental code on one site, so it differs more.

[remi2611]

Thanks guys

Any other advices... ?

[victor363]

You might find this article on combining pages a worthwhile read.

[JohnMu]

There is no duplicate content penalty . [this is all just for Google, I don't know for sure how the others handle it]

The only penalties I have ever seen with regards to duplicate content is when a site copies content from multiple other sites, eg a scraper site or a site that just copies content from several sources (feeds, news pages, etc). I have never seen any sort of penalty applied to sites that are full duplicates.

There are two possible situations at the moment, for any given search term:

1. The highest ranking is shown, the lower ranking one is filtered from the results. This should be how it is happening, but sometimes it takes a while for Google to recognize that the pages are duplicates.

2. Both versions are shown, depending on their relative rankings below each other or with other sites in between. This sometimes happens when pages are not fully parsed yet.

I think it's safe to assume that over time only one of the sites will be shown for any particular search query.

By 301 redirecting one to the other you can concentrate the value of both sites into a single one. That can make sense if you need the extra value. If the page shown is returned as the top search result, it won't change much by concentrating the value (other than cementing the top slot, in case the competition comes).

The only possible negative issues I imagine regarding a full 301 are:
- loss of trust (eg when moving from .gov to .com, similarly perhaps from .com to .gov) bringing a drop in new links
- strange things happening during the transfer (it's getting better, but it can still happen)

If you are ranking #1 for the search terms and if the competition is not getting anywhere close, it's certainly not something that needs to be done right away -- but it's something that would probably make sense to plan sensibly and execute at a time when a drop in rankings/listings wouldn't matter that much (summer break, vacation time, etc).

John

[pageoneresults]

Ah, one of my favorite topics, discussing the .gov TLD (or any Trusted TLD).

I'd give this careful consideration before implementing any changes. First, why are we redirecting from a .gov to a .com? Is it because of the TBPR (Toolbar PageRank™)? Don't let that be the only determining factor in what you do here. While the .com may be at PR7, it could be a weak PR7, its like the Richter magnitude scale, it could be a 7.1 and the .gov could be at a 6.9, that's close. And, its difficult to determine PR at that finite of a level.

How long have the domains been registered? At the same time? If yes, then that levels the playing field somewhat, you have two (02) powerful TLDs at your disposal. Personally I think the .gov is the one you'll want to focus on unless there are reasons why you think the .com should replace it.

You may also want to consult the .gov Registration FAQs (https://www.dotgov.gov/help.aspx). I do believe there would be some restrictions in place when redirecting from .gov to .com. The guidelines are fairly strict when it comes to owning a .gov TLD, it is protected by the sole Registrar.

Edited by pageoneresults, 09 August 2007 - 10:23 AM.

[ChuckTM]

One site should be optimized for Google and
the other for Yahoo or MSN. That's the only
way to get #1 on both anyway in most markets.

There is a duplicate content penalty....
the second version is thrown in the trash and doesn't show on Google.
Maybe not a "penalty".
It gets snubbed.

Edited by ChuckTM, 05 September 2007 - 12:30 AM.

[remi2611]

The client will keep the .com because of the marketing campaign that surrounds it. I presume that having a .gov redirected properly to a .com will have a positive impact on the rankings because (other than also solving the duplicated content issue) Google will give the .com a "trust boost".

Also, i don't think that i will get penalized from porting 18k pages at once because of the trust Google gives to the governemental domain.

I will keep you informed on what will happen.

Thanks guys

[ChuckTM]

There is no "Trust" factor for .gov's , .edu's or any other class of domains.

There is a PERCIEVED trust factor.
Because when we see those domains linking, they have more "power".

They do, but for other very obvious reasons besides
the name they are using.

They are older. ( In Internet Time: They are from God's Creation Week)
They are stable.
They are linked out to authority sites.
They get good traffic.
They have stable, continuous growth.
They rarely loose links.

ANY site with these characteristics gets "power" from Google no matter WHAT the domain is.

.GOV & .EDU mean nothing special in themselves.

[phaithful]

One site should be optimized for Google and the other for Yahoo or MSN. That's the only way to get #1 on both anyway in most markets.

I'll have to disagree with that statement. I've worked on plenty of sites across various industries where you don't need to optimize separately for each engine.

[ChuckTM]

I'll have to disagree with that statement. I've worked on plenty of sites across various industries where you don't need to optimize separately for each engine.

I stand corrected.

That's the only way to get #1 on both anyway in SOME markets.