Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I just have to say I love this particular metaphor. I will be using it frequently from now on when explaining how DA and PA work. Thanks so much, Rand!

Well said, Russ, especially for a "mathy" answer. I am curious, though, would this "ideal document" you describe have a specific word count?

Thanks for your understanding!

Hi there, Josh is correct in that we have a strict no solicitation policy for this forum and do not allow job postings (to prevent the forum from becoming, well, more like a job board and less like a discussion forum). Typically, we close questions seeking recommendations for SEO service providers, including agencies and independent consults, and suggest you check out our list of Moz Recommended Companies or post on Inbound.org's job board. But since you are getting some solid advice on what to look for in an SEO audit (and related tools), I am going to leave this thread open for a while. Thanks so much for your understanding.

Christy

Hi David,

Actually, this forum was built from scratch, in-house.

We are really glad you enjoy using it! I'd love to know what you features you must appreciate, which ones you could do without, and what you'd like to see added to make using the forum a much better experience for everyone.

Also, I am curious what forum platform solutions you've already looked into for your own forum, and how they compare. Would you mind sharing? (No pressure, of course.)

Great question, thanks!

Christy

Today's YouMoz post, Accidental SEO Tests: When On-Page Optimization Ceases to Matter, explores the theory that there is an on-page optimization saturation point, "beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank" for the keywords/keyword topics you are targeting. In other words, you can optimize your page for search to the point that it is 100% topically relevant to query and intent.

Do you believe there exists such a thing as a page that is 100% topically relevant? What are your thoughts regarding there being an on-page optimization saturation point, beyond which further on-page optimization no longer improves your ability to rank? Let's discuss!

Hi Sean! I hope you are having a great weekend. Getting down to business, this is a friendly reminder that we don't allow job posting in this forum. Accordingly, I have edited your question and am locking this thread to comments. In your search for a contractor, you may want to check out our list of Recommended Companies, and/or consider posting on Inbound.org's job board.

Thanks for your understanding, and best of luck in your search!

Christy

Hi there, thanks for your question. In addition to the excellent questions Dmitrii has raised, I would like to know if you are producing a brand new website, with original content, with the exception of a hotel directory. (Or will the content on your site consist primarily of duplicate content from an existing site?)

Hi Oliver, you've received some great responses to your question. Did any of them help answer your question? Let us know, thanks!

Christy

Hi Moosa, do you have an update on this issue?

Hi BeyondIndigo,

I just did a nonpersonalized search in Google-US for Volunteer Veterinary Hospital in Knoxville, and you client came up as the first organic result in the SERPs. My hunch is that you are not ranking for the search terms you are tracking in the tools you mentioned, and you are not tracking the search terms that are actually driving organic search traffic to your client's site.

In order to tell for sure, though, please provide us with more information about the tools you are using, and what, exactly, they are showing you that has led you to believe that your client's site has no presence in Google's search results.

Finally, if your client's site has been verified in Google Search Console, (formerly known as Googlewebmaster Tools), you can see how often the site is showing up in the SERPs, and for what search queries, in the Search Analytics Report.

Hope to hear from you soon!

Christy

Hi J.P.,

Page depth refers to the number of clicks it takes a user (or search engine) to get to a page from the home page. And yes, this can negatively impact SEO, as well as usability, if it takes too many clicks for users and search engines to get to a page. (Search engines may use up their crawl budget, while users may simply leave your site and go to one that is easier to find what the are looking for.)

However, the number of clicks it takes to navigate to a page doesn't necessarily mirror the URL structure. So, in the example you give, the existing URL makes sense - http://www.domain.com/procedures/breasts/augmentation. It is readable, includes keywords, does not use special characters, avoid stop words, and isn't too long.

If you were going to change the URL structure, I would go with http://www.domain.com/procedures/breastaugmentation over http://www.domain.com/breastaugmentation, unless the only procedure your client does is breast augmentation. But, seeing as there is not a compelling reason to change the URL structure, I would leave it as-is. Even if you perfectly plan and execute all 301-redirects and update every link, you are creating a lot of work for yourself (as well as anyone who links to you, as best practice would be to ask them to update the new link). Furthermore, 301-redirects are known to pass slightly less value over time. Of immediate concern, you should expect fluctuations in the site's performance in the SERPs when making any sitewide change such as this.

For more information on best practices for URL structure, I recommend checking out this post by Rand Fishkin: <a>https://moz.com/blog/15-seo-best-practices-for-structuring-urls</a>.

I hope that helps!

Christy

Hi David, did you see Dmitri's question about where you are getting those errors? We'd love some clarification, and update on the status of this issue. Thanks!

Christy

Hi J.P., you've received some solid advice from Bob. Like he said, though, it is difficult from the example given to tell if your suggested approach is solid. However, detailed answers to these 2 questions should help us get a clearer picture of the situation:

1. Why do you think the existing URL structure is a poor one?

2. Why do you  think the proposed one would be more effective for this particular site in terms of SEO performance?

And, of course, if you are able to provide examples of URLs that provide a bit more detail (and show any differences between the existing and proposed URL structure beyond the addition of a subfolder), that would be great, too!

Looking forward to hearing from you,

Christy

Hi Laura,

Has your question been answered? We'd love an update, thanks!

Christy

Welcome to the Moz community, Charles! Posting the question about Hummingbird and cannibalization in a new thread is a smart move, as it will likely get more attention that way. Assuming your new question is answered, it will also help people who have a similar question be able to find an answer that helps them (when they search this forum). So thanks for doing that.

Christy

Hi J,

Did you see Miriam's response to both of your questions? Just checking...

Christy

Hi Karl, did you see Kristina's question? We'd love an update on your situation, thanks!

Christy

Excellent advice. Thanks for jumping in here!

Hi Kashif,

There a few different ways you can tackle this problem, but each approach has the end goal of making sure all of your clients' indexed product pages contain at least 80% unique content. Are you able to share the domain with us? Looking forward to hearing from you!

Christy