Library·SOP·SEO
Decide which overlapping pages to keep, clarify, consolidate or investigate using Google Search Console.
Last reviewed: · Editorial review
Clarity, structure and references reviewed in this version. This is not a test in a live account.
Decide which overlapping pages to keep, clarify, consolidate or investigate using Google Search Console.
This SOP covers:
This does not cover:
Keyword cannibalization means overlapping pages interfere with the result the website needs. Two pages receiving impressions for the same query only start an investigation: they can serve different useful tasks, appear at different times or reflect normal duplicate handling.
Make an editable copy of the Competing-page Diagnosis Plan supplied with this guide. Start Here records your setup, Export Log preserves each view, Query Screen accounts for query rows, Query Pages compares reported pages, Page Checks records actual content and canonicals, and Group Decisions holds the final recommendations. Fictional Example uses invented inputs to teach the choices.
Ask the owner whether the review covers the whole website or a meaningful section, such as all tomato-growing articles and their associated product pages. Enter Website / property, Agreed scope and Scope exclusions in Start Here. Ask what visitors should accomplish and which pages matter; enter Visitor task / important pages. If purpose or priorities are missing, write Not provided and the exact question in Owner questions, then continue collecting evidence.
Open Google Search Console and select the property for this website. Open Performance → Search results and choose Search type = Web. Clear old query or page filters. Record the exact property and any intended country, device or search-appearance filters under Search type / filters; write All when unrestricted. Clicks are visits from these Google results; impressions are recorded appearances in them.
Use the Date control to compare useful periods and record the exact dates.
Choose complete days for Current dates and a same-length prior or seasonally comparable period for Comparison dates. For example, compare 28 complete days with the preceding 28; a seasonal business may need the same season from an available earlier year. Use a longer available period if the shorter view is too sparse. Do not include a recent day marked preliminary.
Ask about promotions, seasonality, page changes and known events during the periods. Enter them in Comparison caveat and copy the report’s update text into Report update text. If useful earlier data is unavailable, write Unavailable in Comparison dates and keep later comparison cells blank. The current pages and data can still support a limited diagnosis.
Create a folder on your computer named Competing pages, followed by the website and today’s date. Enter its path in Evidence folder. Keep unchanged exports there and use the workbook for your interpretation.
A query is the phrase someone searched. Build candidate topic groups from the whole available export, rather than starting with a few assumed competing pages. Search Console omits some queries and limits its ordinary exports.
Preserve the full available Queries rows for each selected period.
For a whole-property review, leave Page unrestricted. For a section review, use a Page filter that matches the agreed section, such as URLs containing /tomato-guides/. Record its exact value in Export Log → View / exact filters. This discovers the section’s queries; you will later remove this page restriction to look for other pages answering those queries.
Set Date to the exact Current dates as a single period, then open Queries. Use Export → Download CSV and save the complete export in Evidence folder. Open the exported Queries table and count its data rows, excluding the header. Add an Export Log row with a unique Export ID, exact filters/dates, Saved file / link, Row type = Queries and Rows available.
If Comparison dates are available, set that exact single period with the same other filters and export its Queries table in the same way. Give it a different Export ID. This captures visible queries that appeared in either period. Do not fabricate a comparison export when history is unavailable.
Copy each Queries table’s complete query column into Query Screen → Query, adding its Export ID beside every row. Append the next export below it and add workbook rows as needed. Preserve repeated phrases from different exports so each source row remains accounted for. You only need to investigate an identical phrase once with the chosen comparison view.
Record each export’s count and limitations in Export Log → Limitation / note and Start Here → Export row counts / limits. Ordinary report exports include at most 1,000 representative rows. Reaching 1,000 suggests a truncated view; fewer rows still omit anonymous or otherwise unavailable queries. If the view is large, export useful focused sections or query topics using one explicit filter at a time and append all their query rows with new Export IDs.
Screen every Query Screen row and retain its decision.
In Plain topic / likely reader task, describe what the words suggest: learn to water tomato pots, buy a starter kit, or find a local service. Check the website’s matching content when the meaning is unclear. Group related phrases for the same practical task with one Group ID, such as TOMATO-WATER. Shared words alone do not mean the same task.
Use Candidate for an in-scope practical task to check for page overlap, including an owner’s concern about the wrong page. Use Parked for a phrase too broad or unclear to infer a useful task; name the missing question in Reason / parked next question. Use Outside scope only for a deliberate exclusion and give its reason. A familiar brand phrase is not automatically a problem or an exclusion.
Count the classified rows for each Export ID and enter that count in Export Log → Rows accounted for. Match Rows available before moving on. In Screening progress, identify any unfinished exports. Combine work batches into this workbook; do not stop at a fixed number of queries or topics. Give an important unresolved parked topic an Investigate / monitor row in Group Decisions.
Search Console describes pages receiving credited performance during a period. Read the actual pages and indexed canonicals before interpreting that relationship. The report does not show that the pages appeared together or caused each other to decline.
For each unique Candidate phrase, restore the chosen Date comparison, Web and other Start Here filters. Remove the discovery Page restriction, then select the phrase in Queries or add Query → Exact query with that phrase. Confirm the query filter is exact and open Pages. This shows other reported pages for that phrase within the accessible property, including pages outside the original section.
Preserve each exact-query Pages view and all its available member URLs.
Enable Clicks and Impressions, then export this filtered comparison view as CSV into Evidence folder. Add an Export Log row with a new Export ID, the exact query and filters, both date ranges, Saved file / link, Row type = Query Pages and the available page-row count. If only current history is available, save the current view and name that limit.
For every exported Pages row, enter Group ID, Exact query, Page URL, Current clicks, Current impressions, Comparison clicks and Comparison impressions in Query Pages. Match the actual column date labels to Start Here. Add Export ID / view. Retain reported pages outside the original section: they may answer the same task. Copy genuine numeric zero; leave unavailable values blank and explain them in Data note.
Check any exported zero that corresponds to ~, a dash or unavailable data in the live view; Search Console can export an unavailable value as zero. Leave that worksheet value blank and record why. Click difference and Impression difference calculate current minus comparison; for 30 current clicks and 55 comparison clicks, the difference is -25. A blank input must leave its difference blank.
Match that export’s Rows accounted for to Rows available, then remove the query filter before opening the next unique Candidate phrase. If you click a page to examine its trend, clear that page filter before returning to the group. Preserve the original date comparison; changing a dimension to Compare can replace it. Add rows and extend the worksheet formulas/dropdowns if needed.
Read every unique page found in each Group ID and check its intended role.
Open the public Page URL and read its main content, headings and offer. In Page Checks, enter Group ID, Page URL, What the page helps a visitor do, and Main content / unique useful material. A growing tutorial and a product page can share tomato words while answering different tasks. Record a missing or inaccessible page as a limit, rather than guessing its contents.
Ask the owner whether each page serves a needed audience, location, product, format or other role. Enter Owner reason to keep URL. If two articles repeat the same checklist, ask whether one maintained answer would meet the need. Record unknown answers and the exact question. Do not choose a retirement or preferred URL from traffic alone.
Compare the group’s exact query phrases with each page’s task. Enter Current page / topic fit: suitable, a specific role gap, or unclear with a reason. For example, a buying query leading to a tutorial titled Best starter kit may indicate a misleading promise even when the tutorial itself should stay. An impression for a broad phrase by itself does not show the wrong page.
A canonical is the URL used to represent duplicate or very similar pages in search. For each unique Page URL, follow the linked SOP's URL Inspection and indexed-canonical checks. In Page Checks record Indexed result / last crawl, User-declared canonical and Google-selected canonical, copying exact URLs when shown. Record missing fields, access limits or a disagreement in Canonical comparison / limit, plus Evidence date / note. You are collecting context, not requesting indexing or changing the page.
Read the whole group’s Query Pages and Page Checks together. Name the observed changes in Group Decisions → Overlap and period evidence: which phrases credited which pages and how their clicks/impressions changed. A falling guide and rising second page warrant investigation, but could reflect different search demand, page changes or other causes. Do not add page impressions to reproduce the property chart total or treat average position alone as a harm test.
The useful result can be keeping good pages separate. Make a content recommendation from page purpose, necessary roles and available evidence; use investigation when those facts remain uncertain.
Create one Group Decisions row for each candidate topic group. Enter Group ID / topic and Queries / member URLs, then choose a decision using these rules.
Choose Keep separate when pages serve different useful tasks, audiences or locations and you find no important contradictory role. Also keep an intended duplicate format when its existing canonical treatment suits the owner's need. In Page role / preferred URL, name what each page should continue to do; in Reason and limits, explain why shared query words do not justify retiring it.
Choose Focus / update when the pages need to stay for different tasks, but actual content, title or headings blur those roles or leave a useful answer incomplete. Name the specific page and correction in Page role / preferred URL and Next action / procedure. Explain the observed mismatch in Reason and limits rather than recommending a merge merely because both URLs appeared.
Choose Consolidate when the same visitor task is served by substantially overlapping main content and the owner confirms one maintained answer is enough, with no required separate URL. Compare every group member for accurate, useful completeness, maintainability, a suitable stable address and query fit. Recommend the page best suited to become that answer in Page role / preferred URL, and name useful material to preserve from the others. Search counts support the comparison; the highest-click page is not automatically the right destination.
Choose Investigate / monitor when page purpose, owner requirements, canonical context or comparable query detail is missing or conflicting. In Reason and limits name the exact unknown; in Next action / procedure name the evidence or owner answer needed. A sparse view can justify reviewing a longer available period or returning on an agreed date. Missing history alone does not prevent an otherwise supported content-role decision, but it limits claims about change.
Read Fictional Example and compare its cases with your group.
In the balcony-tomatoes case, the grow guide has 90 current clicks versus 100 earlier, while the kit page has 35 versus 30. Their learn and buy roles are both needed: Keep separate. In the watering case, two pages repeat the same checklist; the owner wants one guide and the complete, maintained watering page is suitable. Consolidate is a content recommendation, even though its 30 versus 55 clicks do not prove the other page caused the drop.
The starter-kit tutorial should keep teaching while the product page sells; a misleading kit heading warrants Focus / update. The sparse case has missing comparison or purpose, so it receives Investigate / monitor with that exact question. The needed print copy already points canonically to the full guide: absent print performance is consistent with canonical credit, not proof of harmful competition. Apply the appropriate reasoning and state any different facts in your case.
If pages overlap but both URLs need to stay, or a duplicate/canonical disagreement requires a search-control choice, use the linked SOP to choose a method for that specific goal. Carry the necessary roles and canonical evidence into Next action / procedure. Keep Investigate / monitor until that question is resolved; do not use noindex as a shortcut for an unwanted ranking page.
Combine the groups into one usable plan. Every action and important uncertainty needs an owner and check; the diagnosis ends before website changes.
Compare the combined Group Decisions before numbering actionable rows in Order / why before next.
First compare importance to the agreed visitor task, then the clarity of the actual problem, available evidence, reach and effort. Resolve a missing fact for an important group before dependent edits. For similar value and certainty, a small clear correction can go before a larger change. Combine all batches; mark order reasons Provisional if priorities are missing. Keep separate rows stay visible without an action number.
Suppose the fictional shop's main task is choosing a kit. The confirmed misleading kit heading can come before the redundant watering checklists because it affects that main task and has a clear correction. If the kit group's intended URL or canonical is instead unresolved, investigate that question before dependent edits. Write the equivalent comparison between your groups in Order / why before next; the example's order is not a fixed rule for every shop.
For every Group Decisions row, fill Owner, Due / review date, Next action / procedure and Check after work. A focus action needs the exact URL and role/content correction; consolidation needs the whole URL group, proposed destination and material to preserve; investigation needs the exact resolving question. For Keep separate, assign the review owner and date, keep the useful roles, and name a review trigger such as a changed page role or later contradictory result. Put missing assignments in Start Here → Owner questions.
For a WordPress Focus / update decision, attach the linked SOP to Next action / procedure. Give the editor the page's intended task, exact content or promise gap, query evidence and limits, plus any useful material to retain. The editor will update the page and check the published result in that procedure.
For a WordPress Consolidate recommendation, attach the linked SOP to Next action / procedure. Supply every member URL, the proposed preferred URL and reason, required material to preserve, owner keep/retire answers and canonical limits. Implementation must confirm the complete group before changing any page or redirect.
Agree the review date and reviewer in Start Here. In Follow-up inputs, retain the property, Web and audience filters, exact group queries/pages, original periods and any eventual changes. Add the linked SOP to actions needing a later SEO comparison. A later report should compare useful complete periods and explain other known changes; it should not promise a gain from consolidation.
Check that every available Queries export row is classified and each Query Pages export is fully accounted for. Every candidate group must list all available member URLs, actual purpose and canonical checks or explicit limits, a decision, supporting reason and required owner/date/action/check. Re-read Coverage notes and unresolved parked questions. Save the workbook for the owner's normal review. A single-page or harmless group is a valid result; no ranking damage needs to be invented.
