Attention to Topical Map bring serious SEO benefits

[dwain]

'Topical Map' is nothing new. It has been quite a while. Peeps in the SEO space know what it is, and niche site owners and investors should be making the most out of it. We use it for each and every niche sites we work on.

What Is It Actually?
Topical map is a visual representation of the structure and hierarchy of the content on your website. It categorizes the content on your website into different topics and subtopics.

When you identify the relationships between topics and sub-topics, you build a logical structure for content throughout your website.

How It Helps With Ranking?
Simple. You improve your site's search engine visibility by helping search engines understand the context and relevance of each page. Implementing a topical map, you also help readers navigate your site easily and find the information they need efficiently.

In short, a topical map guides you to improve search engine rankings by optimizing your website's content throughout the site. It makes search engines understand what your site is really about.


Emulates Google's Understanding
Topical map is an effective tool to gain insight into the structure of topics and content. It provides an organized hierarchy of topics and sub-topics that is similar to how Google organizes queries. You make it easy on Google to understand what your site is about.

Helps You with Interlinking
Utilising topical map, you will find logical connections between related pieces of content. You can then easily build topical relevance through internal linking. This is something that signals search engines to consider your site as an authority on the topics. Plus, it enhances your overall site architecture.

Eliminates Cannibalization
Having a well-prepared topic cluster before you start posting contents ensures each page is targeting a unique keyword or phrase. Because, you get to have the whole list of keywords before you eyes. You can get rid of the duplicates and merge the similar intent keywords to eliminate the risk of cannibalization.

Saves a Shit Load of Time
Creating a topical map takes time, but it saves you more of it in the long run. How is that? Well, you get the whole keyword research for a topic done at once. So, your content strategy is ready for the next few months. You know how many contents you have to post, at what velocity and frequency, which articles interlinks to which, and so on.

You can use the time saved from these chores can be utilised in link-building and other stuff.

Less Link-building Required
When your site has better topical coverage and an overall good site architecture than the competitors, you don't need to look for as many links as your competitors got. You are very likely to be ranked with lesser links. Content coverage becomes your key advantage, so you can expect to stay out of Google's bad book for the upcoming updates. If you are affected by any chance(because Google is always messing), the damage will be minimum for sure.


Doesn't matter if we are adding a new site to our portfolio or want an existing site to expand into new topics, we always use topical maps to make our content tasks a breeze. What are your thoughts about topical maps?

 

[Ryuzaki]

This is an interesting idea that I've seen mentioned here and there out on the interweb with a new spin on the marketing, basically.

I have a buddy that ordered a topical map from some company and a part of me was impressed and a part of me thought that "all they did" was grab every keyword for a sub-niche of a niche and then organize them into articles and then design categories for them to sit in and design an interlinking flow for them. Which is right, that's what they did.

And that's a pretty massive time saver if you can become convinced that the provider is doing a thorough job. You can essentially outsource all your keyword research for a tightly woven niche site, or even just a category at a time, and then have an interlinking plan to push up the higher volume keywords.

That was the main benefit I saw from a distance looking at the report. The second benefit is obviously, if you chew through what they give you, that you should build topical authority for that topic. these are things we should be and probably are doing anyways.

It's not new, it's not ground breaking, but it is a clever way to combine keyword research and "hub" building for interlinking as one product. It's a time saver if done right. I could see ordering 1, 2, or 3 of these things (depending on how many articles come back in each map) and then shooting those lists off to a content agency. You get the content back, have it posted, and then your site is "done". At that point maybe you just drip in some interesting content that's not largely keyword based, and you work on link building.

It's a cool idea. I know a lot of people who feel pretty insecure about keyword research for whatever reason. It's hard to mess up if you cover every topic, though.

 

[JOoa0ky]

My current "topical map" is essentially my horizontal menu in the header.

Basically four concepts in the menu. (Am planning on adding more as I expand/branch out)

• If you hover over each of these concepts, you get a long drop down list of 80KD+ keywords.
• Each of those high difficulty KWs link back to the concept.
• Every article I write targeting the low/medium/long tails all link back to one of these KWs.

Keeps it pretty organized IMO.

If I find something new to write about and I can't link it to one of the drop down list, it means that there is something new that I need to create...

 

[Darth]

So, say you had a site covering everything about Yamaha motorbikes, and you wanted to an article to cover every conceivable keyword/topic that someone might search for, a topical map would basically be a blueprint of articles and categories for how that would look?

How do "they" know when to stop spitting out keywords/variations? Or part of the value of a topical map grouping all those variations into the same article?

TBH I am pretty crap at keyword research (IMO) so this is interesting for me.

 

[wikibum]

Google relies on Wikipedia a lot so I think a good starting point to make a topical map would be there. If you type in a main category, like motorcycle, then look at the related pages within that page or pages it links to - you will get a lot of ideas of sub categories. Then go to the sub categories and dive in even deeper. You can then draw lines from each category to its sub category, etc.. to make the map.

 

[dwain]

So, say you had a site covering everything about Yamaha motorbikes, and you wanted to an article to cover every conceivable keyword/topic that someone might search for, a topical map would basically be a blueprint of articles and categories for how that would look?

How do "they" know when to stop spitting out keywords/variations? Or part of the value of a topical map grouping all those variations into the same article?

TBH I am pretty crap at keyword research (IMO) so this is interesting for me.

1. Yes. A topical map outlines the articles and categories necessary to establish expertise and authority in a specific subject or niche. It involves identifying relevant topics, subtopics, and related keywords.

2. A big part of a topical map's value is you will plan the categories, set the content clusters, and group keywords that need to be in the same article. All in a place so you have the complete picture of what and when to publish articles. Also, it's important to publish articles from one cluster of a subtopic at a time and not mix different subtopics at the same time. At least in the beginning. Doing this confuses Google. A topical map makes it very easy to maintain this. Essentially a blueprint of what you should do.

Google relies on Wikipedia a lot so I think a good starting point to make a topical map would be there. If you type in a main category, like motorcycle, then look at the related pages within that page or pages it links to - you will get a lot of ideas of sub categories. Then go to the sub categories and dive in even deeper. You can then draw lines from each category to its sub category, etc.. to make the map.

100% agree with you mate.

To create a topical map, I begin with the Wikipedia page of my target niche. Identify the main sub-topics and ensure all relevant topics are included. I then analyze my competitors to see see what's working for them. Combining data from these two sources forms the core of my topical map. From there, I set the categories & subtopics, then group related keywords into clusters as needed. The specifics may vary depending on the niche, but this is the general process I follow.

 

[KhairujjamanS]

So, say you had a site covering everything about Yamaha motorbikes, and you wanted to an article to cover every conceivable keyword/topic that someone might search for, a topical map would basically be a blueprint of articles and categories for how that would look?

How do "they" know when to stop spitting out keywords/variations? Or part of the value of a topical map grouping all those variations into the same article?

TBH I am pretty crap at keyword research (IMO) so this is interesting for me.

Part of the topical map creation process is to decide the content clusters properly under a subtopic and group same intent keywords. This helps you stay organized and on-topic

 

[dwain]

My current "topical map" is essentially my horizontal menu in the header.

Basically four concepts in the menu. (Am planning on adding more as I expand/branch out)

• If you hover over each of these concepts, you get a long drop down list of 80KD+ keywords.
• Each of those high difficulty KWs link back to the concept.
• Every article I write targeting the low/medium/long tails all link back to one of these KWs.

Keeps it pretty organized IMO.

If I find something new to write about and I can't link it to one of the drop down list, it means that there is something new that I need to create...

This works too. But here's the thing -if you're starting a new website, it's best to work on one sub-topic at a time. Focusing on just one area makes it easier for Google to understand what your site is all about, and it helps you establish authority in that specific sub-topic faster. Once you've got a solid foundation, you can start expanding into other areas of the niche.

 

[MinstrelJunkie]

Hey all, would love any thoughts on this.

We were hit by an algo update in January, and one of our issues is low topical relevance. We have 960 articles spread over 60+ categories. The median # of articles per category is just 10. This is after a good amount of cleaning up and pruning.

Going forward we're going to be putting out 30 high-quality, expert-reviewed articles per month (while also updating all of our old content).

The question is - how do you decide when one category is 'finished' to move on to the next?

I know it depends on the topic, but as a rule of thumb, would you say 20 posts? 30? 50?

I've prioritized all our categories in order of relevancy and performance. I know the order we need to tackle them. I'm just not sure how far to build each one out. The plan right now is basically to hammer out KWR sessions for each category in order, and just go by gut feel.

I just can't shake the feeling of wasting time and energy filling out one category while others are in dire need of more content as well.

Would be great to hear how you guys would look at this, especially for an established site.

 

[dwain]

Hey all, would love any thoughts on this.

We were hit by an algo update in January, and one of our issues is low topical relevance. We have 960 articles spread over 60+ categories. The median # of articles per category is just 10. This is after a good amount of cleaning up and pruning.

Going forward we're going to be putting out 30 high-quality, expert-reviewed articles per month (while also updating all of our old content).

The question is - how do you decide when one category is 'finished' to move on to the next?

I know it depends on the topic, but as a rule of thumb, would you say 20 posts? 30? 50?

I've prioritized all our categories in order of relevancy and performance. I know the order we need to tackle them. I'm just not sure how far to build each one out. The plan right now is basically to hammer out KWR sessions for each category in order, and just go by gut feel.

I just can't shake the feeling of wasting time and energy filling out one category while others are in dire need of more content as well.

Would be great to hear how you guys would look at this, especially for an established site.

Firstly, you have to prioritize one category first. It can be tempting to tackle everything at once, but focusing on one area of improvement will give you a better chance of success. As you feel this: "I just can't shake the feeling of wasting time and energy filling out one category while others are in dire need of more content as well."

Now, to decide when one category is 'finished' to move on to the next, a good way to start is by checking how many topics the current category has. Then you can guess an estimated article count that one category needs.

You don't necessarily need to publish every single topic from there now.

Here's how I'd do this:

Another tip for prioritizing categories is to use tools like Google Search Console and Google Analytics to see which categories your site has authority in. I'd also try to keep semantically related categories on top of the priority list.

Then, list out all the topics within that category Figure out the main clusters. Then spend a good amount of time grouping same intent keywords (to avoid publishing unnecessary articles). I'd also write down the SEO difficulty(manually checked) of each article topic - low/mid/high.

At this point, I'll have a mini topical map complete for that category.

Then I'll start marking out article topics I've already published. When it's done, I'll start writing articles on topics that I haven't published. If there are too many topics then I'll write on only low/mid competition topics at first. And skip very high competition kw for the time being(will get back to these after covering other high-priority categories).

Just a quick follow-up - while I generally suggest starting with low to mid competition keywords, it's still important to cover core topics within a category, even if they have high competition. So don't be afraid to tackle those topics in the first phase if they're essential to the category's overall coverage.

Once a category is done, move on to the next.

 

[MinstrelJunkie]

Firstly, you have to prioritize one category first. It can be tempting to tackle everything at once, but focusing on one area of improvement will give you a better chance of success. As you feel this: "I just can't shake the feeling of wasting time and energy filling out one category while others are in dire need of more content as well."

Now, to decide when one category is 'finished' to move on to the next, a good way to start is by checking how many topics the current category has. Then you can guess an estimated article count that one category needs.

You don't necessarily need to publish every single topic from there now.

Here's how I'd do this:

Another tip for prioritizing categories is to use tools like Google Search Console and Google Analytics to see which categories your site has authority in. I'd also try to keep semantically related categories on top of the priority list.

Then, list out all the topics within that category Figure out the main clusters. Then spend a good amount of time grouping same intent keywords (to avoid publishing unnecessary articles). I'd also write down the SEO difficulty(manually checked) of each article topic - low/mid/high.

At this point, I'll have a mini topical map complete for that category.

Then I'll start marking out article topics I've already published. When it's done, I'll start writing articles on topics that I haven't published. If there are too many topics then I'll write on only low/mid competition topics at first. And skip very high competition kw for the time being(will get back to these after covering other high-priority categories).

Just a quick follow-up - while I generally suggest starting with low to mid competition keywords, it's still important to cover core topics within a category, even if they have high competition. So don't be afraid to tackle those topics in the first phase if they're essential to the category's overall coverage.

Once a category is done, move on to the next.

Fantastic, appreciate the detailed reply! Thank you.

Been looking at a competitor with a pretty bad site that's done well, and they have a huge amount of topical relevancy. Like 200+ posts within a major category. We're far more spread out widely, and I think that's why we were knocked by the Helpful Content Update (writing for broad topics to get search traffic, rather than establishing expertise).

Going to bite the bullet and just choose 3-4 core categories to really build them out. Will be a long road but makes a lot more sense for the site. Cheers!

 

[DarkCarnage]

I'm looking to come up with a topical map for a new niche site. Can anyone point to any online resource that comprehensively covers how to do this? I'm aware of services that do this, but they are out of my budget.

 

[dwain]

I'm looking to come up with a topical map for a new niche site. Can anyone point to any online resource that comprehensively covers how to do this? I'm aware of services that do this, but they are out of my budget.

I couldn't find one worth sharing yet.

So my team is working on putting together an extensive guide, but it's taking a bit longer than expected. These things really do require a lot of effort, don't they? But we're doing our best to make it as comprehensive and helpful as possible.