URL best practices, use folders or not ?
-
Hi
I have a question about URLs. Client have all URL written after domain and have only one / slash in all URLs. Is this best practice or i need to use categories,folders?
Thanks
-
It's a trade-off, for both SEO and users, and I don't think there's one answer that fits every situation. The category level can add information, but it also makes URLs longer, which can be bad for both bots and people. If you have short, descriptive categories that aren't repeated in the product/page names, and those categories mimic your site structure, then I think it can be positive.
My argument was mostly against people adding categories just for SEO benefit (it's probably minimal, at best) or repeating every category, sub-category, etc. to the point of absurdity, causing keyword cannibalization and massive URLs. For example:
www.bobscamerashop.com/cameras/digital-cameras/canon-cameras/eos-cameras/camera-canon-eos-rebel-t3
Of course, that's also keyword stuffed, but I'm exaggerating to prove a point. You can go too far in either direction.
In general, though, I don't think categories in the URL are necessarily bad. In some cases, as Woj said, they could be a positive for users and possible even SEO.
-
Think about it from the user's point of view. What would work best for them? Maybe even get some feedback from some site users if possible
-
Will the site categories/products grow? If so, then the slash could be used to organise the structure & prepare for the future
In the example, you presented:
- www.example.com/accounts-titanium
- www.example.com**/**accounts/titanium
These are the same length & make no real difference
When we compare these 2, however:
You can see that #1 is shorter, doesn't repeat keyword (even though they are plural) & would be more likely clicked in the SERPs
Does that help some more?
-
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/should-i-change-my-urls-for-seo
In this article point 2 is saying that the unstructured is better so i`m confused.
-
the site is small about 60 pages and max depth level is 3
-
I'd use folders or categories if the amount of products/items is large and/or going to expand
If it's a small amount & finite then make the URLs as short as possible
-
Information architecture is important from a usability and search engine prospective.
I'd say go for the categories divided by the /
www.example.com**/**accounts/titanium
www.example.com/accounts/open-demo-accountThis makes more sense and lends itself to scalability etc.
hope this helps.
there are some really good articles on information architecture on the seomoz and the web
-
URL is without any category or folder
www.example.com/accounts-titanium
www.example.com/open-demo-account
is this right or i need to use:
www.example.com**/**accounts/titanium
-
not quite sure what you mean exactly - can you expand with and example?
Thanks
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Canonical URL Tag Usage
I have a large website, almost 1500 pages that each market different keywords for the trucking logistics industry. I don't really understand the new Canonical URL Tag USAGE. They say to use it so the page is not a duplicate but the page that MOZ is call for to have the tag isn't a duplicate. It promotes 1 keyword that no other page directly promotes. Here is the page address, now what tag would I put up in the HEAD so google don't treat it as a duplicate page. http://www.freightetc.com/c/heavyhaul/heavyhaul.php 1. Number 1 the actual page address because I want it treated like its own page or do I have to use #2 below? 2. I don't know why I would use #2 as I want it to be its own page, and get credit and listed and ranked as its own page. Can anyone clarify this stuff to me as I guess i am just new to this whole tag usage.
On-Page Optimization | | dwebb0070 -
Url structure
Hi Guys, Wondering what is better for url structure say for example a key word "slow cooker" example.com/slowcooker or example.com/slow-cooker ? Thank you 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | GetApp0 -
Similar URLs
I'm making a site of LSAT explanations. The content is very meaningful for LSAT students. I'm less sure the urls and headings are meaningful for Google. I'll give you an example. Here are two URLs and heading for two separate pages: http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-1/q-10/ - LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q 10 http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-2/q10/ - LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning II, Q10 There are two logical reasoning sections on LSAT 69. For the first url is for question 10 from section 1, the second URL is for question 10 from the second LR section. I noticed that google.com only displays 23 urls when I search "site:http://lsathacks.com". A couple of days ago it displayed over 120 (i.e. the entire site). 1. Am I hurting myself with this structure, even if it makes sense for users? 2. What could I do to avoid it? I'll eventually have thousands of pages of explanations. They'll all be very similar in terms of how I would categorize them to a human, e.g. "LSAT 52, logic games question 12" I should note that the content of each page is very different. But url, title and h1 is similar. Edit: I could, for example, add a random keyword to differentiate titles and urls (but not H1). For example: http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-2/q10-car-efficiency/ LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q 10, Car efficiency But the url is already fairly long as is. Would that be a good idea?
On-Page Optimization | | graemeblake0 -
Is the use of some keywords necessary to be included in many of the pages?
Hello, I have a website about SEO and webdesign. I want to ask will mentioning these two keywords in many of my articles have any benefit for particular landing pages that I have. F.e.: I have two pages: example.com/seo example.com/web-design They are optimized and have Grade A in SEOMOZ's onpage tool for their two keywords. So my question is: Will broad use of my keywords SEO and webdesign in the text, title or alt not only on my two landing pages but also in other articles of my website also help these two pages to rank higher for their keyword. I see in Webmaster Tools (http://images.seroundtable.com/google-content-keywords-1351084751.jpg) there is an option to see the content keywords in your website. May be that shows that the content in my website is more relevant to particular topic and that also can influence the ranking of my two landing pages.
On-Page Optimization | | HrishikeshKarov0 -
Removing old URLs from Google
Hello, I am sure that this question has been asked many times, but I am still not sure what to do about the following: Our site's URL structure has changed a few times in the past few months. Recenty, we have changed our URLs to become more SEO friendly. However, Google has indexed the old URLs as well. To give an example: The following page in our website shows the following URLs in Google Webmaster Tools: Confúcio e Seus Ensinamentos /artigo/68_38/2/as_religioes_iv_confucio_e_seus_ensinamentos//aula/14_6132/vestibular/confucio_e_seus_ensinamentos//aula/1_14_6132/vestibular/confucio_e_seus_ensinamentos//aula/_14_6132/Vestibular/confucio_e_seus_ensinamentos//aula/ensino/confucio_e_seus_ensinamentos/ The correct URL is the last one. What should I do about the other ones? Almost all the pages in our website have this problem. We have redirected the old URLs to the new ones, but is there anything else we should do? We were asking Google to remove them, but Google has informed us that it has reached the limit. Please advise us on waht we should do. We have removed the old sitemap with the old URLs. What else must we do? Thank you very much.
On-Page Optimization | | Tev0 -
Canonical URL Tag
Hi, I have two pages that are identical on my site: http://www.absolutepower.nl/creatine-monohydraat and http://www.absolutepower.nl/CREATINE/creatine-monohydraat Should I use the canonical URL tag in this case? Thanks, Jasper
On-Page Optimization | | Japking0 -
Close URL owned by competitors.
The following example is exactly analogous to our situation (site names slightly altered😞 We own www.business-skills.com. It's our main site. We don't own, and would rather avoid paying for, www.businessskills.com. It's a parked domain and the owners want a very large sum for it. We own www.business-skills.co.uk and point it to our main site. We don't own www.businessskills.co.uk. This is owned by our biggest competitor. We also own www.[ourbrand].com and .co.uk, and point them to the main site. My question is - how much traffic do you think we may be missing due to these nearly-but-not-quite URL matches? Does it matter in terms of lost revenue? What sort of things should I be looking at to get a very rough estimate?
On-Page Optimization | | JacobFunnell0 -
Is it good to have dashes in url's
When using keywords in url's for internal pages, isn't it a good idea to use dashes or underscores in the url between the keywords?
On-Page Optimization | | BradBorst0