Which is the better taxonomy?
-
Which of these is the better taxonomy?
-
Hi, keywords located in the file path or file name of a document will appear bolded in search results. This bolded appearance is what can affect your CTR. A higher CTR will provide higher authority which is a signal that affects organic rank. It also depends on the keyword you're targeting. If your keyword is "hr outsourcing solutions" and you are also targeting "hr outsourcing" then the latter makes more sense in terms of taxonomy. In a world of Penguin updates I would avoid the former in case your audience pulls in the URL as your anchor text frequently. The double use of your target phrase in the URL would then also "over optimize" your anchor text signals and may get a Penguin penalty.
-
Irving:
Is there anything wrong with www.mysite.com/hr-outsourcing/hr-outsourcing-solutions from a ranking perspective?
From my point of view, it's easier to keep things organized.
And Mysite.com/hr-outsourcing and mysite.com.hr-outsourcing/hr-outsourcing-solutions are separate pages with the long-tail reinforcing the parent in the Silo.
-
a lot of people aren't aware of that. yea
www.mysite.com/hr-outsourcing-solutions is better than www.mysite.com/hr-outsourcing because it includes longtail, could be two separate pages even, with long tail versions pointing to the main www.mysite.com/hr-outsourcing parent page to make it stronger
by filename i mean whatever is the page name, www.mysite.com/page-name
but yes it applies to image files as well for instance
www.mysite.com/zombie-pics/image-123.jpg no SEO benefit for the image
www.mysite.com/zombie-pics/walking-dead-zombie-girl.jpg good for SEO (use in conjunctiomn with alt tags)
-
Irving,
When you refer to "filenames", are you talking about .jpg .png .pdf or could it be the last /whatever of the url?
Thanks for the information!
-
Wow! I did not know that folders don't push rank. So if my keyword is "hr outsourcing", does www.mysite.com/hr-outsourcing-solutions push rank?Can I assume that it does?
-
what is your keyword phrase for this page? if it is "hr outsourcing solutions" then neither example is best. this is best:
www.mysite.com/anything-can-go-here/hr-outsourcing-solutions
keywords in folder names DO NOT push rank, keywords in filenames do
good luck
- Irving -
Hey CsmBill,
I would say the 2nd option is better because it is easier for visitors. Even if your keyword was "hr outsourcing solutions" the SEO impact of your url have been decreasing, to my knowledge. Especially when the url starts getting longer and longer because of it.
Remember, Google wants things easier for searchers and if the url structure is something easy and makes sense structure-wise, then it will look favorable.
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
-
Why does Google display the home page rather than a page which is better optimised to answer the query?
I have a page which (I believe) is well optimised for a specific keyword (URL, title tag, meta description, H1, etc). yet Google chooses to display the home page instead of the page more suited to the search query. Why is Google doing this and what can I do to stop it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | muzzmoz0 -
URL Migration: Better to have .301s processed or 200s?
I'm migrating sub-domains to sub-folders, but this question is likely applicable for most URL migrations. For example: subdomain1.example.com to example.com/subdomain1 and any child pages. Bear with me as it may just be me but I'm having trouble understanding whether internal links (menu, contextual etc and potentially the sitemaps) should be kept as the pre-migration URL (with .301 in place to the new URL) to give Google a chance to process the redirects or if they should be updated straight away to the new URL to provide a 200 response as so many guides suggest. The reason I ask is unless Google specifically visits the old URL from their index (and therefore processes the .301), it's likely to be found by following internal links on the website or similar which if they're updated to reflect the new URL will return a 200. I would imagine that this would be treated as a new page, which is concerning as it would have a canonical pointing toward itself and the same content as the pre-migrated URL. Is this a problem? Do we need to allow proper processing of redirects for migrations or is Google smarter than this and can work it out if they visit the old URL at a later date and put two and two together? What happens in-between? I haven't seen any migration guides suggest leaving .301s in place but to amend links to 200 as soon as possible in all instances. One thought is I guess there's also the Fetch as Google tool within Search Console which could be used with the old URLs - could this be relied on? Apologies if this topic has been covered before but it's quite difficult to search for without returning generic topics around .301 redirects. Hope it makes sense - appreciate any responses!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AmyCatlow0 -
Better Domain and Page Authority Than my compeitors
Hi All, I have a pretty extensive question but wanted a starting point if you don't mind. I have a situation where I created 4 sites that I would say are almost identical other than I have loaned my other websites to other agents. My content is rewritten but it's still roughly the same. You will see, when I give the URL's, that they are similar, and almost identical in templates.My question is going to be, Since I have built some authority on all of these sites, is it wise to simply take them down, or just change the templates and take away the content and start over. If so, what do I do with the existing pages? Or is there a better idea I'm not thinking of? My other question is, this site: goo.gl/Tf00rc Is my main site. It has a higher domain authority and page authority than any of my other local competitors, yet I'm still ranked #13-15 for my main keywords. I will say, many of my other competitors have older domains and I'm sure didn't try to manipulate the serps either. Thoughts and recommendations? Here are my other similar sites which have almost identical templates and very similar content but not copied and pasted content. 1. goo.gl/Wwb0Tg 2. goo.gl/3gpR1X 3. goo.gl/FwD8Bk 4. goo.gl/vpuQv2 My dilemma: I want to make sure that my other agents have a great site that can perform well, as well. If I completely remove these sites, they have no site. I'll say that right now the sites that get the most traffic are the goo.gl/Tf00rc and goo.gl/Wwb0Tg then is the goo.gl3gpR1X, and lastly goo.gl/FwD8Bk so they all get about 3k, 2k, and 1k and 500 visits a month respectively. The total visits of all of these is pretty good. I feel like the max would visits would be around 10k per month in my market. Any help would be greatly appreciated as I have spent a lot of time and money getting these sites where they are only to be penalized, I'm sure, for duplicate content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Veebs0 -
Better for SEO to No-Index Pages with High Bounce Rates
Greeting MOZ Community: I operate www.nyc-officespace-leader.com, a New York City commercial real estate web site established in 2006. An SEO effort has been ongoing since September 2013 and traffic has dropped about 30% in the last month. The site has about 650 pages. 350 are listing pages, 150 are building pages. The listing and building pages have an average bounce rate of about 75%. The other 150 pages have a bounce rate of about 35%. The building and listing pages are dragging down click through rates for the entire site. My SEO firm believe there might be a benefit to "no-index, follow" these high bounce rate URLs. From an SEO perspective, would it be worthwhile to "no-index-follow" most of the building and listing pages in order to reduce the bounce rate? Would Google view the site as a higher quality site if I had these pages de-indexed and the average bounce rate for the site dropped significantly. If I no-indexed these pages would Google provide bette ranking to the pages that already perform well? As a real estate broker, I will constantly be adding many property listings that do not have much content so it seems that a "no-index, follow" would be good for the listings unless Google penalizes sites that have too many "no-index, follow" pages. Any thoughts??? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
Moz Rank and how to do better?
Could anyone offer me some help regarding Moz Rank? Of all the metrics this seems to be one where we want to improve but just have not been able to. Does anyone have any advice or tips that we could look at implementing to get this thing to move at all?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | halloranc0 -
Incoming affiliate links: is it better to follow or nofollow?
Hello here, this question is from a merchant stand point, and here is a typical scenario: this merchant has thousand of affiliate incoming links. Affiliates link to specific product pages with their affiliate ID passed as a parameter as: http://www.merchantsite.com/products/product_page/?affid=[affiliate_id] and users get 301 redirected to a clean URL like: http://www.merchantsite.com/products/product_page/ after that a cookie is stored into the user's browser for tracking purposes. Now, my question is the following: is for the merchant more convenient to have its affiliates linking with follow or nofollow links? Is that actually relevant? What are the pros and cons? Thank you in advance for any insights!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Consolidating MANY separate domains into a much better, single URL: Should I point a landing page or redirect to the new site?
I am consolidating a site for a client who previously, and very foolishly, broke up their domains like so: companyparis.com companyflorence.com companyrome.com etc... I am now done with the new site, which will be at: company.eu with pages as appropriate: company.eu/paris company.eu/florence company.eu/rome This domain, although not entirely new, does not have much authority or rank. In terms of SEO and link-building, is it better to redirect the old domain to the specific page on the new domain: companyparis.com --> company.eu/paris or... is it better to put a landing page at the old domain LINKING to the page on the new domain: companyparis.com --> landing page linking to --> company.eu/paris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | thongly0 -
Internal or external blog better?
Hello, We are adding content to ourdogsmind(dot)com We're going to have a blog with unique content. Should we use an external blog with links back to our site, or an internal blog. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0
