Is it a problem if a URL has too many backslashes in its address?
-
The ecommerce platform of the site that I am working on generates URLs that contain ID Codes for each different product category, color variations, styles, etc.
An example of a URL for a specific product includes:
www.example.com/women/denim-jeans/py/c/109/np/108/p/3834.html
Is it a problem for search engine crawlers if the URL address has so many backslashes in its address?
Appreciate your feedback.
-
Thank you for all of your feedback.
Unfortunately, this website is a on a old propitiatory platform that requires to have these long URL strings, but thankfully there are no separate pages for each of the backslash categories.
For now, I have to accept having these long URLs and just make sure all the correct pages are submitted in sitemap.
Thank you again for you all of your feedback. This was very helpful!
-
To be clear, what type of cart system does the site use? VirtueMart? Magento?
I agree with the posts above, in that sometimes it doesn't hurt, but at the same time, you aren't doing the product pages any favors. Two ways to look at this would be:
1. Having the URL structure set up like you example will still get the pages indexed, if they are included in a sitemap, and submitted correctly, furthermore if the content on those pages is a good match.
2. Having the pages set up that way will limit the ranking potential of those pages, by having a long URL, without relevant keywords in place. Let me explain:
In your example:
www.example.com/women/denim-jeans/py/c/109/np/108/p/3834.htmlYou have the opportunity to potentially rank for "womens denim jeans" using that url. This somewhat limits the ranking potential of the items, as they are all tied into one specific category, that being "womens denim jeans". Lets look at another example:
www.example.com/women/denim-jeans/faded-wash/indigo-dye-item-details3834.html
In the above URL, you are much more specific in the style and type of jean it is, and a user will know (and a search engine) what the page is specifically about. Style, color, keyword, category, etc. Since you most likely have a large catalog of product types, why limit your item details to a bunch of unnecessary numbers and slashes?
I would also look at a way of using product markup to make the items stand out further in search results. Google likes to see "the complete package". Using clean specific URL's and schema product markup tells a much clearer pricture than /py/c/109/np/108/p/3834.html. Depending on the CMS used, there may be a component or plugin that takes care of the product markup for you, from the item description and details.
Hope this helps!
-
Hi there,
Ryan is correct - high numbers of subfolders like this aren't ideal. That takes into account real and virtual subfolders (i.e. "subfolders" that have no content on them but are generated by a CMS versus subfolders that contain landing pages).
Ideally, these would be rewritten to www.example.com/women/denim/product1.html, etc. You will need to check with the developers why the CMS creates these subfolders and what can be done about it.
Google is much better at indexing / ranking URLs like this than it was a few years ago, and it's not exactly a deathblow if you're told that this can't be changed. It's still not ideal though, so check whether it can be simplified.
-
I would want to have as few as possible. You have to ask yourself whether or not all those folders are actually needed. As far as indexing, it's more about the hops than the number of backslashes. For instance if a crawler has to go to /denim-jeans then to /py then /c then /c109 then /np then /108 then /p then /3834.html it will likely have some indexing issues, but if the next hop after /denim-jeans is from a link that goes to /py/c/109/np/108/p/3834.html then it likely wouldn't cause any issues for the crawler, but again it's a nasty structure and you have to ask yourself if it is all really necessary.
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
-
Duplicate page url crawl report
Details: Hello. Looking at the duplicate page url report that comes out of Moz, is the best tactic to a) use 301 redirects, and b) should the url that's flagged for duplicate page content be pointed to the referring url? Not sure where the 301 redirect should be applied... should this url, for example: <colgroup><col width="452"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | compassseo
| http://newgreenair.com/website/blog/ | which is listed in the first column of the Duplicate Page Content crawl, be pointed to referring url in the same spreadsheet? Or, what's the best way to apply the 301 redirect? thanks!0 -
URLs with parameters + canonicals + meta robots
Hi Moz community! I'm posting a new question here as I couldn't find specific answer to the case I'm facing. Along with canonical tags, we are implementing meta robots on our pages (e-commerce website with thousands of pages). Most of the cases have been covered but I still have one unanswered case: our products are linked from list pages (mostly categories) but they almost always include a tracking parameter (ie /my-product.html?ref=xxx) products urls are secured with a canonical tag (referring only to the clean url /my-product.html) but what would be the best solution regarding the meta robots? For now we opted for a meta robot 'noindex, follow' for non canonical urls (so the ones unfortunately linked from our category/list pages), but I'm afraid that it could hurt our SEO (apparently no juice is given from URLs with a noindex robots), and even maybe prevent bots from crawling our website properly ... Would it be best to have no meta robots at all on these product urls with parameters? (we obviously can't have 'index, follow' when the canonical ref points to another url!). Thanks for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JessicaZylberberg0 -
Are iframes really an organic search problem?
I'm helping someone with a new site that will have pages for organic search that contain embedded video. Some will be youtube embeds and some will be wistia embeds. These pages will have several hundred words of transcript text and the embeds (iframes) iframes themselves will be rather small, but expandable and possibly more than one per page. The transcript text area is more like 80% of the page. Do you think this is an organic search problem? I use one site audit tool that calls this out as a serious warning. Currently, the embedded player(s) are a column down the left side, about 1/4th of the width of the page, and the transcripts are everything else, wrapping around it. The transcripts are fully readable and not hidden in some kind of expandable accordion or anything. Does layout matter in this issue? Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Massive URL Migration with thousands of 301
Hey Everyone! I'm currently working on a project that we have A Lot of product pages and we have thousands of URL's that need to be 301'd over. I know this can be a major issue and could lead to tons of errors. What is everyone's thought of doing such a huge Migration, Should I do it all in phases? or should I do them all at once so they can all be indexed together? What would you suggest to be the best way to go about doing such a massive migration?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rpaiva0 -
SEO Problem with PowerPoint to PDF?
Can anyone think of any reasons why it would be a bad idea to use PowerPoint to create documents and then convert them to PDFs? Do you think this could cause any crawling issues for Google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BlueLinkERP0 -
URL with a # but no ! being indexed
Given that it contains a #, how come Google is able to index this URL?: http://www.rtl.nl/xl/#/home It was my understanding that Google can't handle # properly unless it's paired with a ! (hash fragment / bang). site:http://www.rtl.nl/xl/#/home returns nothing, but: site:http://www.rtl.nl/xl returns http://www.rtl.nl/xl/#/home in the result set
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EdelmanDigital0 -
Problem of indexing
Hello, sorry, I'm French and my English is not necessarily correct. I have a problem indexing in Google. Only the home page is referenced: http://bit.ly/yKP4nD. I am looking for several days but I do not understand why. I looked at: The robots.txt file is ok The sitemap, although it is in ASP, is valid with Google No spam, no hidden text I made a request for reconsideration via Google Webmaster Tools and it has no penalties We do not have noindex So I'm stuck and I'd like your opinion. thank you very much A.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | android_lyon0 -
Why are so many pages indexed?
We recently launched a new website and it doesn't consist of that many pages. When you do a "site:" search on Google, it shows 1,950 results. Obviously we don't want this to be happening. I have a feeling it's effecting our rankings. Is this just a straight up robots.txt problem? We addressed that a while ago and the number of results aren't going down. It's very possible that we still have it implemented incorrectly. What are we doing wrong and how do we start getting pages "un-indexed"?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MichaelWeisbaum0