Hlp with site setup
-
Hi there and thanks for the great information, certainly lots to take in.
Can anyone suggest the best way to setup product / category url structure for a store?
At the moment we have something like domainname.com/parentcategory/subcategory/product name.html
As the product url, we edited url structure using a plugin, we don't use default WooCommerce url settings.
domainname.com/parentcategory/subcategory/product name.html. this can sometimes be long
But when you click on the product the url changes to the following.
domainname.com/product name.html. This can shorted the url by 40% and still have keyword in url
Is there any benefit in doing his? Re canonical urls, I only have about 15 products that are selected in many categories.the other 200 are under once category only.
Product pages don't have many backlinks at the moment.
Thanking you so much.
-
HI seoelevated thaks again for taking the time to explain.
That helps a lot and will adjust the site accordingly, it makes sense.
-
To my understanding, a redirect and a canonical are treated very similarly from an SEO standpoint. With either of these, only the end URL (either the one to which you are redirecting, or the one linked in the canonical reference) is the one which, if all directives are honored, gets indexed. So, unless I'm missing something, there is no benefit at all of having the category paths in the URLs if you are either redirecting from those to the flat one, or if you are pointing a canonical to the flat one. The benefit would be there if those keywords were in the final URL (redirected or canonical). But if the final URL is flat, then I don't think you get any benefits from the non-canonical URLs having keywords in their paths. So, if the flat URL is the final one, from either method, I would ensure that the "product name" is fully descriptive with the desired keywords.
-
Hi seoelevated, thanks for taking the time to explain.
The reason for asking was that I noticed many sites that rank well within our industry display the full path in their urls, for example, domainname.com/parentcategory/subcategory/product name.html and this allows them to do as you suggested, have keywords in the category, then sub cat and then finally the product title.
Many when clicking on a product remove the categoy urls completely, something like this, domainname.com/product name.html and I didn't understand why but it makes sense now. I just thought that there might have been an SEO benefit to doing this.
Looking at our site we do have the following setup link href="https://www.domainname.com/category/subcat/product.html/" rel="canonical" so I assume that this tells google the right path to follow. I think that the disadvantage here is that urls can become quite long so they need to be optimised, much shorter than they are now.
As of accessing urls from many locations, some articles that you read say that the url should only be accessible from one path which was my worry. Although the cannical url tag is there I dont know if its it hurts our website if you can still access from all of the following, is this okay or should I not worry about it.
domainname.com/parentcategory/subcategory/product name.html
domainname.com/subcategory/product name.html
domainname.com/product name.html
domainname.com/parentcategory/product name.html -
The benefit of the directory paths approach is the additional keywords, if your product name (or ID) is not in itself descriptive enough. For example, if you have a sofa style named "Diana", you wouldn't want your URL to be domainname.com/diana.html. Something like domainname.com/furniture/sofas/diana.html would be better.
But, you can accomplish that with more descriptive product IDs. So, in the example above, if you could make your product name "furniture-sofas-diana", then your URL would be domainname.com/furniture-sofas-diana.html, which accomplishes the same keyword targeting.
And then that solves the issue of when products are in multiple categories, since it's a flat URL regardless of how the visitor arrived to the page.
But if your products are really almost entirely in a single category each (keeping in mind temporary categories like "sale", "new", etc.), and they will be that way forever, then there is an argument to be made for the paths. Because it does help the search engine to parse up your site, and to provide nice breadcrumbs on your listings.
This is really a perennial debate. And there's no one answer. For most of us, we do have to live with products being in multiple categories, as the norm (especially when considering categories like sale, new, best sellers, etc.). Canonical reference links help this issue, but aren't necessarily ideal.
But, what really struck me in your question was that you said the URL changes when you click on the product. Ideally, you don't want all your internal links to be redirects. That's something I would try to avoid.
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
-
PDF Sharing sites - scribd/dropbox/edocr/etc Cleaning Up SEO History
Howdy, Whilst in the process of cleaning up a new clients seo profile and have encountered a lot of techniques I am uncomfortable with and in my opinion should be removed. One technique I have not seen before is using a load of pdf sharing and video sites. The domains have high DA ratings, but to me the intention is highly questionable. The sites include: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tuxb8w1qowcm27i/Looking for boiler spares-geniune parts and consumables.pdf?dl=0 http://www.scribd.com/doc/241542076/Looking-for-Boiler-Spares-geniune-Parts-and-Consumables http://www.divshare.com/download/26207602-569 And so the list goes on for about 50 domains. Am I correct to be concerned here and what was the seo plan here? Thanks in advance. Andy Southall. (Marz Ventures)
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MarzVentures0 -
Old Press Release sites - Which ones do you Disavow and leave alone
Hi Mozers! I need your help. I'm in the final stages of a huge link audit and press releases are a big concern. As you know, press release distribution sites up until 2012 had "follow" links, giving webmasters a delight of having their keyword anchor texts a big boost in rankings. These are the websites that are troubling me today so i would appreciate your input on my strategy below as most of these websites are asking for money to remove them: 1. Press Release sites that are on the same C-class - Disavow 2. Not so authoritative press release websites that just follow my www domain only (no anchor texts) - I leave it alone 3. Not so authoritative press release websites but have anchor texts that are followed - Disavow 4. Post 2012 press release websites that have "followed" anchor text keywords - Request to remove, then disavow 5. Post 2012 press release websites that just follow my www domain only (no anchor texts) - leave it alone #2 and #5 are my biggest concern. Now more than ever I would appreciate your follow ups. I will respond quickly and apply "good answers" to the one's that make the most sense as my appreciation to you. God bless you all.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Shawn1240 -
Two sites, heavily cross linking, targeting the same keyword - is this a battle worth fighting?
Hi Mozzers, Would appreciate your input on this, as many people have differing views on this when asked... We manage 2 websites for the same company (very different domains) - both sites are targeting the same primary keyword phrase, however, the user journey should incorporate both websites, and therefore the sites are very heavily cross linked - so we can easily pass a user from one site to another. Whilst site 1 is performing well for the target keyword phrase, site 2 isn't. Site 1 is always around 2 to 3 rank, however we've only seen site 2 reach the top of page 2 in SERPs at best, despite a great deal of white hat optimisation, and is now on the decline. There's also a trend (all be it minimal) of when site 1 improves in rank, site 2 drops. Because the 2 sites are so heavily inter-linked could Google be treating them as one site, and therefore dropping site 2 in the SERPs, as it is in Google's interests to show different, relevant sites?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | A_Q0 -
How would you optimize a new site?
Hi guys, im here to ask based on your personal opinion. We know in order to rank in SEO for a site is to make authority contents that interest people. But what would you do to increase your ranking of your site or maybe a blog post? leaving your link on blogs comment seem dangerous, nowadays. Is social media the only way to go? Trying to get people to write about you? what else can be done?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | andzon0 -
Is one of my competitors trying to get my site penalized?
Hi guys, I have been ranking #2 for a popular search term for several months now, and today I noticed a drop to #5, so I went to check my backlink profile, and I'm seeing thousands of no-follow exact keyword matched backlinks, all from spammy looking websites. I looked at some of the links and they do link to me, but I didn't generate these links, and I have never paid anybody externally to build links for me. What is the best course of action for me here? link disavow tool?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | davegill0 -
Our site has too many backlinks! How can we do a bad backlink audit?
Webmaster Tools is saying we have close to 24 million links to our site. The site has been around since the mid 90s and has accumulated all these links since. We also have our own network of sites that have links in their templates to our main site. I'm fighting to get these links "nofollow"'d but upper management seems scared to alter this practice. This past year we've found our rankings have dropped significantly and suspect it's due to some spammy backlinks or being penalized for doing an accidental link scheme network. 24 million links is too many to check manually for using the disavow tool and it seems that bulk services out there to check backlinks can't even come close. What's an SEO to do?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | seoninjaz0 -
Site-wide links: Nofollow or eliminate altogether?
As a web developer, it's not uncommon for me to place a link in the footer of a website to give myself credit for the web design/development. I recently decided to go back and nofollow all these site-wide footer links, to avoid potentially looking spammy. I wanted to know if I should remove these links altogether, and just give myself text credit without a link at all? I would like for a potential client who is interested in my work to still be able to get to my site if they like my work - but I want to keep my link profile squeaky clean. Thoughts?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | brad.s.knutson0 -
Has my site been penalized by google
Hi all I have noticed a sudden drop in rankings for most of my keywords on kerryblu ,co,uk and was thinking the site may have been manually penalized by google. I have not received any notification of this in webmaster tools but can't think of any other reason for the loss of rankings. I have searched the web for info on this but can't find a definite answer. Is there any way of knowing for sure. At the time of the crash the only real change I made was adding google adsense to my blog. Could this be responsible. Thanks for looking.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Dill0