Creating pages as exact match URL's - good or over-optimization indicator?
-
We all know that exact match domains are not getting the same results in the SERP's with the algo changes Google's been pushing through. Does anyone have any experience or know if that also applies to having an exact match URL page (not domain).
Example:
keyword: cars that start with AWhich way to go is better when creating your pages on a non-exact domain match site:
www.sample.com/cars-that-start-with-a/ that has "cars that start with A" as the
or
www.sample.com/starts-with-a/ again has "cars that start with A" as the
Keep in mind that you'll add more pages that start the exact same way as you want to cover all the letters in the alphabet. So:
www.sample.com/cars-that-start-with-a/
www.sample.com/cars-that-start-with-b/
www.sample.com/cars-that-start-with-C/or
www.sample.com/starts-with-a/
www.sample.com/starts-with-b/
www.sample.com/starts-with-c/Hope someone here at the MOZ community can help out. Thanks so much
-
Hi Curtis,
Thanks for your reply. Well to be more specific the domain would be:
freecarfinder.com/cars-that-start-with-a/The domain is new so it has not authority whatsoever. The domain is not that long but it's not really short neither. The content on the page is pretty small where the exact keyword that's in the URL is mentioned in the heading 1 and twice on a small piece of text that explains how to use the page to search for results.
Totally agree best practise is to test it out. I do see that our competition is using /starts-with/a and is ranking really well with it. Maybe the best option is to create half of the pages using the exact keyword in the URL and half with /starts-with-a/ to see which one performs better?
-
Unless your domain is really strong on car keywords I would include car in the URL, assuming the URL is not that long. Although Google is moving away from exact match into symantic search it seems to be happening slowly and we have certainly seen improvements in ranking by having some exact matches. So I think as longs as you don't have the exact same phrase in all places on the page there isn't much danger. However, the best pratice is to test and learn, make the change and see if it improves the ranking.
Hope that helps, let me know if you need anything more?
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
-
Too many links pointing to our privacy policy page: Hurting our ranking efforts of main pages?
Hi community, As per the "Links" report from GSC, there are millions of pages pointing to our privacy policy page. We can expect high number of links to this page being ours an open source product. But these links are overtaking the count of links pointing to our homepage which are very artificial from few spammy or low quality sites. "Privacy policy" anchor text is also been the top anchor text. Our homepage ranking dropped and I suspect this is the culprit. Google might be considering this is the important page being linked on top with anchor text. Shall I Disavow these sites and will this makes Google stop counting links, and the anchor text coming from these sites as well? Suggestions please. Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Footer images links, good or bad?
Hi everybody! I have a very serius question because i have a problem with this. We run a website of voucher codes and we are looking that our rivals are putting their logos on footers of online stores with images, sometimes link to home, sometimes link to store within webpage. Should i ask for the same to online stores? I have scary to get a penalty by Google. Please help me with this and recommend me something because we are doing fair play but rivals are doing this and they get best results in SERPS. Thanks very much! Best regards!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | pompero990 -
I've purchased a PR 6 domain what will be best use of it ?
I've purchased a PR 6 domain what will be best use of it ? Should make a new site or redirect it to my low pr sites? Or I wasted my $100 ?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | IndiaFPS0 -
I'm Getting Attacked, What Can I Do?
I recently noticed a jump in my Crawl Errors in Google Webmaster Tools. Upon further investigation I found hundreds of the most spammy web pages I've ever seen pointing to my domain (although all going to 404 errors): http://blurchelsanog1980.blog.com/ http://lenitsky.wordpress.com/ These are all created within the last week. A. What the hell is going on? B. Should I be very concerned? (because they are 404 errors) C. What should my next steps be? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CleanEdisonInc0 -
Link Audit: How do I decide what is a good or bad link?
I am conducting a link audit for one of my formerly high-ranking pages. But despite reading quite a bit on the issue, I am still quite confused as to how to decide whether to keep or remove a link. Some links come from directories and social bookmarking sites. I know that generally speaking, you do not want to be on these types of sites, but what if their domain authorities, pageranks, and mozTrusts scores are good? For example, here is one of my links for "envelopes": http://www.folkd.com/detail/www.jampaper.com%2FEnvelopes The page itself has no MozRank, MozTrust, or links but the domain has an authority of 88, a MozRank of 6.41, a mozTrust of 6.31. Should I be looking on a page level or domain level basis? It also has over 5 million links, with over two million of those being external followed links. Is the high quantity of links a warning sign? I also used a free online tool (thesitevalue.com) to determine how much traffic the domain gets. Apparently it receives over 350,000 unique visits daily, so it must be useful to people. This, combined with the fact that we've received 5 visits from the link over the last year (not a lot, but something), makes me believe that the link's intent wasn't purely to "trick" Google. Despite this, I still have a feeling the link could be considered low-quality based on the domain's appearance. Similarly, some of our links are coming from domains named linkdirect.info, backlinks8.com, tolinkup.com, findyourlink.info, searchengineurl.com, websubmissionfree.com. Is it safe to assume these are harmful links strictly because of their names? Thank you!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | jampaper0 -
Google is giving one of my competitors a quasi page 1 monopoly, how can I complain?
Hi, When you search for "business plan software" on google.co.uk, 7 of the 11 first results are results from 1 company selling 2 products, see below: #1. Government site (related to "business plan" but not to "business plan software")
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | tbps
#2. Product 1 from Palo Alto Software (livePlan)
#3. bplan.co.uk: content site of Palo Alto Software (relevant to "business plan" but only relevant to "business plan software" because it is featuring and linking to their Product 1 and Product 2 sites)
#4. Same site as #3 but different url
#5. Palo Alto Software Product 2 (Business Plan Pro) page on Palo Alto Software .co.uk corporate site
#6. Same result as #5 but different url (the features page)
#7. Palo Alto Software Product 2 (Business Plan Pro) local site
#8, #9 and #10 are ok
#11. Same as #3 but the .com version instead of the .co.uk This seems wrong to me as it creates an illusion of choice for the customer (especially because they use different sites) whereas in reality the results are showcasing only 2 products. Only 1 of Palo Alto Software's competitors is present on page 1 of the search results (the rest of them are on page 2 and page 3). Did some of you experience a similar issue in a different sector? What would be the best way to point it out to Google? Thanks in advance Guillaume0 -
Page not being indexed or crawled and no idea why!
Hi everyone, There are a few pages on our website that aren't being indexed right now on Google and I'm not quite sure why. A little background: We are an IT training and management training company and we have locations/classrooms around the US. To better our search rankings and overall visibility, we made some changes to the on page content, URL structure, etc. Let's take our Washington DC location for example. The old address was: http://www2.learningtree.com/htfu/location.aspx?id=uswd44 And the new one is: http://www2.learningtree.com/htfu/uswd44/reston/it-and-management-training All of the SEO changes aren't live yet, so just bear with me. My question really regards why the first URL is still being indexed and crawled and showing fine in the search results and the second one (which we want to show) is not. Changes have been live for around a month now - plenty of time to at least be indexed. In fact, we don't want the first URL to be showing anymore, we'd like the second URL type to be showing across the board. Also, when I type into Google site:http://www2.learningtree.com/htfu/uswd44/reston/it-and-management-training I'm getting a message that Google can't read the page because of the robots.txt file. But, we have no robots.txt file. I've been told by our web guys that the two pages are exactly the same. I was also told that we've put in an order to have all those old links 301 redirected to the new ones. But still, I'm perplexed as to why these pages are not being indexed or crawled - even manually submitted it into Webmaster tools. So, why is Google still recognizing the old URLs and why are they still showing in the index/search results? And, why is Google saying "A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt" Thanks in advance! Pedram
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | CSawatzky0 -
How to Handle Sketchy Inbound Links to Forum Profile Pages
Hey Everyone, we recently discovered that one of our craft-related websites has a bunch of spam profiles with very sketchy backlink profiles. I just discovered this by looking at the Top Pages report in OpenSiteExplorer.org for our site, and noticed that a good chunk of our top pages are viagra/levitra/etc. type forum profile pages with loads of backlinks from sketchy websites (porn sites, sketchy link farms, etc.). So, some spambot has been building profiles on our site and then building backlinks to those profiles. Now, my question is...we can delete all these profiles, but how should we handle all of these sketchy inbound links? If all of the spam forum profile pages produce true 404 Error pages (when we delete them), will that evaporate the link equity? Or, could we still get penalized by Google? Do we need to use the Link Disavow tool? Also note that these forum profile pages have all been set to "noindex,nofollow" months ago. Not sure how that affects things. This is going to be a time waster for me, but I want to ensure that we don't get penalized. Thanks for your advice!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | M_D_Golden_Peak0