Site Architecture Trade Off
-
Hi All
I'm looking for some feedback regarding a site architecture issue I'm having with a client. They are about to enter a re-design and as such we're restructuring the site URLs and amending/ adding pages.
At the moment they have ranked well off the back of original PPC landing pages that were added onto the site, such as www.company.com/service1, www.company.com/service2, etc
The developer, from a developer point of view wished to create a logical site architecture with multiple levels of directories etc. I've suggested this probably isn't the best way to go, especially as the site isn't that large (200-300 pages) and that the key pages we're looking to rank should be as high up the architecture as we can make them, and that this amendment could hurt their current high rankings.
It looks like the trade off may be that the client is willing to let some pages be restructured so for example, www.company.com/category/sub-category/service would be www.company.com/service.
However, although from a page basis this might be a solution, is there a drawback to having this in place for only a few pages rather than sitewide? I'm just wondering if these pages might stick out like a sore thumb to Google.
-
Hi Dejan
Thanks, all good points so much appreciated.
-
Firstly URL effect is minor in comparison to the actual navigational hierarchy.
I give preference to short and neat URLs however www.company.com/category/sub-category/service doesn't sound terrible to me. What would be my primary concern is if this is how you get to that page:
Home > Category > Sub Category > Service (3 clicks)
If this "Service" is a key service to your client then it would be wise to create navigational wormholes to drill through from say home page or top level category page and label it as "popular" or within a piece of text.
In a website with 200-300 pages PageRank distribution and indexation should not be a problem (assuming you have decent links) so there is no huge need for flattening site architecture to the point where you have 1000 links on each page.
I have heard Matt Cutts validate this point in at least two or three of his videos stating that linking your main content from as high as possible is the key.
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
-
Moving site from html to Wordpress site: Should I port all old pages and redirect?
Any help would be appreciated. I am porting an old legacy .html site, which has about 500,000 visitors/month and over 10,000 pages to a new custom Wordpress site with a responsive design (long overdue, of course) that has been written and only needs a few finishing touches, and which includes many database features to generate new pages that did not previously exist. My questions are: Should I bother to port over older pages that are "thin" and have no incoming links, such that reworking them would take time away from the need to port quickly? I will be restructuring the legacy URLs to be lean and clean, so 301 redirects will be necessary. I know that there will be link juice loss, but how long does it usually take for the redirects to "take hold?" I will be moving to https at the same time to avoid yet another porting issue. Many thanks for any advice and opinions as I embark on this massive data entry project.
Technical SEO | | gheh20130 -
Then why my site is not ranking
My website's DA and PAs are good compare with my competitors. Then why my site is not ranking.
Technical SEO | | Somanathan0 -
Why is this site ranking better than me
Hi just used the compare tool to try and find out why a site is ranking better than me http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/comparisons?site=www.lifestylemonthly.co.uk%2F my site is www.in2town.co.uk and the site i am comparing with is http://www.lifestylemonthly.co.uk/ Can anyone explain what is going on and how i can achieve better ranking results
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
Multiple domains pointing to same site
Over the years, we have acquired a great number of variations of our domains, or industry-specific domains to protect our brand. Currently, the majority of those domains are parked at the registrars. Would we do any harm to our rankings if we pointed the dormant domains to our website (www.ellsworth.com)? If not, are there any recommendations as the best way to do this, or just point them to the same IP?
Technical SEO | | Ellsworth0 -
404 Error from site - is this normal?
I have been trying to clean up any 404 errors. We keep getting the following: URL /include/vdimgck.php referring domain http://www.856d.c@m/plus/feedback.php rendered domain unclickable by adding the "@" since I do not know if it is safe. I just turned off the trackbacks and pings in the blog since I saw it was producing duplicate content and from what I read it is not worth keeping those with Wordpress. is vdimgck.php anything some here instantly recognizes ? It tops all our 404 errors, seems like a lot of requests. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Force70 -
How is this site doing this?
http://www.meccabingo.com It shows a splash / promotion page yet you check the cache and it's the real homepage, they are doing this so they don't lose rankings but how are they redirecting users to that but Google is caching the real homepage? is it friendly? thanks!!
Technical SEO | | AdiRste0 -
Site revision
our site has complete redesign including site architecture, page url and page content (except domain). It looks like a new site. The old site has been indexed about thirty thousand results by google. now what should i do first?
Technical SEO | | jallenyang0 -
Old proudct pages - eComm Site
Hello, Geeks.com currently has approx. 194k pages in Google index. (approx. 30k suppl.) http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Ageeks.com+inurl%3Aadditem&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#sclient=psy&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=Ltp&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&source=hp&q=site:www.geeks.com%2F&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&fp=876898a2ea0c82c7&biw=1512&bih=641 We have many thousands of old product urls which have gone out of stock, never to "see the light of day" again. 14 years worth! Should we be 301'ing all old products pages that go out of stock, if we know for certain we will never carry that SKU again? If we were to do a "mass" 301 of 30k+ urls how would google or other SE's react to that? Could there be any negative implications to doing so? What is considered best practice for eComm sites, as I imagine we are not alone with this type of situation. Thank you in advance. Michael B.
Technical SEO | | JustinGeeks0