Short URL's vs Optimised URL's
-
Howdy Mozzers!
What are your thoughts on short URL's vs Optimised URL's. For example if a website currently sells wood furniture and wants to target the keyword "Wood Furniture For Sale", which URL would be preferable:
Short URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture
Optimised URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture-for-sale
The website also uses facet navigation and selected attributes are added in a fixed order sequence after the category. For example if Cane is selected as wood type:
Short URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture/Cane
Optimised URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture-for-sale/Cane
Which one do you prefer (between the short URL and optimised URL) and why?
Cheers!
MozAddict
-
Hi Kevin,
Thank you for contributing your thoughts. I think keywords in URL's are useful in two ways
1. They give an indication to users what the page is about
2. They give an indication to search engines what the page is about
Although the keywords "Cane wood furniture for sale" can be used in the Meta Title, H1 tag and onsite content, I don't see any harm in adding them to the URL as an additional indicator, other than the downside of increasing the URL length.
So I suppose it depends on whether google gives more preference to keywords in URL's over their length or vice versa
-
Man, that sure seems like splitting hairs but I've literally spent days trying to decide the answer to this very question. I personally just try to get into my customer's head and try to figure out what would be the more likely search term. I'm leaning toward the optimized URL simply because if I'm looking to buy wood furniture, I'd be more likely to search for "wood furniture for sale." Then again, you might have custom wood furniture, or antique wood furniture, or maybe you restore or refinish wood furniture.
At the end of this, one is just going to have to go with the URL people might most likely search for. But then that's just the URL. You can mention all of those key words on that page, which should then rank fairly well for wood furniture. After Google works it's magic behind (now) closed doors to see who searches for what and then bounces out of your site, then you'll start ranking organically for the words that get the best results for your mix. If you get the recipe wrong, you'll see it in the SERPs (or not) and you can edit or add to your page later.
My thoughts only.
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
-
Should I change my website urls?
We're translating our website in a few languages (FR / DE / JP) using subdirectories. So our website will have the following urls www.brand.com/en
On-Page Optimization | | dcalexandra
www.brand.com/fr
www.brand.com/de
www.brand.com/jp I would like to change the url structure of a few pages from www.brand.com/section/feature-name to www.brand.com/feature-name Is it a good idea to do this now since we're adding the subfolders and these are anyway new urls in google's eyes?0 -
Url shows up in "Inurl' but not when using time parameters
Hey everybody, I have been testing the Inurl: feature of Google to try and gauge how long ago Google indexed our page. SO, this brings my question. If we run inurl:https://mysite.com all of our domains show up. If we run inurl:https://mysite.com/specialpage the domain shows up as being indexed If I use the "&as_qdr=y15" string to the URL, https://mysite.com/specialpage does not show up. Does anybody have any experience with this? Also on the same note when I look at how many pages Google has indexed it is about half of the pages we see on our backend/sitemap. Any thoughts would be appreciated. TY!
On-Page Optimization | | HashtagHustler1 -
301 vs 410
Hello everyone! I'm going through a large list of old 404 links that search console has given me and a lot of these links need to be 301'd. My question is, should I 410 some of these links if I can't find a good place to 301 to? Or is there another thing I should do that is better practice. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | KathleenDC0 -
Exact keyword vs connecting words.
Hi guys, I'm wondering if there's a huge difference between exact keywords vs connecting words. i.e. "limo service chicago" vs " limo service in chicago" or something similar. It's tough to have 4+ keywords on a page sound great without using some form of connecting word. Will google still rank the page as high if I use connection words in a few instances of the keyword? Or should I just leave the exact keyword fir all instances. Thanks in advance. Aron
On-Page Optimization | | aronwp0 -
Will Google Custom Search results on my home page kill it's ranking?
This is probably a dumb question, but here goes anyway. 🙂 On a site I have it would be very useful to the reader to offer a search box that uses a Google Custom Search that I have optimized to search websites that are closely on-topic with my site. I know it sounds bad that I would send people to other sites, but just assume that the reasons are valid for this discussion. My question is, if the search results are set to display on the same page (the home page) as the search box, will the links in the search results to external sites just bleed my page rank to death? I assume it would, but thought I'd check just in case I'm missing something. I have to option to place the results on separate page of my site, and noindex it, but it won't be as powerful as it would be on the home page.
On-Page Optimization | | bizzer0 -
What's the best practice for handling duplicate content of product descriptions with a drop-shipper?
We write our own product descriptions for merchandise we sell on our website. However, we also work with drop-shippers, and some of them simply take our content and post it on their site (same photos, exact ad copy, etc...). I'm concerned that we'll loose the value of our content because Google will consider it duplicated. We don't want the value of our content undermined... What's the best practice for avoiding any problems with Google? Thanks, Adam
On-Page Optimization | | Adam-Perlman0 -
Can Your Site Get Penalized For Keyword Stuffing On An 'Untarged' Keyword?
My site has dropped since the EMD/Panda 20 roll out and I am looking for reasons why. I am looking at Keyword Stuffing as one potential problem. My web site is on the topic of WordPress Security with that being the main keyword I want to target. Now I can limit the number of occurrences of 'wordpress security' to below the recommended 15, but it is impossible to do this for 'wordpress' without severely compromising the user experience. I've got other content on topics such as WordPress Backup and WordPress Security Plugins etc, so obviously the word 'wordpress' is bound to appear frequently. Is there a risk that Google will penalize me for Keyword Stuffing on 'wordpress' and thus pull down the site or page for other keywords? Or would it simply mean I won't be able to rank for 'wordpress' (which I am quite happy about)? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | andersvin0 -
Canonical URL's - Fixed but still negatively impacted
I recently noticed that our canonical url's were not set up correctly. The incorrect setup predates me but it could have been in place for close to a year, maybe a bit more. Each of the url's had a "sortby" parameter on all of them. I had our platform provider make the fix and now everything is as it should be. I do see issues caused by this in Google Webmaster, for instance in the HTML suggestions it's telling me that pages have duplicate title tags when in fact this is the same page but with a variety of url parameters at the end of the url. To me this just highlights that there is a problem and we are being negatively impacted by the previous implementation. My question is has anyone been in this situation? Is there any way to flush this out or push Google to relook at this? Or is this a sit and be patient situation. I'm also slightly curious if Google will at some point look and see that the canonical urls were changed and then throw up a red flag even though they are finally the way they should be. Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | dgmiles
Dave0