Does "seomoz.org" lose LJ when someone use "seomoz.COM" as the link site?
-
thanks...or does the 301 solve the issue 100%?
-
I stated, the path with upper case was a canonical isssues, not the domain name, you suggested i was confused or mistaken.
i was not canfused or mistaken, I think it is pretty plain you were
-
Alan, I am at a loss here. I don't know what words or combination of words I can type to help you.
The original Q&A asked about a domain URL specifically. For an unknown reason you chose to bring up the folder path portion of the URL which I agree uses a different set of case sensitive rules. All of my comments are directed at the base domain URL which I have expressly and repeatedly shared.
At this point I have done all I can here and I will let this topic go. If you disagree with any portion, that is perfectly ok.
Best Regards
-
Well in this case there is not much to disagree on.
we can test it
Lynux server
https://www.linux.com/learn/docs 200 OK
https://www.linux.com/learn/DOCS 404 Page doe not exist , does not resolve to lower case
Windows server
http://www.bing.com/toolbox/webmaster/ 200 OK
http://www.bing.com/toolbox/WEBMASER/ 200 OK does not resolve to lower caseWindows server with 301 redirect (my server I have 301 to lowercase)
http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/tutorials/how-to-fix-canonical-issues-involving-the-upper-and-lower-case 200 OK
http://perthseocompany.com.au/SEO/tutorials/how-to-fix-canonical-issues-involving-the-upper-and-lower-case 301 permanent redirect , resolves only because of a 301 redirect -
My original reply was going to be....we will have to agree to disagree. I should have stuck to that reply. This issue is not related to the original Q&A anyway. My apologies for allowing the convo to move in this direction.
As for the camelCase example, no it would not resolve unless you 301 it, it would lead to canonical issues (assuming you are talking of path not domain)
The original Q&A only asked about the domain name. I am not sure why you ever brought up the deeper URL path as it seems completely unrelated to the question. My responses were applicable to the domain name itself as I indicated.
Camel case in the domain name is perfectly acceptable and does not case any issues.
-
As for the camelCase example, no it would not resolve unless you 301 it, it would lead to canonical issues (assuming you are talking of path not domain)
IIS servers have a built in url-rewrite template you can use to correct this.
http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/tutorials/how-to-fix-canonical-issues-involving-the-upper-and-lower-case -
I said "(disregarding domain name), " meaning the path
Read first post
“I am not sure about the actual domain name as it seems to give a 200 OK status for seomoz.ORG but resolves to seomoz.org”Meaning that’s fine, because it resolved
“But try changing the path “to does-seomoz-ORG-lose-…””
You will see that you still get the 200 OK status but does not resolve to ”does-seomoz-org-lose-…”
search engines will see this as 2 different URL’s, really it should 301 to lower case
http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo... “Meaning it is not ok
Domain seems to not be a problem, but path is.The link you posted is confirms what I said, at least with windows servers (As I have always worked with Microsoft technologies)
With lynx the problem is worse because it 404’s , this is something I did not know. This would explain the /q/ in the path 404ing if you capitalize it. The rest of the path acts like a windows server (does not 404), I assume this is because of some URL-rewriting.
But the point is UPERCASE in the path will cause a canonical issue. The same conclusion as Ann SmartyI say it SEEMS to be ok for domain name, because I believe it is ok I don’t really know how it resolves, I also notice that Ann Smarty also is ambiguous as for domain name.
-
I believe you are confused or mistaken Alan.
To the best of my knowledge, it makes absolutely no difference to anything related to Google whether any letters are capitalized in a domain name. In 100% of cases, Google will show the domain name of an organic search result in lower case.
Some support on this statement: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/url-capitalization-and-seo/12667/
I have personally used websites where internal links always used camel-case, but Google still displayed the URL as lower-case. If I am mistaken, please feel free to correct me. I would love to learn a bit and update my knowledge.
-
Well depends on what you mean by case sensitive, the url will work, but it will be seen as 2 separate Url’s to search engines if you use upper case or not(disregarding domain name) , to me case sensitive means it will 404. That is why I pointed out that the “/q/ “ is truly case sensitive, if you change it to /Q/ it will 404
Case sensitive in programming languages means how you compare, Binary or TextIn text Q= q
In binary Q<>q
as they have different binary numbers, the q in the path of this post is probably used in a binary compare and is case sensitive, the rest of the path is not case sensitive.
-
I agree with Phillip as well.
A 301 redirect is designed to redirect the user from the old URL to the new one. When the redirect occurs, an estimated 1 - 10% of link juice is lost. This loss is by design and will always occur on any form of redirect. The loss is amplified when multiple redirects occur. A good short video on this topic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1lVPrYoBkA
I believe Anthony only capitalized the .COM for emphasis. It is true the folder and file portions of a URL are case sensitive, the domain name is not. You can visit any URL on the internet via any form of capitalization of it's domain name. www.seomoz.org = wWw.SeOmoz.ORG.
-
Philip is correct, they will lose link juice thought a 301 from com to org
but it goes further then that as you used uppercase letters. I am not sure about the actual domain name as it seems to give a 200 OK status for seomoz.ORG but resolves to seomoz.org
But try changing the path “to does-seomoz-ORG-lose-…”
You will see that you still get the 200 OK status but does not resolve to ”does-seomoz-org-lose-…”
search engines will see this as 2 different URL’s, really it should 301 to lower case
http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/reports/violation/the-page-contains-multiple-canonical-formats
Something else I noticed was the /q/ in the path, if you change that to /Q/ you get a 404, this would be because of some code they have comparing the q as binary and not text I suggest -
A 301 redirect causes a link to lose as much as 10% of its link juice so SEOMoz doesn't quite get as much, but they still get the vast majority of it.
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
-
Site Wide Footer Links Exception, Any Advice ?
I was reading the following Q&A on site wide footer links, http://moz.com/community/q/site-wide-links-from-another-domain-could-these-cause-a-problem I feel my situation is slightly different however,we have lots of international sites linking to each other through these links like our sites for different counties and languages so our German, French and Spanish sites, http://www.cirrusresearch.co.uk/ Our main UK site has always ranked very well and has never really had a problem despite always having had these followed sitewide footer links, Because of this we regularly get high amount of visitors performing English language searches from different counties and i don't think it is a bad thing having more country/language specific sites of ours available in the footer for visitors that may prefer a more localized site, Our main website has to be at least 10+ years old at least, has a lot of strong links compared to our competitors, but the smaller German and Spanish sites are relatively smaller in size and most only 1-2 years old, my big fear is that these smaller sites would not be able to stand on there own without these footer links from our main site, After reading the community question caused me to question this ?, should i take a leap of faith and no-follow all of these site wide footer links connecting all of our sites ? we never really had a problem ranking so i don't really see the need but would this be the best thing to do ? Thank you, James
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Antony_Towle0 -
Would be the network site map page considered link spam
In the course of the last 18 months my sites have lost from 50 to 70 percent of traffic. Never have used any tricks, just simple white-hat SEO. Anyway, I am now trying to fix things that hadn't been a problem before all those Google updates, but apparently now are. Would appreciate any help.. I used to have a network site map page on everyone of my sites (about 30 sites). It basically would be a page called 'our network' and it'll show a list of links to all of my other sites. These pages were indexed, had decent PR and didn't seem to cause any problem. Here's an example of one of them:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | romanbond
http://www.psoriasisguide.ca/psoriasis_scg.html In the light of Panda and Penguin and all these 'bad links' I decided to get rid of most of them. My traffic didn't recover at all, it actually went further down. Not sure if there is any connection to what I'd done. So, the question is: In your opinion/experience, do you think such network sitemap pages could be causing penalties for link spam?0 -
What things, that we might overlook, help retain link juice on the site?
Since subscribing to Moz, I have been focussing alot on some of the more technical aspects of SEO. The current thing I am finding interesting is stopping link juice leaks. Here are a selection of some of the things I have done: I have cloaked my affiliate links - see http://yoast.com/cloak-affiliate-links/ Removed some html coded social share links within the theme, and replaced with javascript plugin (http://wordpress.org/plugins/flare/) Used the Moz toolbar to view as Google, to see what google is seeing. Removed some meta links at the bottom of blog posts (author etc) that were duplicated. Now, I don't intend to go over the top with this, as links to social accounts on each page are there to encourage engagement etc, but are there any things you may have come across \ tips that people may have overlooked but perhaps should look out for? As example as some of the things that might be interesting to discuss: Are too many tags, categories bad? Do you index your tag, date archive pages? Does it matter?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jonathan19790 -
How to identify 404 that get links from external sites (but not search engines)?
one of our site had a poor site architecture causing now about 10.000s of 404 being currently reported in google webmaster tools. Any idea about easily detecting among these thousands of 404, which ones are coming from links from external websites (so filtering out 404 caused by links from our own domain and 404 from search engines)? crawl bandwidth seems to be an issue on this domain. Anything that can be done to accelerate google removing these 404 pages from their index? Due to number of 404 manual submission in google wbt one by one is not an option.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
Or do you believe that google automatically will stop crawling these 404 pages within a month or so and no action needs to be taken? thanks0 -
To "Guest Blog" or "Ghost Blog"?
To "Guest Blog" or "Ghost Blog"? I've been wondering which would be better given G's "authorship" tracking program. "Onreact.Com" indirectly raised this issue in a recent blog post "Google Authorship Markup Disadvantages Everybody Ignores" as : "Google might dismiss your guest articles. Your great guest blogging campaign on dozens of other blogs might fail because Google will count the links all as one as the same author has written all the posts and linked to himself. So maybe the links won't count at all." Assuming all other things are equal, would you use "Guest Author" with G Authorship attribution (if allowed) or just ghost the article and include an in-text link without attribution to you as the author?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JustDucky1 -
Relaunching old site - Will it regain former link equity?
We've got an older site with significant link equity. It 301 redirects to our current website, passing all traffic, link value, etc. The 301 redirects have been in place for several years. Since the original redirects were setup, the current website has acquired massive link equity above and beyond the redirects. I am considering removing all the 301 redirects and bringing the old site back to life (same URLs, content, design as before). I would also keep the current website live as is. The goal is to capture more SERP visibility by having 2 website "brands" in the same market. Will the old site regain it's former link equity or will we effectively be starting from scratch? In other words, does Google consider how long 301 redirects have been in place?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jeff_DomainTools0 -
If google ignores links from "spammy" link directories ...
Then why does SEO moz have this list: http://www.seomoz.org/dp/seo-directory ?? Included in that list are some pretty spammy looking sites such as: <colgroup><col width="345"></colgroup>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | adriandg
| http://www.site-sift.com/ |
| http://www.2yi.net/ |
| http://www.sevenseek.com/ |
| http://greenstalk.com/ |
| http://anthonyparsons.com/ |
| http://www.rakcha.com/ |
| http://www.goguides.org/ |
| http://gosearchbusiness.com/ |
| http://funender.com/free_link_directory/ |
| http://www.joeant.com/ |
| http://www.browse8.com/ |
| http://linkopedia.com/ |
| http://kwika.org/ |
| http://tygo.com/ |
| http://netzoning.com/ |
| http://goongee.com/ |
| http://bigall.com/ |
| http://www.incrawler.com/ |
| http://rubberstamped.org/ |
| http://lookforth.com/ |
| http://worldsiteindex.com/ |
| http://linksgiving.com/ |
| http://azoos.com/ |
| http://www.uncoverthenet.com/ |
| http://ewilla.com/ |0 -
Migrating multiple sites and trying to save link juice
I have an interesting problem SEOmozers and wanted to see if I could get some good ideas as to what I should to for the greatest benefit. I have an ecommerce website that sells tire sensors. We just converted the old site to a new platform and payment processor, so the site has changed completely from the original, just offering virtually the same products as before. You can find it at www.tire-sensors.com We're ranked #1 for the keyword "tire sensors" in Google. We sell sensors for ford, honda, toyota, etc -- and tire-sensors.com has all of those listed. Before I came along, the company I'm working for also had individual "mini ecommerce" sites created with only 1 brand of sensors and the URL to match that maker. Example : www.fordtiresensors.com is our site, only sells the Ford parts from our main site, and ranks #1 in Google for "ford tire sensors" I don't have analytics on these old sites but Google Keyword Tool is saying "ford tire sensors" gets 880 local searches a month, and other brand-specific tire sensors are receiving traffic as well. We have many other sites that are doing the same thing. www.suzukitiresensors.com (ranked #2 for "suzuki tire sensors") Only sells our Suzuki collection from the main site's inventory etc We need to get rid of the old sites because we want to shut down the payment gateway and various other things those sites are using, and move to one consolidated system (aka www.tire-sensors.com) Would simply making each maker-specific URL (ie. fordtiresensors.com) 301 redirect to our main site (www.tire-sensors.com) give us to most benefit, rankings, traffic etc? Or would that be detrimental to what we're trying to do -- capturing the tire sensors market for all car manufacturers? Suggestions? Thanks a lot in advance! Jordan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JordanGodbey0