URL change extension to .php from .htm
-
I am looking at changing the platform of an established (7 years) site to PHP based.
Currently most of the URLs have the file extension .htm (“x.com/filename.htm” ) with some URLs being indexed as directory URLs (“x.com/directory/” feeding from “x.com/directory/index.htm”)
So I am considering two options
-
A. Changing just file extensions & create 301 redirects, (x.com/samefilename.htm” -> “x.com/samefilename.php”) and for directory URLs (“x.com/samedirectory/index.htm” -> “x.com/samedirectory/index.php”)
-
B. At the same time taking the opportunity to change the file hierarchy to be more user / seo friendly by changing all URLs to directory URLs – this would be a more extensive redirect than just changing the file extension.
I am interested in what risks / impact would there be of this and the questions I would like some help with are:
- Are there any short term risks to rankings with a filename extension change like this?
- Should an exercise like this be staggered or is it ok to carry out the site-wide change in one go?
- Does a more extensive filename and structure redirect like in option B above introduce more risk than just changing to the .php extension or would the search engines consider this the same?
- For the directory URLs do I even need a 301 redirect after changing index.htm to index.php or will the Search engines not even recognise a change (indexed URL will remain the same)?
Your opinions on the above questions and any other advice / experience you can share would be much appreciated.
Thanks,
Adrian.
-
-
Istvan makes a number of good points and Matt Cutts has certainly alluded to a loss of some link juice when using 301's, although Google's official line is that there is no loss. I'd not seen the 15% number before, which is certainly high enough to be discernible above the 'noise'.
I support his contention that, in terms of getting existing inbound links repointed, it's best to focus on the few high value links and then look for new links driven by quality content. This has the double benefit of cleansing some of the now-devalued link types, whilst appealing to Google's measurable preference for 'fresh' links.
-
Hi Adrian,
with a 301 you lose aprox 15% of link juice (don't remember who gave that exact number, but i still have that in my mind )
So basically if you can change the links that you have control of, it will help. with other links... try to focus more on gaining new link partnerships. the 301 will lose some of the link juice, but new partners will push the link diversity and will help you more.
I hope it helped and good luck ;-),
Istvan
-
Thanks Istvan and Alan for the responses.
On the subject of incoming links - I can change internal links and inbound links from other sites I control however the vast majority of links will still point to the old page location so my follow up question is just how serious is this link juice loss due to the 301 and is this a serious enough reason to not do the change and keep the locations as they are now?
-
Thank you Alan
-
Istvan is give a good answer, i would add one thing, make sure all your internal links point to the new urls, dont rely on the 301, as as Istvan stated, they will leak a little link juice.
-
Hi Adrian,
We had a similar problem not as long ago (changing the website extension from .html to .aspx). What we have experienced is, that the website traffic and rankings went down for aprox. 1-2 week, then it came back up without any problem.
I would suggest to go for all change at one time instead of going with partial rewrite, then again some partial rewrite. (Before you put it alive, test all your links! check for broken links and make sure the redirects are right)
After the website deploy you should resubmit a new sitemap in GWT.
The 301 should be done, so after resubmitting your sitemap in GWT you will not face any duplicate content issue.
The negative part: you will lose some of the link juice thanks to the 301. If you have the possibility contact the webmasters who are already linking to your website and ask them kindly to resolve the URL issue (at least for the highest authority links you have gained in time).
I hope that helped,
Istvan
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
-
Appending a code at the end of a URL
Hi All, Some real estate/ news companies have a code appended to the end of a URL https://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-qld-ormiston-141747584 https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/queensland/childcare-centre-could-face-prosecution-for-leaving-child-on-hot-bus-20230320-p5ctqs.html Can I ask if there's any negative SEO implications for doing this? Cheers Dave
Technical SEO | | Redooo0 -
Old URLs Appearing in SERPs
Thirteen months ago we removed a large number of non-corporate URLs from our web server. We created 301 redirects and in some cases, we simply removed the content as there was no place to redirect to. Unfortunately, all these pages still appear in Google's SERPs (not Bings) for both the 301'd pages and the pages we removed without redirecting. When you click on the pages in the SERPs that have been redirected - you do get redirected - so we have ruled out any problems with the 301s. We have already resubmitted our XML sitemap and when we run a crawl using Screaming Frog we do not see any of these old pages being linked to at our domain. We have a few different approaches we're considering to get Google to remove these pages from the SERPs and would welcome your input. Remove the 301 redirect entirely so that visits to those pages return a 404 (much easier) or a 410 (would require some setup/configuration via Wordpress). This of course means that anyone visiting those URLs won't be forwarded along, but Google may not drop those redirects from the SERPs otherwise. Request that Google temporarily block those pages (done via GWMT), which lasts for 90 days. Update robots.txt to block access to the redirecting directories. Thank you. Rosemary One year ago I removed a whole lot of junk that was on my web server but it is still appearing in the SERPs.
Technical SEO | | RosemaryB3 -
IP Change
Hello MOZ friends! We recently changed servers and subsequently had a change in IP. It's a better and faster server but have seen a significant drop in SERPS. Could this be a result of moving the site? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | wearehappymedia0 -
Friendly URLs for MultiLingual Site
Hi, We have a multilingual website with both latin and non-latin characters, We are working on creating a friendly URL structure for the site. For the Latin languages can we use translated version of the URLs within the language folders? For example - www.site/cars www.site/fr/voitures www.site/es/autos
Technical SEO | | theLotter0 -
Will This Domain Change Hurt
I have a potential client that is looking to change their domain for branding reasons, but does not want to lose their solid SERP position. I'm not concerned about links continuing to pass juice as he was (though I am concerned about the link profile). What I am concerned about is domain age (moving from a 4 year old domain to one that has just been parked for 4 years but not used, or one that is currently just a redirect to his site), and the fact that his current URL is an EMD. He is using his state (only really does work there), plus two solid keywords in the domain, and wants to switch to brand name with one of the two solid keywords he was using. My initial thought is "if it's not broke, don't fix it." How worried should I be about rankings if we change this domain. Thanks for the help, and fire back any questions. Sorry I'm a little vague.
Technical SEO | | DeliaAssociates0 -
Singular vs plural in urls
In keyword research for an ecommerce site, I've found that widget, singular gets a lot more searches than widgets, plural AND is much less competitive. Is it better for SEO purposes to have the URLs (and matching title tags) in the catalog as /brass-widget.html, /steel-widget.html, etc., or /brass-widgets.html, etc.? I'm worried that a) searches for widgets will pass by the singular urls but not vice versa, and b) the singular form will strike visitors as bad grammar. Any advice?
Technical SEO | | AmericanOutlets0 -
Changing url structure
We are an ecommerce site established in 2005 and currently have some great rankings. We are about to move away from our existing platform, actinic and move on to Magento. This will change all our url's. What are the steps we should be asking our web developers to follow in order to minimize the consequences of moving? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | LadyApollo0 -
Canonical for non-exist URL ?
Hi I have a website what has parameter URL. For example www.example.com/index.php?page_id=1&no=2 I want that search engine see my page URL as; www.example.com/toys/cars But this URL is not exist in my website. And when i externally enter this page it goes to 404 page. If i add canonical url as www.example.com/toys/cars to the page www.example.com/index.php?page_id=1&no=2, what happened ? Is the url at the serp change as www.example.com/toys/cars ?
Technical SEO | | SEMTurkey0