Replacing "_" with "-" in url, results in new url?
-
We ran SEOmoz's "On-Page Optimization" tool on a url which contains the character "_".
According to the tool:
"Characters which are less commonly used in URLs may cause problems with accessibility, interpretation and ranking in search engines. It is considered a best practice to stick to standard URL structures to avoid potential problems."
"Rewrite the URL to contain only standard characters."
Therefore we will rewrite the url, replacing "_" with "-".
Will search engines consider the "-" url a different one? Do we need to 301 the old url to the new one?
Thanks for your help!
-
One reason to change all URLs from _ to - is conformity.
If you have some that are _ and some that are -
the question is how will you remember which one to use, for a particular page?
For that reason, I would convert them all.
As for using a canonical tag, I don't know, you'd need to know what google and otehr search engines do with that information, if anything. I would also worry about what they will do with it in the future, because these things are liable to change.
If it was me, I would change them all and redirect the stragglers.
-
Why not use rel canonical? I would prefer that to a 301 (my 2nd choice)
-
To throw in my 2 cents, the benefit in rewriting the URL (and making a 301) comes from Google's ability to then clearly recognize the keywords that you're using within it (assuming that you're synching your on page KWs). Google views hot_keyword_landing_page.html as hotkeywordlandingpage.html - Matt Cutts on underscores vs. dashes in URLs. The downside is having to keep the 301 in place if the page has IBLs.
-
Yes it will. Had to re-write a few items myself and any little change will make a new URL.
301 it is best.
-
FYI, based on the information provided by the SEOmoz tool we will revamp the page (tags, look, content), therefore it'll be a "new page".
-
As stated before, the answer is Yes. Should you do it ? I would answer no.
You should do it for new content, but do move all you're content to other URL and 301 just for this. This would no do too much good.
-
Well this is an easy one.
_Will search engines consider the "-" url a different one? _Yes.
Do we need to 301 the old url to the new one? Yes.
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
-
Change of URL + SEO Impact
We recently changed the URLs from our site http://www.website.com (old)
On-Page Optimization | | ederdesign
https://website.com/us/en/ (new) Our ranking is plummeting every since and I wonder if the new URL had something to do with it. Do you know if that change, could have impacted the ranking?0 -
Value of URL Changes
Hi Guys, I have a question. Each product listed on my webstie has product number like /product.php?id=3624. After I spent many hours with MOZ, I figured out that this approach is wrong and I should use the product name as URL to achieve better SEO performance. Now I am planing to change the URL generating algoritm but should I do it for existing products. Some of them have already been linked to external websites. I am thinking to create mirror URLs but this may cause rather damage on my website. Do you know what is the right answer? Best, Tony
On-Page Optimization | | Threeding.com0 -
URL Path. What is better for SEO
Hello Moz people, Is it better for SEO to have a URL path like this: flowersite.com/anniversary_flowers/dozen_roses OR flowersite.com/dozen_roses Is it better to have the full trail of pages in the URL?
On-Page Optimization | | CKerr0 -
Results clustered in blue below the main result
There are multiple results that appear in blue below the main result for a query from a particular domain. For example, if I search 'mobile phones online' on google.co.uk, the result field from www.dialaphone.co.uk shows me multiple results clustered in blue - 'HTC One Silver', 'Samsung', 'iPhone5S', 'Free Gifts'. I am trying to understand what these are, and why these show up. Ideally, I would like the results for my domain to show up in a similar fashion, and am wondering if there is something special that I would need to do in this regard. Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | rjchugh0 -
Similar URLs
I'm making a site of LSAT explanations. The content is very meaningful for LSAT students. I'm less sure the urls and headings are meaningful for Google. I'll give you an example. Here are two URLs and heading for two separate pages: http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-1/q-10/ - LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q 10 http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-2/q10/ - LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning II, Q10 There are two logical reasoning sections on LSAT 69. For the first url is for question 10 from section 1, the second URL is for question 10 from the second LR section. I noticed that google.com only displays 23 urls when I search "site:http://lsathacks.com". A couple of days ago it displayed over 120 (i.e. the entire site). 1. Am I hurting myself with this structure, even if it makes sense for users? 2. What could I do to avoid it? I'll eventually have thousands of pages of explanations. They'll all be very similar in terms of how I would categorize them to a human, e.g. "LSAT 52, logic games question 12" I should note that the content of each page is very different. But url, title and h1 is similar. Edit: I could, for example, add a random keyword to differentiate titles and urls (but not H1). For example: http://lsathacks.com/explanations/lsat-69/logical-reasoning-2/q10-car-efficiency/ LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q 10, Car efficiency But the url is already fairly long as is. Would that be a good idea?
On-Page Optimization | | graemeblake0 -
How about this "onpage overoptimisation" everybody is talking about? Are the on-page optimisation reports still to be used?
Are the on-page optimisation reports still to be used? If we do check all factors we risk penalization because of latest Panda update?
On-Page Optimization | | MugurCosminFrunzetti0 -
Hierarchy and consistency in ecommerce URLs
One of the first things I remember reading about SEO and URLs, a long time ago, is that keywords are important, and hierarchy is important, for search engines and for users. Hierarchy in URLs would give the search engines an idea of the structure of the site, and users would be able to edit the URLs to continue navigating. I'm wondering about URLs, hierarchy and usability lately, since I've seen that ASOS uses a new URL structure on their site. At first glance, I thought it was brilliant, so I would like to get all of your opinions as well. For those of you that haven't seen the URLs: for categories, ASOS uses a structure as you would expect it, but for products they don't insert the category in the URL. Instead they insert the brand name as the first part of the URL, followed by the product title. Some examples: Category:
On-Page Optimization | | DocdataCommerce
www.asos.com/women/dresses/... Product:
www.asos.com/french-connection/french-connection-tie-waist-pocket-stripe-dress/... I can see the importance of brand name for a site like ASOS, and like how they stressed this by inserting not the category but the brand for products. I don't know how much ASOS still relies on organic non-ASOS related keyword traffic, but still. Now, for hierarchy, I guess a good internal linking structure will tell the search engines about the hierarchy of a site as well, right? So perhaps hierarchy in the URL isn't that important? Perhaps something like this would be just as good as anything, given a good internal link structure? www.onlinestore.com/category/
www.onlinestore.com/subcategory/
www.onlinestore.com/brand/product-title/ Now, I understand that if you use this structure, you wouldn't be able to have men/shirts and women/shirts, but let's say that you don't have subcategories that use the same names. In this case, how important is hierarchy? And, what do you think about this URL structure for an ecommerce site for which brands are important?0 -
2 URLs, same content, 1 with keywords. Does this hurt me?
I'm in the process of adding some new features to our site and have a question about our URLs. Most of our URLs consist of either sitename.com/contentname or sitename.com/content/contentid I'm in the process of building a directory to those pages. The directory has a number of filters which will ultimately point to the destination page. sitename.com/filter1/filter2/contentid or sitename.com/filter1/filter2/contentname The destinations will have references. From an SEO perspective, I would think I want the filter1/filter2 version of the link indexed since this will add keywords that someone might search for. However, since the filters are dynamic, if someone just searches for contentname I would want to have sitename.com/contentname returned in the search results. Do I get any SEO benefit out of building those filter links as described if they are not the canonical links?
On-Page Optimization | | JoeCotellese810