Querystring params, rel canonical and SEO
-
I know ideally you should have as clean as possible url structures for optimal SEO.
Our current site contains clean urls with very minimal use of query string params. There is a strong push, for business purposes to include click tracking on our site which will append a query string param to a large percentage of our internal links.
Currently:
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/
Will change to:
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/?tg=zzzzwww
We currently use rel canonical on all pages to properly define the true url in order to remove any possible duplicate content issues.
Given we are already using rel canonical, if we implement the query string click tracking, will this negatively impact our SEO? If so, by how much? Could we run into duplicate content issues?
We get crawled by Google a lot (very big site) and very large percent of our traffic is from Google, but there is a strong business need for this information so trying to weigh pros/cons.
-
Overall I think we are OK, but I just want to point out that since we'll be adding click tracking, we could have numerous urls that all resolve the same page. The "tg" element in my example will change just due to what specific link a user chose to select (but the content of the page will be exactly the same).
One page
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/Internal links to that page
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/?tg=zzzzjj6
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/?tg=zzzzww2
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/?tg=zzzzyy1
http://www.oursite.com/section/content/?tg=zzzzvv4
The tg is irrelevant as an identifier for the page. I don't think that is a problem but it is a slightly different use case as outlined in the referenced Google article.
-
NicB1
The myth is that clean urls are better for indexing, etc. Actually, you do not need to change dynamic to static unless you are worried that the CTR may diminish a bit due to not having a clean url. Personally, I don't think today that even happens more than rarely.
So, go forth and analyze. Now on the off chance there are some who would think that my having started drinking when I got up this morning was effecting my judgement, I went and pulled an old Google WMT post:
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/09/dynamic-urls-vs-static-urls.html
Best
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
-
Relaunching website seo audit
Hi People, We are going to Relaunch the website(https://www.y-axis.com). Url remains the same; the website has good SEO (Ranking, Leads, Traffic...). Website skin (layout, content) is going to change.Hence, would like to know the precautions to secure SEO. Please provide us necessary SEO Checklist for the above request.
Technical SEO | | Anshul.S1 -
Anyone a Bing SEO Expert?
I have a website that is getting great long tail search positions in Google for a website.The site is not getting any Bing or Yahoo positions for these long tail terms. I'm trying to find someone has experience or can give advice on Bing rankings. Is their anything specific I should watch out for when trying to rank in Bing?
Technical SEO | | EngNet0 -
Local SEO - Page Titles
Hi Folks, Complete newbie (well last 12 months) I have recentley added a blog to my site and have been doing quite a bit of quite word researching through google. I have found some good keywords that have up till now escaped me! Heres my question because I trying for local traffic, mainly newcastle durham and sunderlanddo i go with one of the following two options get two very similar keywords in my article and go for both and rely on google to bring up local listings for the end user in my area e.g Small garden design | Garden design from the experts. (keywords bold ) or Garden Design | Newcastle | Sunderland | Durham | so I have geo locations in title either way I will obviously have both keywords and locations in the artcle Help please I dont want to write many hours and find I have missed a trick! Many thank guys n girls!
Technical SEO | | easigrassne0 -
Canonical & rel=prev / next changes to website a good idea or not?
Hi all, I decided yesterday to make a load of changes to my website, and today i woke thinking, should i have done that! So below is an example of what i have done (i will try to explain clearly anyway), can you let me know if you think what i have done would harm or help my website in search results etc... ok, so lets take just one category - Cameras And it has the sub categories - box dome bullet it also has other sub categories (which are actually features, but the only way i can show them on my site is by having them as a sub-category with its own static page, and adding the products to these as secondary categories) vandal proof high resolution night vision previously i have it set up so that every single category / sub category / feature had its own static page, with a canonical tag to itself (i.e cameras.html canonical was to cameras.html, vandalproof.html canonical was to vandalproof.html). Any of the categories / sub cats / features that had more than one page were simply not in search results due to the canonical pointing to "Page 1"... What i have now done: Last night i decided to change all this, now for all categories / sub cats / features i have add rel=prev / next where applicable, and removed the canonical from second / third / fourth pages etc, but left the canonical on "page 1". I also removed any keywords from page 2,3,4 etc and changed descriptions to just page "X" + category name. So for example, page one looks like: and page two looks like: I also went a little further (maybe too far) and decided that the features pages would canonicalize back to cameras so for those i now have: Page 1: Page 2: Any advice is welcome on the above, in regards to which way may be better and why, and obviously if anything jumps out as a mistake... Please advise James
Technical SEO | | isntworkdull0 -
Canonical and 301
Hi We have recently restructured our site and 301 redirected some pages. Unfortunately the new page which we 301 to, still had the canonical tags pointing to the old pages. Would this cause google not to index the new pages....?????
Technical SEO | | jj34340 -
Does redesigning the website effects the SEO?
What are the precautions to be taken in redesigning the website ? do it effect on link building? I am planing to re design my website, most of the Keywords are already optimized by Google, and i have given many back links to it . After redesigning my website will it get effected? Kindly answer my question
Technical SEO | | PrasanthMohanachandran0 -
Seo on a dk site
hi my client has asked if we can seo their dk site , my question is does all link building and article submission have to be in danish
Technical SEO | | Westernoriental0 -
SEO Tomfoolery
Oh Hai, I recently changed the permalink structure on my Wordpress based site, southwestbreaks.co.uk from the standard ?p=123 to a more SEO chummy /%postname%/. As a result, my site has completely dropped off the board for all my previously well ranked search phrases. Having since gotten into SEOmoz a bit more, I can see there are WP plugins available that apparently would've done this a lot more smoothly. I'd be most grateful if someone could explain if this drop off is just temporary, or have I somehow entered Google's shun book? The site has been like this for about 48 hours. Thanks, Tim
Technical SEO | | Southwesttim0