Long URL's
-
So I'm super new at SEO and learning a lot. I'm a small business owner and enjoy doing it myself.
Are long URL's good or bad?
Like this:
Is that too long? The german-shepherd-puppies-the-girls is an actual page with actual content.
Do those hurt me?
-
Excellent questions thanks.
I wish to further the question by asking if Google or Bing actually penialise you for long url such as in the original question or as in my own site: http://www.ditalia.com.au/wedding-dress-wedding-dresses-and-bridal-gowns-designed-and-made
Do the SE's look in the urls for the search terms? I was told they no-longer do that.
-
Just to clarify, 70 characters is a good rule of thumb for title tags, however that limit is largely in place due to the number of characters that Google displays in search results.
I personally think 80-100 is a good rule of thumb for maximum length on a URL but it's not always feasible, and the best practice for URLs is not as clearly delineated as title tags.
-
Hi Joshua,
There's not a perfect cutoff mark as far as URL length. In general, I try to clearly identify the keyword targeted as the page URL, and stick to one subfolder, or occassionally 2 subfolders on a larger site. Beyond that, I try to avoid being redundant, which is the biggest issue with the example you presented - you should try not to duplicate long strings inside the URL - in this case using "german-shepherd-puppies" twice is what makes it too long and redundant.
Assuming you want to target the keyword "Long Haired German Shepherd Puppies", I would rather see a URL like one of these:
- http://www.farnorthkennel.com/puppies/long-haired-german-shepherd/
- http://www.farnorthkennel.com/long-haired-german-shepherd-puppies/
Then for the actual page for Lava or one of the other dogs you'd probably do one of these:
- http://www.farnorthkennel.com/puppies/long-haired-german-shepherd/lava/
- http://www.farnorthkennel.com/long-haired-german-shepherd-puppies/lava/
That is an effective URL that isn't too keyword stuffed and isn't redundant.
Taking a further look at the site, you could also consider options like these:
-
Hi Joshua
A lot of SEO's recommend 70 characters or less, unless you are seeking particular long tail key word combinations. I agree
I recommend you read the following articles:
In particular the title tags section: http://www.seomoz.org/beginners-guide-to-seo/basics-of-search-engine-friendly-design-and-development
and this blog post http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/title-tag
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
-
Can bots crawl this homepage's content?
The website is https://ashleydouglas.com.au/ I tried using http://www.seo-browser.com/ to see if bots could see the content on the site, but the tool was unable to retrieve the page. I used mobile-friendly test and it just rendered some menu links - no content and images. I also used Fetch and Render on Search Console. The result for 'how google sees the page' and 'how a visitor sees the page' are the same and only showing the main header image. Anything below isn't shown. Does this mean that bots can't actually read all content on the page past the header image? I'm not well versed with what's going on with the code. Why are the elements below the header not rendering? Is it the theme? Plugins? Thank you.
On-Page Optimization | | nhhernandez0 -
Long-tail with few searches vs. Generic with many
Our business is a contract packager/manufacturer of products sold to very prominent brands who sell through retail. For example, we make the sunscreen under a brand’s name, which you might then find on the shelf in Target or CVS. As I’ve optimized our pages, I’ve attempted to go long-tail, which has been simply to add “…contract packaging” or a variation after the particular product. So, instead of trying to compete in “sunscreen”, which would pit me against big-box distributors and prominent brands and sellers of sunscreen, I’ve optimized for “sunscreen manufacturers.” “Sunscreen” has 31K – 72K searches, with an 81 Difficulty and 67 Potential. “Sunscreen manufacturers” has a low 13 Difficulty and a decent 54 Potential, but only 51 – 100 searches. Some of my terms have only 0 – 10 searches, but I’ve been thinking that it’s better to compete for fewer but more qualified / buyer-intent searches and have generally lower Difficulty. Can you please tell me if this is a smart strategy, or if I should instead try to compete in higher-volume terms but much greater Difficulty? Thanks a lot for everyone's help.
On-Page Optimization | | Beau_W0 -
Javascript(0) extension causing an excess of 404's
For some reason I am getting a duplicate version of my urls with /javascript(0) at the end. These are creating an abundance of 404 errors. I know I am not supposed to block JS files so what is the best way to block these? Ex: http://www.jasonfox.me/infographics/page/8/javascript(0) is a 404 http://www.jasonfox.me/infographics/page/8/ is not Thank you.
On-Page Optimization | | jasonfox.me0 -
Recommendation: Add a canonical URL tag referencing this URL to the header of the page.
Please clarify: In the page optimization tool, seomoz recommends using the canonical url tag on the unique page itself. Is it the same canonical url tag used when want juice to go to the original page? Although the canonical URL tag is generally thought of as a way to solve duplicate content problems, it can be extremely wise to use it on every (unique) page of a site to help prevent any query strings, session IDs, scraped versions, licensing deals or future developments to potentially create a secondary version and pull link juice or other metrics away from the original. We believe the canonical URL tag is a best practice to help prevent future problems, even if nothing is specifically duplicate/problematic today. Please give example.
On-Page Optimization | | AllIsWell0 -
Removing old URLs that are being used for my on page optimization?
Is there a way to remove old URL's that are still being used for my keywords for my on page optimization? They are giving me grades of F since they no longer exist and if I change the URL to the current one, the grade becomes an A, but they are still showing after the new crawl.
On-Page Optimization | | Dirty0 -
Different pages for OS's vs 1 Page with Dynamic Content (user agent), what's the right approach?
We are creating a new homepage and the product are at different stages of development for different OS's. The value prop/messaging/some target keywords will be different for the various OS's for that reason. Question is, for SEO reasons, is it better to separate them into different pages or use 1 page and flip different content in based on the user agent?
On-Page Optimization | | JoeLin0 -
Rename index.php or keyword in URL?
It is important for me to get good search results for keyword + city name For instance: tulips amsterdam What would be better: renaming index.php or adding the cityname to the URL? www.example.com/amsterdam/tulips OR www.example.com/pages/tulips-amsterdam
On-Page Optimization | | svdg0 -
Absolute vs relative urls
Hello, Should absolute or relative urls to be used for the internal links? I heard mixed opinions on that: One source claims that web crawlers prefer absolute urls as they are more understandable Other source points that there is no difference for web crawlers what urls are used and relative urls are shorter which reduces the size of a page. Which option is recommended? Many thanks Darius
On-Page Optimization | | LinenMe0