URL - Well Formed or Malformed
-
Hi Mozzers,
I've been mulling over whether my URLs could benefit a little SEO tweaking. I'd be grateful for your opinion.
For instance, we've a product, a vintage (second hand), red Chanel bag. At the moment the URL is:
www.vintageheirloom.com/vintage-chanel-bags/2.55-bags/red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag-1362483150
Broken down...
vintage-chanel-bags = this is the main product category, i.e. vintage chanel bags
2.55-bags = is a sub category of the main category above. They are vintage Chanel 2.55 bags, but I've not included 'vintage' again. 2.55 bags are a type of Chanel bag.
red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag = this is the product, the bag
**1362483150 **= this is a unique id, to prevent the possibility of duplicate URLs
As you no doubt can see we target, in particular, the phrase **vintage. **The actual bag / product title is: Vintage Chanel Red 2.55 classic double flap bag 10” / 25cm
With this in mind, would I be better off trying to match the product name with the end of the URL as closely as possible?
So a close match below would involve not repeating 'chanel' again:
www.vintageheirloom.com/chanel-bags/2.55-bags/vintage-red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag
or an exact match below would involve repeating 'chanel':
www.vintageheirloom.com/chanel-bags/2.55-bags/vintage-chanel-red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag
This may open up more flexibility to experiment with product terms like second hand, preowned etc.
Maybe this is a bad idea as I'm removing the phrase 'vintage' from the main category. But this logical extension of this looks like keyword stuffing !!
www.vintageheirloom.com/vintage-chanel-bags/vintage-2.55-bags/vintage-chanel-red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag
Maybe this is over analyzing, but I doubt it?
Thanks for looking.
Kevin
-
Thanks Everett,
Strange, the product on the website appears in two places, on the homepage 'Featured' product, and in the Chanel > 2.55 bags category. When I check both I only see the product name after the .com/.
Thanks for the heads up about restructuring to match the rel canonical, makes perfect sense. I'll be moving over to Wordpress, Woocomerce at some point in the future. I'll look into making the linkable URL neat and tidy as suggested.
Much appreciated...
Kevin
-
The product I checked (see above) had rel canonical tags that used the first category (though not the second / sub-category). That is different than what you listed as "default" above.
Having the default rel canonical tag be .com/product-name-UniqueID/ is fine too. The important thing here is that you should be consistent. Also realize that using the rel canonical tag like this is sort of a temporary band-aid. Ideally you would be linking to the canonical URL and displaying the canonical URL instead of linking to and displaying the non-canonical URL on the site and relying on the rel canonical tag to "fix" it.
That should be fine for now. At some point in the future you probably want to make .com/product-name-UniqueID the version that gets linked to from elsewhere on the site (such as category pages) and for all other versions of that URL to 301 redirect to it.
-
Hi Everett,
Thank you for your considered response.
Choice wise, I feel fairly constrained by my shopping cart (Opencart, and lack of technical ability !
So am I correct in thinking that Google reads the rel canonical, not what appears in the URL? I've checked the generated rel canonical & by default it takes just the product name, probably as products, as you say, can be in more than 1 category. So I get: www.vintageheirloom.com/red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag-1362483150
As you say this omits the term chanel & vintage.
With no understanding of how to implement your suggestion of putting all products into a 'products' category I think it might be safer for me to leave as is... for now. I'll certainly bear this in mind when I next rebuild the website, all good food for thought.
Thanks!
-
Hello Mr. Vintage Heirloom,
Takeshi has some great points about priorities, and avoiding keyword stuffing your URLs. I might add, however, that putting category directories in product URLs has two major disadvantages that, in my opinion, usually outweigh the advantage of having those keywords in the URL.
#1 - If the product exists in multiple categories you risk having more than one URL for the product. This can be mitigated with redirects or rel canonical tags, but is still a pain. Here's an example:
http://www.vintageheirloom.com/vintage-chanel-bags/red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag-1362483150
http://www.vintageheirloom.com/vintage-chanel-bags/2.55-bags/red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag-1362483150
The bag's URL can be accessed from at least two different URLs (some products could have many more versions) and the canonical tag says that the shorter of the two URLs above is the canonical version. If that is the case the keywords in your /2.55-bags/ directory are useless as a ranking factor for that particular product page since that directory is not in the rel canonical tag.Yes you can avoid the issues presented by multiple URL versions of the page, and some sites only ever put a product into a single category. However, that does nothing to account for this...
#2 - The deeper your category structure goes the further away from the root your product pages are. I have seen product pages five or six folders deep across entire eCommerce sites because of this. While I don't think the entire site architecture should be completely flat (some sort of taxonomy in the URLs is logical and useful) you don't want your most important pages to be several folders deep either.
I always recommend going with this:
site.com/products/product-name/
Or in your case:site.com/products/product-name-uniqueID/
Putting the products into the /products/ directory is that level of useful taxonomy I mentioned above. This allows you, for instance, to do a search on Google like (site:domain.com inurl:products) to see how many of your product pages are indexed. The same type of logic is useful when segmenting analytics reports or WMT exports in Excel, among other uses.
Then you don't have to worry about keyword stuffing due to keywords already contained in the category directory portion of the URL.
This is just one person's opinion though. Some may disagree. I just don't find keywords in the URL to be all that important these days compared to other things. It has been spammed to death and thus the importance attributed to that factor has been steadily declining over the years, at least to my observation.
Regarding 301 redirects, they don't really cost you any appreciable amount of pagerank. It truly is negligible as long as you're not going through several redirect hops at once. The key is to make up your mind about your URLs with an eye to the future scalability and useability of the site - and stick with it. One round of redirects will temporarily set you back in the SERPs, but you should bounce back within a couple of weeks (good time of year to do them!) if done correctly.
Good luck!
-
Remember that every keyword you add to your URL decreases the value of every other keyword you have in the URL. You want to include a few keywords in your URL for SEO value, but not so many that it dilutes the value of the other keywords. Also, having an overly long URL is a poor user experience.
So in this case, I would not include the word "vintage" in your URL for a 3rd time, because the SEO value is marginal and it will dilute the value of your other keywords, as well as making an already long URL even longer. And like I said, changing your URL structure will result in a loss of PageRank.
-
Thanks Takeshi,
Good to know. Any harm in adding an additional 'vintage' here to match H2 product name?
www.vintageheirloom.com/vintage-chanel-bags/2.55-bags/vintage-chanel-red-2.55-classic-double-flap-bag...
Or does that look spammy?
-
If you've been running your site for a while, I would recommend against changing your URL structure as 301s do result in some loss of link value, and you will likely see your rankings drop. The URLs you have now aren't bad, so I would focus on higher value activities such as link building. Ultimately, Google weighs offsite factors more highly than a few on-site tweaks.
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
-
Having Problems to Index all URLs on Sitemap
Hi all again ! Thanks in advance ! My client's site is having problems to index all its pages. I even bought the full extension of XML Sitemaps and the number of urls increased, but we still have problems to index all of them. What are the reasons? The robots.txt is open for all robots, we only prohibit users and spiders to enter our Intranet. I've read that duplicate content and 404's can be the reason. Anything else?
Technical SEO | | Tintanus0 -
Link building with AddThis URL
We've begun using AddThis for tracking our social sharing. AddThis has been adding the snippet to the end of the URLs on our pages and we've been finding that people linking to us are linking to the URL with the snippet. AddThis says this isn't a problem for SEO. Is this correct? Here is an example: https://www.harborcompliance.com/information/how-to-start-a-non-profit-organization-in-colorado.php#.UunCfPldVig I want to make sure this is not affecting our SEO in any way, particularly that Google would see this as an affiliate or paid link since it has the "#". I may be crazy but I just want to make sure!
Technical SEO | | Harbor_Compliance0 -
Should we use & or and in our url's?
Example: /Zambia/kasanka-&-bangweulu or /Zambia/kasanka-and-bangweulu which is the better url from the search engines point of view?
Technical SEO | | tribes0 -
Forms and link juice
On product listing page on e-commerce site We use POST forms as 'Add To Cart' buttons. Because of that We have dozens (~40-80) forms on any product listing page, and two questions regarding them: Does these forms affect link juice of other links on the page? Are there cases when forms are somehow counted by Google as links? Regards, Lucek
Technical SEO | | lucek0 -
MozBar picking up iFrame source as URL
Running a WordPress site with a custom theme. Using a standard wp_head or wp_footer hook to insert the standard code for a Facebook Like, Twitter count / Google Plus count into the site - basically that hook just places the code, programmatically, into the HEAD (where applicable) or right before the BODY closes. For some reason, MozBar is picking up the URL of the iFrame that gets inserted with this code as the URL of the site. I don't have it live right now due to the issues, but I can turn it "on" for anyone who wants a look. Anyone else have this issue? I'm using the code directly from developers.facebook.com for the Like box, and the Google Plus button, Twitter too. Nothing fancy here.
Technical SEO | | joechicago0 -
New URL or Folder Off Existing Site
I am working on a project that is promoting dining in a particular region of the southwest for a destination marketing company. The parent Web site is an authority in the region and ranks well for almost all terms related to the leisure experience in the region. A completely separate Web site was built to promote this culinary program as it involves a committee of different stakeholders, but it’s solely focused on the region. My question is this. The site is on a different CMS, etc., but the overall experience on the site is similar to the parent DMO site in terms of creative. The client has a brand new domain that they purchased for this initiative, but we are also considering mapping the parent site URL to the new culinary site. Parent: www.regionalsite.com New Themed Site: www.regionalsite.com/theme/ Or www.themeurl.com My fear is that if I take the approach of the new URL that it will take forever for the site to build any link clout at all, as the client doesn’t really get the fact that working a link strategy is so critical. However, I know that having links from the regional site over to the theme URL will have an impact. Also, if I do take the approach of mapping the URL to a new folder off of the parent domain, do I risk that 2<sup>nd</sup> tier links on the micro-site will have a challenge indexing as they will essentially be on tier 3? Any advice would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | VERBInteractive0 -
301 an old URL with a ? in the URL?
I am redoing a site and the URL's are changing structure. The client's site was in magento and in the store they would get two URLs, for example: /store/categoryname/productname and /store/categoryname/productname?SID=dslkajsfdoiu947598whouieht983hg98 Do I have to 301 redirect both of these URL's to their new counterpart? Both go to the same content but magento seemed to add these SIDs into the navigation and Google has both versions in the index.
Technical SEO | | DanDeceuster0 -
Should I repeat keywords at each folder level of my urls?
Hey Guys, I'm wondering which URL is preferable when targeting the keyword phrase "ski goggles" a) http://www.evo.com/shop/ski/ski-goggles.aspx or b) http://www.evo.com/shop/ski/goggles.aspx URL a includes the keyword phrase exactly with a dash but also repeats the word "ski" and feels redundant. Any research/ testing to support either case? Thanks a bunch. Will
Technical SEO | | evoNick0