Service Keyword in URL - too much?
-
We're working on revamping the URL structure for a site from the ground up. This firm provides a service and has a library of case studies to back up their work. Here's some options on URL structure:
1. /cases/[industry keyword]-[service keyword] (for instance: /cases/retail-pest-control)
There is some search traffic for the industry/service combination, so that would be the benefit of using both in URL. But we'd end up with about 70 pages with the same service keyword at the end.
2. /cases/[industry keyword] (/cases/retail)
Shorter, less spam potential, but have to optimize for the service keyword -- the primary -- in another way.
3. /cases/clientname (/cases/wehaveants)
No real keyword potential but better usability.
We also want the service keyword to rank on its own on another page (so, a separate "pest control" page). So don't want to dilute that page's value even after we chase some of the long tail traffic.
Any thoughts on the best course of action? Thanks!
-
Awesome, thanks
-
two or three layers into it, hyphens vs. slashes is not as critical as too many hyphens in the primary domain name.
Personally, I believe it's better user experience to go with slashes rather than hyphens to clearly visually split out services vs. industries vs. company names. But that's just my preference and belief regarding usability.
-
That's what I needed to hear. I think maybe a cases/pest-control/industry-company or industry/company structure will work nicely then. I can fix a good link structure no problem. Thanks!
-
the number of directories is pretty much illusionary - it's how many clicks to get to something that matters.
That's the key. It ultimately depends on how many case studies you're dealing with as to how you link to them.
Here's an example
Cases is a top level site-wide link.
On the Cases page, there's a description of each service, and a link within that description to that service's page.
Then on that service page, there's a brief snippet for each case study, where you group them on that page by industry type.
That's three clicks down to the individual case study. And in that scenario, you can go with the URL syntax I previously suggested.
So while the "folder structure" "appears" to be four layers deep
case-studies/pest-control/retail/company-name/
The linking methods above are only three deep. So you're totally within SEO best practices.
-
Ah, now that's a question! As far as I WAS aware it was always best to go for a "flat as possible" structure (so minimal directories). BUT... I've recently been informed (on these very boards, and from a very experienced pro) that it no longer matters as long as the linking structure is good, so there's plenty of links from strong pages, such as the homepage pointing in... so it will get crawled no matter how deep.
-
Alan, you've made me think of a question myself on that... you know the whole rule about not having too many hyphens in a domain, well how much of that extends to the rest of the URL/path after the initial domain?
Not sure I worded that very well. I mean, as we know, www.thing-blah-flip-flop.com is bad... and www.thing-blah.com is okay, but what about: www.thing-blah.com/flip-flop-give-a-dog-a-bone-is-this-too-many-hyphens-in-this-part-of-the-url-after-the-domain.html
I know there's tonnes of it about, but does it matter?
(Sorry to hijack the question lol, I assume it's still relevant though).
-
I suppose I meant the depth of the directories... Finding the page three or four directories in (I asked the same in response to Alan).
Thanks for all the help!
-
So when working with the directories, if we structure navigation so that you can get to a specific case study with two clicks, does that offset the depth of the directory structure? So, if it happened to be (hopefully not) cases/retail/pest-control/MI/Detroit/company-name, will the number of subfolders be an issue, as long as you could get to the page through two clicks from home?
-
How many is too many? I mean you don't want a directory per page or anything.
-
Yes definitely!
I assume if they're all landing pages then you wouldn't be targeting each page with the same keywords anyway, as that would be massive canibalization. You want to just assign 2 or 3 keywords to each page, then have one of them in the URL (the main one).
-
Would it make any sense to you to group them by service? so...
cases/pest-control/industry-company
Less spammy, but wonder about the impact of too many directories.
-
whether you do retail-pest-control or retail/pest-control - either is acceptable and as long as the sequence ordering is consistent you will achieve the same results.
So they should all be industry-service or service-industry.
-
The idea is that yes, they can all be landing pages. The pages as they're sitting now are driving some traffic from these long-tail keyword combinations -- we'd like not to lose that when we make the change.
Can the service keywords be variations? So, could it be retail-pest-control, restaurant-termite-control, athletic-ant-extermination? (samples again, of course)
-
Unless there's only one company in each combination of service and industry, having the company name or another differentiator as the last element in the URL is vital for individual page topical relevance. Company Names make the most sense from a user perspective.
-
I agree. Find a way to use no.1 and make it not spammy.
-
It depends on which is more important to you whether best practices dictate the industry first or the service type first, however generally speaking, they should both be in the URL.
So for example:
case-studies/pest-control/retail/company-name/
case-studies/retail/pest-control/company/name/
Some might argue that can cause long URLs, it's best practices, especially since Google is quite efficient these days when a site is structured properly like this, to be able to display portions of URLs most relevant to a search. So if the search was for pest control in the retail field, the URL in the search result might look like:
yourdomain.com/case-studies/retail/../pest-control/...
And doing it one of these two ways is the best way to build topical relationships, which in turn boosts the relevance of the site for the industries and services.
Oh - and you can do this and still have all the core content no more than two or three clicks from the top level.
-
I'd check others' opinions too, but mine is option 1 without dupe service keywords for the win... why must every page have that same keyword at the end, are they all landing pages you're optimizing?
Anyway, if option 1 without doing that then it's not spammy as far as I see and do, it's descriptive, allows link architecture to map site architecture... and you've got your keywords in there. Gets my vote, but yeah I'd wait for clarification or disagreement from others on that before taking any action
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
-
Multiple keyword optimisation
What is the best way to optimise for multiple keywords for the same product? The situation basically is I have several products which I need to optimise currently only one page, the search terms that relate to the product are in some cases very different.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoman100 -
Keyword Targeting / Cannibalisation
Hi Guys We're about to launch a very large website for a flooring company and would like to find out more about _key word _cannibalisation - to put my mind at rest. I know Rand posted a Whiteboard Friday early last year about this topic and mentioned using part of the same keyword was ok to use. All our keywords are specifically geared for "user intent" meaning each keyword has relevance and the content to back up the keyword. We've ensured the keywords are located within each url, placed at the start of the page title, h1 etc.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GaryVictory1 -
URL Optimisation Dilemma
First of all, I fully appreciate that I may be over analysing this, so feel free to highlight if you think I’m going overboard on this one. I’m currently trying to optimise the URLs for a group of new pages that we have recently launched. I would usually err on the side of leaving the urls as they are so that any incoming links are not diluted through the 301 re-direct. In this case, however, there are very few links to these pages, so I don’t think that changing URLs will harm them. My main question is between short URLs vs. long URLs (I have already read Dr. Pete’s post on this). Note: the URLs I have listed below are not the actual URLs, but very similar examples that I have created. The URLs currently exist in a similar format to the examples below: http://www.company.com/products/dlm/hire-ca My first response was that we could put a few descriptive keywords in the url, with something like the following: http://www.company/products/debt-lifecycle-management/hire-collection-agents - I’m worried though that the URL will get too long for any pages sitting under this. As a compromise, I am considering the following: http://www.company/products/dlm/hire-collection-agents My feeling is that the second approach will give the best balance between having the keywords for the products and trying to ensure good user experience. My only concern is whether the /dlm/ category page would suffer slightly, but this would have ‘debt-lifecycle-management’ in the title tag. Does this sound like a good approach to people? Or do you think I’m being a little obsessive about this? Any help would be appreciated 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO0 -
Canonical Issue with urls
I saw some urls of my site showing duplicate page content, duplicate page title issues on crawl reports. So I have set canonical url for every urls , that has dupicate content / page title. But still SeoMoz crawl test is showing issue. I am giving here one url with issue. The below given urls shown duplicate content and duplicate page title with some other urls all are given below. Checked URL http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7635 dup page content http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7622&category_id=270&colors=Black_Tones&click=colors&ci=1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | trixmediainc
http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7622 dup page Title http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7636&category_id=270&sizes=12x15,12x18&click=sizes
http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7636
http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7622&category_id=270&colors=Black_Tones&click=colors&ci=1
http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7622 But I have set canonical url for all these urls already , that is :- http://www.cyrusrugs.com/bridge-traditional-area-rug-item-7622 This should actually solve the problem right ? Search engine should identify the canonical url as original url and only should consider that. Thanks0 -
Blog URL Canonical
Hi Guy's, I would like to know your thoughts on the following set-up for blog canonical. Option 1 domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com/blog"> domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com/blog"> domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical = no canonical option 2 domain.com/blog = <link rel="canonical" href="domin.com blog"="">(as option 1)</link rel="canonical" href="domin.com> domain.com/blog-category/general = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-category="" general"="">(this time has the canonical of the category)</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com> domain.com/blog-article/how-to-set-canonical = <link rel="canonical" href="domain.com blog-article="" how-to-set-canonical"="">(this time has the canonical of the article full URL)</link rel="canonical" href="domain.com> Just not sure which is the best option, or even if it is any of the above! Thanks Dan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Dan1e10 -
SEO Ecommerce Keywords
Hi guys got a question regarding ecommerce seo do you think its a better idea to target more long tail terms and try get links directly to product pages, brand pages and categories. Rather than focus on short keywords that do bring in good traffic but are very broad, i will prob do both, but i would like a second opinion please about other users strategies thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Will_Craig0 -
SEO Overly-Dynamic URL Website with thousands of URLs
Hello, I have a new client who has a Diablo 3 database. They have created a very interesting site in which every "build" is it's own URL. Every page is a list of weapons and gear for the gamer. The reader may love this but it's nightmare for SEO. I have pushed for a blog to help generate inbound links and traffic but overall I feel the main feature of their site is a headache to optimize. They have thousands of pages index in google but none are really their own page. There is no strong content, H-Tags, or any real substance at all. With a lack of definition for each page, Google see's this as a huge ball of mess, with duplicate Page Titles and too many onpage links. The first thing I did was tell them to add a canonical link which seemed to drop the errors down 12K leaving only 2400 left...which is a nice start, but the remaining errors is still a challenge. I'm thinking about seeing if I can either find a way to make each page it's own blurb, H Tag or simple have the Nav bar and all the links in the database Noindex. That way the site is left with only a handful of URLs + the Blog and Forum Thought?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MikePatch0 -
Rel=Canonical URLs?
If I had two pages: PageA about Cats PageB about Dogs If PageA had a link rel=canonical to PageB, but the content is different, how would Google resolve this and what would users see if they searched "Cats" or "Dogs?" If PageA 301 redirected to PageB, (no content in PageA since it's 301 redirected), how would Google resolve this and what would users see if they searched "Cats" or "Dogs?"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | visionnexus0