Rewriting dynamic urls to static
-
We're currently working on an SEO project for http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/.
After a crawl of their site, tons of duplicate content issues came up. We think this is largely down to the use of their brand filtering system, which works like this:
By clicking on a brand, the site generates a url with the brand keywords in, for example:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-cid77.html
filtered by the brand Mammut becomes:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-Mammut-cid77.html?filter_brand=48
This was done by a previous SEO agency in order to prevent duplicate content. We suspect that this has made the issue worse though, as by removing the dynamic string from the end of the URL, the same content is displayed as the unfiltered page.
For example
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-Mammut-cid77.html
shows the same content as:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-cid77.html
Now, if we're right in thinking that Google is unlikely to the crawl the dynamic filter, this would seem to be the root of the duplicate issue.
If this is the case, would rewriting the dynamic URLs to static on the server side be the best fix? It's a Windows Server/asp site.
I hope that's clear! It's a pretty tricky issue and it would be good to know your thoughts.
Thanks!
-
I use canonical references on all my pages no matter what. Most professional sites I encounter do as well. You will notice they are used on SEOmoz.
I would use a rewrite rule mainly to do something alone the lines of directing all your non www traffic to their www counterpart. For the type of issue you are working on, I would use canonical tags on every page.
-
Thanks for answering so quickly. We were going to add a canonical tag as well to make sure, but I thought a rewrite might be the best bet to start with. Would you do both, or just the canonical?
S
-
Canonicalizing your pages will solve your issue.
You can have a page and present it to visitors with various URLs. What Google needs to understand is which is the primary version of the page. Using your example:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-cid77.html
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-Mammut-cid77.html
You can put the following tag on the pages:
That tag lets Google know that you have a single page which you are presenting to visitors with different URLs. This is a very common practice. For example, you may have a product page and sort it ascending by price, descending by product name, etc. These pages all offer the same content but just presented a bit differently for your visitor's benefit.
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
-
Product URL Optimisation
Hi guys, We are currently trying to add new products to our site but we are in a quandary on what type of URL structure to pursue. For example:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | michel_8
Product Name: Aspect Exfoliating Cleanser 240ml https://www.example.com.au/aspect-exfoliating-cleanser-240ml (including the size)
VS
https://www.example.com.au/aspect-exfoliating-cleanser 1.) Which is a better URL structure based on SEO 2018 and why?
2.) Is there any merit in removing the size from the URL key with the aim of attracting more traffic? Keen to hear from you guys! Cheers,0 -
How much does URLs with CAPS and URLs with non-CAPS existing on an IIS site matter nowadays?
I work on a couple ecommerce sites that are on IIS. Both sites have return a 200 header status for the CAPS and non CAPS version of the URLs. While I suppose it would be ok if the canonicals pointed to the same version of the page, in some cases it doesn't (ie; /Home-Office canonicalizes to itself and /home-office canonicalizes to itself). I came across this article (http://www.searchdiscovery.com/blog/case-sensitive-urls-and-seo-case-matters/) that is a few years old and I'm wondering how much of an issue it is and how I would determine if it is/isn't?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OfficeFurn0 -
Will disallowing URL's in the robots.txt file stop those URL's being indexed by Google
I found a lot of duplicate title tags showing in Google Webmaster Tools. When I visited the URL's that these duplicates belonged to, I found that they were just images from a gallery that we didn't particularly want Google to index. There is no benefit to the end user in these image pages being indexed in Google. Our developer has told us that these urls are created by a module and are not "real" pages in the CMS. They would like to add the following to our robots.txt file Disallow: /catalog/product/gallery/ QUESTION: If the these pages are already indexed by Google, will this adjustment to the robots.txt file help to remove the pages from the index? We don't want these pages to be found.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | andyheath0 -
Demoting a URL (not-WMT Related)
I have a pharmaceutical brand that treats two diseases, but wants to primarily promote one. We want searches for "brand dosing" to go to Side A, but currently "brand dosing" goes to Side B. BUT, I want "brand dosing Side B" to still show up in organic search, so a noindex on Side B, or canonicalization of Side A, won't work. Essentially, I want any searches that are not specific to a disease treatment to go to Side A, and then specific Side B related searches, go to Side B. Because this is a client paying me to optimize their site, I obviously want to optimize their whole site, so only optimizing Side A, or unoptimizing Side B, aren't solutions I want to employ. I don't think a solution exists, but I figured my fellow Mozers would know best. Thanks in advance,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GTO_Pharma_SEO0 -
What Should I Do With My URL Names?
I release property on my blog each week, and it has come to the point we will get property in the same area as we have had in the past. So, I name my URL /blah-blah-blah-[area of property]/ for the first property in that area right. Now I get a different property in that same area and the URL will have to be named /blah-blah-blah-[area of property]-2/. Now I'm not sure if this is a major issue or not, but I'm sure there must be a better way than this, and I don't really want to take down our past properties - unless you can give me good reason too, of course? So before I start getting URLs like this: /blah-blah-blah-[area of property]-2334343534654/ (well, ok, maybe not that bad! But you get my point) I wanted to see what everyones opinion on it is 🙂 Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JonathanRolande0 -
Changing URL Structure
We are going to be relaunching our website with a new URL structure. My question is, how is it best to deal with the migration process in terms of old URLS appearing whilst we launch the new ones. How best should we launch the new structure, considering we've in the region of 10,000 pages currently indexed in Google.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NeilTompkins0 -
In Report Card - Weird Characters in URL
We have an underscore in a lot of our links. My question is since it is difficult to change existing site architecture, is an underscore really that negative? Here is an example: http://www.winematch.com/profile_368-2005-Artesa-Vineyards--Winery-Merlot-Reserve.html Eventually we want to change this to http://www.winematch.com/wine/2005-Artesa-Vineyards-Winery-Merlot-Reserve.html but it is a big project.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | roundbrix0 -
Limiting URLS in the HTML Sitemap?
So I started making a sitemap for our new golf site, which has quite a few "low level" pages (about 100 for the golf courses that exist in the area, and then about 50 for course architects), etc etc. My question/open discussion is simple. In a sitemap that already has about 50 links, should we include these other low level 150 links? Of course, the link to the "Golf Courses" is there, along with a link to the "Course Architects" MAIN pages (which, subdivides on THOSE pages.) I have read the limit is around 150 links on the sitemap.html page and while it would be nice to rank long tail for the Golf Courses. All in all, our site architecture itself is easily crawlable as well. So the main question is just to include ALL the links or just the main ones? Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JamesO0