URL Structure Question
-
We are building a job board website that will have a decent amount of "career resources" type content and want to make sure we set up our url structure correctly. After researching on Google and here I have an idea how to structure it but would like some insight if we are on the right track. We are using Wordpress for the content part of our website. We will have about 5 content categories (like resume-tips, job-interviews, job-search etc.)
The two options we are considering;
www.domain.com/career-resources/index.html As content start page
www.domain.com/career-resources/resume-tips/index.html category start page
www.domain.com/career-resources/resume-tips/top-5-resume-mistakes.html article name
is the /career-resources/ folder really needed or can we go something like;
www.domain.com/career-resources/index.html As content start page
www.domain.com/resume-tips/index.html category start page
www.domain.com/resume-tips/top-5-resume-mistakes.html article name
Are we on the right track... and is one way better for SEO that the other?
Thanks!
Shaun
-
Thanks for your input Cody and I agree about the bread crumbs benefits. Do you think there is any SEO "loss" by using the /career-resources/ folder before the the category folders as in?
"www.domain.com/career-resources/resume-tips/article
vs
"www.domain.com/resume-tips/article
I've read that being closer to the root domain is better.
Shaun
-
One other reason I like ending in slashes. GA and other software that crawls your site and then produces reports will look at the slash and then include that URL as the home page with everything else under it in the same reports.
Some developers like to leave off the slash and just have the index page as .com/resume-tips
You then get people who will naturally add the slash at the end in links, or you have a footer where you add the slash when you did not mean to and then you have a duplicate content issue.
I like to end with the slash and just be consistent. Seems like most reports "expect" that convention and so it just will help down the road.
-
Thanks for tip on the ending folders with "/". We are trying to get the structure correct right from the start and this helps.
-
You want to properly group your content together. So, if the section of your website is "Career Resources," and all of these categories are in that section, then I would use the first URL structure. It makes internal linking between these pages seem more natural, since they are in the same "silo."
The other benefit of the first style is if you used breadcrumbs. By having no unifying sub-directory, as in the second URL structure, you are unable to push all the authority to a single page, which then pushes authority back down into specific categories. Well, you still could, but your URL structure would contradict your breadcrumbs, and it would probably be harder to program the website to naturally build breadcrumbs.
-
I think that either way you will probably be ok, but I would lean toward removing the /career-resources/ folder as it is probably not needed. I think you could just have a .com/career-resources.html as your index page and the link to all to topic folders from there. Anytime, you can have a file that is closer to the root, that is an indicator of the importance of the URL and so that helps as well. Also, I would not mess with index.html file names, just end the folder in a slash e.g. .com/resume-tips/ A lack of a page name in a folder is the index page. Nobody goes to google.com/index.html or moz.com/index.html same thing with folders.
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
-
Questions about canonicals
Howdy Moz community, I had a question regarding canonicals. I help a business with their SEO, and they are a service company. They have one physical location, but they serve multiple cities in the state. My question is in regards to canonicals and unique content. I hear that a page with slightly differing content for each page won't matter as much, if most of the content is relevantly the same. This business wants to create service pages for at least 10 other cities they service. The site currently only have pages that are targeting one city location. I was wondering if it was beneficial to use a template to service each city and then put a canonical there to say that it is an identical page to the main city page? Example: our first city was san francisco, we want to create city pages for santa rosa, novato, san jose and etc. If the content for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, city were the same content as the 1st city, but just had the slight change with the city name would that hurt? Would putting a canonical help this issue, if i alert that it is the same as the 1st page? The reason I want to do this, is because I have been getting concerns from my copywriter that after the 5th city, they can't seem to make the services pages that much different from the first 4 cities, in terms of wording of the content and its structure. I want to know is there a simpler way to target multiple cities for local SEO reasons like geo targeted terms without having to think of a completely new way to write out the same thing for each city service page, as this is very time consuming on my end. Main questions? Will making template service pages, changing the city name to target different geographic locations and putting a canonical tag for the new pages created, and referring back to the main city page going to be effective in terms of me wanting to rank for multiple cities. Will doing this tell google my content is thin or be considered a duplicate? Will this hurt my rankings? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Removed URLs
Hi all, We have recently removed 200+ articles from our blog. However, those links are still being shown on Google weeks after their removal. In there a way to speed up the process? What effect will this have on our SEO ranking?
Technical SEO | | businessowner0 -
Structured Data Authorship
Hi I've just successfully set up authorship for a client according to the rich snippet testing tool although bit perplexed since underneath the results theres a section called 'Extracted Structured Data'. The first section is marked hatom feed and under that it says under the field saying 'Author' it says in red: Warning: At least one field must be set for Hcard.Warning: Missing required field "name (fn)".And then under the URL field & the URL it says:Warning: Missing required field "entry-title".Any ideas what this means or even if its important ? I would have thought the tool wouldnt acknowledge authorship as being set up correctly if this was an issue but that does beg the question what is it doing there and what does it mean ?Theres another section after that called rdfa node which seems all fineAlso says page does not contain publisher mark up although i know publisher has been added to the home page, is it best to add publisher to head section in every page (as i have heard some people say) or just the home page ?Many ThanksDan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Removing a lot of content & changing url structure.
I recently moved an existing ecommerce site, which I recently purchased, from Volusion to Shopify. The new site has a completely different link structure. The old site also had about 120 products which are not even close to being up to par with the products I now have on the site. So I had to remove all of those pages too. I was just wondering which measures I need to take to deal with this? I created a really nice 404 page. I also 301 redirected the pages which still exist. But I was wondering if there is anything else I should do? Should I request a removal of all the old pages, which no longer exist? Should I do something else I'm not thinking about? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. jim
Technical SEO | | PedroAndJobu0 -
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 -
Canonical for non-exist URL ?
Hi I have a website what has parameter URL. For example www.example.com/index.php?page_id=1&no=2 I want that search engine see my page URL as; www.example.com/toys/cars But this URL is not exist in my website. And when i externally enter this page it goes to 404 page. If i add canonical url as www.example.com/toys/cars to the page www.example.com/index.php?page_id=1&no=2, what happened ? Is the url at the serp change as www.example.com/toys/cars ?
Technical SEO | | SEMTurkey0 -
New URL structure caused a HUGE drop?
I have started working with a client who did an upgrade on their e-commerce sive in May of last year. It totally changed the URL structure and they didn't redirect old URLs or do any of the things they should have. Not unexpectedly they they went from about 300 visitors a day to 0 for then rose up to maybe 50 and have remained there ever since. There were some major onsite issues including about 15000 internal links that 302 back to the site. In any case I have fixed most of the onsite problems and worked on a little better categorization + content optimization, etc. We have only been working on this for about 30 days and organic traffic is up and they are ranking for much better keywords, but I expected a little quicker rise. Here is a screenshot out of GA of their descent. Its pretty rapid. I dont think it makes sense to redirect their old URLs at this point since most of them have been deindexed for 10+ months. Anyone have any suggestions on how to get back to their previous level. The domain actually has decent authority and link profile, etc. Is this just going to be a slow climb back? Any thoughts? Fxz9Y.png
Technical SEO | | BlinkWeb0 -
Re-write of url
Hi, I would like your input on the following dilemma I am wanting to target the keyword "download xml". at the moment Google indexes us on page 2 and indexes the page www.ourdomain.com/download.aspx I would like to rewrite the url to be /download-xml-editor.aspx The current page is a pr5 and is our most trafficked and externally inked to page. My thoughts are quite mixed on how to do this. approach 1: re-write url of "download.aspx" and setup permanent 301 redirect of download.aspx to download-xml-editor.aspx approach 2: create a new page called download-xml-editor and 301 redirect that to the current stronger page which is download.aspx approach 3: create new page called download-xml-editor with unique content and try and get that page to rank over time, allowing it to build up links and not compromise the current page, then later 301 redirect How would you deal with this and what are your recommendations
Technical SEO | | LiquidTech0