Long or Short URLs. Who's Coming to Dinner?
-
This has been discussed on the forums in some regard.
My situation.
Example 1 Long Keyword URL:
www.abctown.com/keyword-for-life-helping-keywords-everywhere-rank-better
Example 2 Short Keyword URL:
In both examples I want to improve rankings for the "keyword" phrase. My current URL is example 1. And I've landed a page one ranking in Google (7) with that URL. In attempts to improve rankings further (top 5), I was toying with the idea of going simpler with all my URLs in favor of the example 2 model.
Might this method help or hurt my current rankings? In recent articles I've read it seems that going with the simpler more human approach to my SEO efforts.
Any thought would be appreciated.
Cheers,
-
Agreed. The risk of losing juice from a redirect would keep me from moving forward. The only way that I would consider redirecting the old page is if the new page provides better and more relevant/current content.
If you don't plan on improving the content and are only using duplicate content then there is no need to change the page or URL.
-
If this was on my site I would not change the URL.
You might gain a little from having a better URL but you might lose a little by doing a redirect. Maybe you would lose more from the redirect than you gain from the short URL.
So, I would start using better URLs going forward and spend the time savings on new content.
-
Yes, as I mentioned above, in order to keep page authority (at least most of it) and ranking, you will want to 301 the page.
-
Thanks for the input! Great advise.
In the above examples, if I decided to move to a shorter, simpler URL for page abctown.com/keyword-for-life-helping-keywords-everywhere-rank-better to abctown.com/keyword
Would you setup the 301 from the current page URL to the simpler one or the new simple URL to the current URL???
Appreciate the help!
-
I try to make the URL match the most important keyword that I hope to rank for.
-
Test, test, test.
It seems that the general rule of thumb on old URLs redirecting to new ones is that you will lose some of the linking value in the redirect.
But I must agree with Richard Getz, in that you may want a middle ground. You certainly shouldn't over kill KWs in the URL and I would advise never using the Keyword twice the way you have in Example 1.
-
This answer comes right from Rand himself (and a few other answers), as I just stumbled upon it in Quora yesterday:
http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-best-permalink-structure-for-SEO
And to add my two cents, as far as rankings, I don't think you can credit the URL alone for a #1 page ranking. I would construct your URL as Rand suggests and focus your on-page optimization efforts in a holistic manner.
-
I'd love to see if someone has tests to this effect. I have silly long urls (mostly because I designed them before I knew anything about SEO.) But, I kind of feel that they help me.
My philosophy is that if I am targeting long tail traffic then having a url like, mydomain.com/questions-about-blue-widgets-and-where-to-purchase-them is good. But, if I have an article that I want at the top of the serps for a particular competetive term then I would go for something like mydomain.com/blue-widgets.
I've heard people say that BING likes shorter urls...not sure if it is true though.
-
I would vote for middle ground here on future pages, and questions on current page metrics.
www.abctown.com/keyword-for-life
And then lengthen the Title to the full title of the page.
Does the current page have many inbound links? If so, doing a 301 will loos some of that juice. Can you get the inbound links re-pointed? If so, then 301 the page and get the old links to point to the new page.
If not, and this page has a high authority, then you will take a hit on the move, at least for the short term. But building more inbound links to the new page will resolve this.
Also, if you do move the page, I would push it back out on your social network to get the SEs attention and build fresh links back to the new page. Dr. Pete recently wrote about how the canonical tag is respected by Facebook and Twitter, so they might then respect the 301 also.
In short, I would make the change as the shorter URL would be better in my opinion.
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
-
What is the best way to deal with creating a separate brand with it's own website when the main site already ranks well for the target keywords?
A client currently has a site that ranks well for a number of queries. They recently created a new site for a spin-off brand/company that they now want to focus on ranking for some of the keywords their original site already ranked for. What would be the best way to go about this without throwing away the existing authority and traffic the original site has for those queries?
On-Page Optimization | | P1WS_Sully0 -
Short URL's vs Optimised URL's
Howdy Mozzers! What are your thoughts on short URL's vs Optimised URL's. For example if a website currently sells wood furniture and wants to target the keyword "Wood Furniture For Sale", which URL would be preferable: Short URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture Optimised URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture-for-sale The website also uses facet navigation and selected attributes are added in a fixed order sequence after the category. For example if Cane is selected as wood type: Short URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture/Cane Optimised URL: www.domain.com/wood-furniture-for-sale/Cane Which one do you prefer (between the short URL and optimised URL) and why? Cheers! MozAddict
On-Page Optimization | | MozAddict0 -
Tips on URL structure for a site re-design
Wanted to know what you would do with regards to urls – in an ideal world how would you structure them? Keen to know as me and dave are soon to have a meeting about this and were wondering about changing them from the current – http://www.looking4parking.com/airport/gatwick to something like - www.looking4parking.com/gatwick-airport-parking We will soon have pages for the specific parking types that will be a lot more engaging to users with some really useful content on benefits, features, how a certain type of parking works, images, video etc. Currently going to a type of parking, such as meet and greet just brings up a dropdown modal – I was thinking of having the url structure looking like this – www.looking4parking.com/gatwick-airport-meet-and-greet-parking www.looking4parking.com/gatwick-airport-on-site-parking www.looking4parking.com/gatwick-airport-park-and-ride We will then have specific pages for each parking product – in which this product will have unique content built around it – each will have an overview of the product, benefits, features, reviews, images, directions to the car park, find your route and eventually a video on each product So for example we currently have the product “Jet Parks 2” at Manchester airport – the current url is - http://www.looking4parking.com/airport/manchester/park-and-ride/jetparks-2 I would like to change this now we have the opportunity to refresh the whole system, to something along the lines of **domain/location/product title - **www.looking4parking.com/manchester-airport-parking/jetparks-2 or as we have some similar products at certain airports (mainly where the airport has multiple terminals) we would just change it to the following - www.looking4parking.com/manchester-airport-parking/jetparks-3 What are peoples thoughts/opinions on the above?
On-Page Optimization | | RyanCrawf19840 -
URL Keyword Variations?
I'm aware that keywords in the url aren't as effective as they used to be, but I'm still convinced that they do have a significant impact (based on results in one of the niches I'm in). My question is, will variations of keywords and "hidden" keywords have as much value as an exact keyword? For example, let's say that I'm trying to target the keyword "day." Will including variations like "daily" in the url work just as well? What about a brand name that includes the keyword hidden in its name, like "Dayest"? And, as a followup question, does including "stop" words have any effect? For example, if I'm trying to target the keyword "Day of the Month", would including "day" and "month" in the url be just as effective as including "day of the month"?
On-Page Optimization | | JABacchetta0 -
Keyword in url, which way better?
Hello, is there a difference between urls for targeting keyword "brazil tourist visa" fastbrazilvisas.com/tourist or fastbrazilvisas.com/brazil-tourist-visa ? ran the report In-Page Optimization it tells "no keyword usage in url". is there an idea behind that? thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Kotkov0 -
URL Rewrite
(By Google Traductor) Hello, I wanted to ask about some changes that we are evaluating for the issue of passing the url with variables to be more descriptive, for example: http://www.agroads.com.ar/detalle.asp?clasi=139592 tohttp://www.agroads.com.ar/humedimetro-para-cereales-draminski-gmm-139592.html In this case corresponds to the breakdown of a product if you have long published andcan be well positioned to change the title of this position would be lost unless youmanage it with a 301, as one would manage when you have more than 30000 products and title may change several times? There are tools to manage this? Finally, we must apply this to all listed with their respective filters, recommends doingtheir part with 301 redirects and analyze what funciene well to continue with the rest or implement a complete change? I hope I can bring a little light to implement this. Greetings and thanks! Roberto
On-Page Optimization | | romaro0 -
Which Canonical URL Tag tag should we remove?
Hi guys, We are in the process of optimizing the pages of our new site. We have used the 'on page' report card feature in the Seomoz Pro Campaign analyser. On several pages we got the following result No More Than One Canonical URL Tag Number of Canonical tags <dl> <dd>2</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>The canonical URL tag is meant to be employed only a single time on an individual URL (much like the title element or meta description). To ensure the search engines properly parse the canonical source, employ only a single version of this tag.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Remove all but a single canonical URL tag</dd> </dl> I have looked into the source code of one of the pages http://www.sabaileela.co.uk/acupuncture-london and can see that there are two "canonical" tags. Does anyone have any advise on which one I should ask the developer to remove? I am not sure how to determine the relative importance of either link.
On-Page Optimization | | brian.james0 -
Best URL Structure For Products That Are The Same
I know that the url structure is very important for seo preferably using the keyword. But is it okay to have the same url with the product number at the end ? Each of our products have a name with a product number. Or will this cause to many similar urls? or if the folder is the name of the product that needs to be optimized, can the page just be called the product number? Example: Say you have a 20 different product lines and they are all catagorized in the appropriate folders, and need to be optimized for the actual product name. XXX (folder name ) WWW-PR-123 WWW-PR-1234 WWW-PR-12345 WWW-PR-123456 what would be the best url structure? Can they have the same begining? The product name? something like: www.example.com/xxx/www-pr-123.php www.example.com/xxx/www-pr-1234.php or www.example.com/xxx/pr-123.php www.example.com/xxx/pr-1234.php
On-Page Optimization | | hfranz0