Using categories in Permalinks
-
I am looking at updating my WP Permalink structure and wanted to know if I should continue to include the category after my domain as in www.maximphotostudio.net/weddings/6081/columbus_wedding_photography/ or maybe www.maximphotostudio.net/6081/columbus_wedding_photography and www.maximphotostudio.net/6082/dayton_wedding_photography.
Any help is appreciated.
-
Thank you Ryan.
-
It's a matter of preference. The levels in your URL are not as important as how you link to your pages. If you offer enough content to support each category, then you can keep them if you feel it is helpful.
If all your links are similar to what you are presently showing, I would suggest it is redundant to have "wedding" listed twice in your link, so I would remove the category.
My personal preference is to use the post_id followed by a dot, then the post_name. /%post_id%.%postname%/
Your thread would then appear as http://www.maxidusphotostudio.net/6081.columbus_wedding_photography/
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
-
Using Schema markup for Feefo reviews
I am a little confused about whether or not it is ok to use Schema markup with reviews collected through Feefo. We use Feefo to collect reviews from our customers and these get displayed on our website. We get service ratings as well as product ratings through Feefo. My question is: Is it ok to use Schema markup for these? I would have thought they would fall under 3rd party reviews, but this article from the Feefo website seems to suggest that it would be ok to use markup in the way they recommend. Can anyone confirm how Google handles review markup like this? Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | ViviCa10 -
If I am using Lazy Load & Ajax Technology then how "tools.pingdom.com" will consider website performance?
Hello Experts, If I am using Lazy Load & Ajax Technology then how "tools.pingdom.com" will consider website performance? I am not using this technology but few of my competitors are using this technology but still there performance in pingdom tool worst than my ecommerce site Little bit confuse please help. Thanks! Wrights
On-Page Optimization | | wright3350 -
Have you used Reziew or Reevoo?
We are looking into companies to work with for customer reviews and ratings on our e-commerce site. We want our customers to see what others think and we want unique and fresh content on our site for Google to see and the rating star rich snippets in the SERPs. Two companies we're looking at right now are Reziew and Reevoo. Has anyone had any experience working with them? Any advice for choosing one? Or advice in general about choosing a partner for this? Any other companies you recommend?
On-Page Optimization | | dogids0 -
How often should ecommerce category and product descriptions be rewritten?
We are a 15 year old ecommerce company. Most of our category descriptions are about 3 years old. Our product descriptions are 5-8 years old. While our category pages still rank well in Google our product pages have dropped significantly over time. How often should product page descriptions be rewritten so they do not become stale to Google? We have about 1,000 products on the site. If we rewrite them we are thinking about 250 words each. Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | SLINC0 -
Which pages should use rel="canonical" links?
I have many pages showing up as multiple content. Most of the them belong to product pages for my store, login pages that show up everywhere on the site, etc. I know that I need to use the rel=canonical link in the header but after searching the forum I'm still unsure of what pages need it. Is it the pages that I don't want searched/crawled by Google or the other way around? Thanks! Crystal
On-Page Optimization | | COfashionista0 -
Using fathead page keywords for directories and as a red herring to competitors
I'm fairly new to SEO and I have been reading a lot on here and the SEOmoz guides over the last few days, finding it very interesting. I am wondering about page keywords, I read that the engines no longer use them. In this thread they say they still use them because of directories. http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/why-i-still-use-meta-keywords#new-comment So I was wondering, because directories are always smaller scale than search engines would keywords that are normally high competition have more clout in them? If so then using them could be misleading to competition if they think they are the actual keywords? or might this contradict between your actual chosen keywords in the directories backlink anchor text or something?
On-Page Optimization | | Zoolander0 -
Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
When I'm checking my page on SEOmoz should I use http://www. or http:// or www. or just keyword.com? And I get this for my check Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>XXX</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply.</dd> <dd>I have absolutely NO idea what this means 😞
On-Page Optimization | | 678648631264
</dd> </dl>0 -
New CMS system - 100,000 old urls - use robots.txt to block?
Hello. My website has recently switched to a new CMS system. Over the last 10 years or so, we've used 3 different CMS systems on our current domain. As expected, this has resulted in lots of urls. Up until this most recent iteration, we were unable to 301 redirect or use any page-level indexation techniques like rel 'canonical' Using SEOmoz's tools and GWMT, I've been able to locate and redirect all pertinent, page-rank bearing, "older" urls to their new counterparts..however, according to Google Webmaster tools 'Not Found' report, there are literally over 100,000 additional urls out there it's trying to find. My question is, is there an advantage to using robots.txt to stop search engines from looking for some of these older directories? Currently, we allow everything - only using page level robots tags to disallow where necessary. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | Blenny0