Different URLs for signed in and signed out users
-
Hello,
I have a client that plans to use different URLs for signed in and signed out customers.
My concern is that signed in and signed out customers will provide back links to different URLs of the same page and thus split page rank. I'm assuimg the URL for signed in customers won't be fetched by Google and therefore rule out canonicalizing the signed in URL to the signed out version.
The solution for me would be to ensure that there is only one URL for each content page, and to instead use cookies to prompt customers to sign up to the service that aren’t already a customer.
However, please correct me if I’m wrong in my assumptions.
Thanks
-
How is it that signed in and signed out users get different urls for the same page, I have never actually seen this practice in any CMS I have seen or used before. Client should not decide these things... you as the developer or the seo should provide the right way of doing things and explain to them why. To say the least you are dealing with duplicate content as as risk and in that case you can use canonical tag to specify the primary page.
But I would not listen to the client for what they demand, a lot of times clients have no friggin clue about this stuff and ask the vendors to shoot them in their own foot... good vendors will counter with proper reasoning and explanation and if you are the SEO in charge in this case, know that their insisting decisions will have major implications in the results you get and the treatment and longevity of contract you get from these clients... just my 2 cents from few years of doing this as a freelancer, but now I am running my own team and agency and client says this does not mean anything to me anymore when it comes to technical decisions. I ask them about their end goal and find the right way of achieving that.
-
JM123, you can be assured that Google and it's bots don't create accounts--so they will never be able to sign in and sign out.
That said, you could technically deliver unique content to all signed-in users, because Google will never sign in and see that content.
What's important is the content that you do give to users that are NOT signed in. You should concentrate on that content to that it's unique and other pages aren't duplicated (thus having a duplicate content issue).
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
-
SEO URLs: 1\. URLs in my language (Greek, Greeklish or English)? 2\. Αt the end it is good to put -> .html? What is the best way to get great ranking?
Hello all, I must put URLs in my language Greek, Greeklish or in English? And at the end of url it is good to put -> .html? For exampe www.test.com/test/test-test.html ? What is the best way to get great ranking? I am a new digital marketing manager and its my first time who works with a programmer who doesn't know. I need to know as soon as possible, because they want to be "on air" tomorrow! Thank you very much for your help! Regards, Marios
Technical SEO | | marioskal0 -
Language Specific Characters in URLs for
Hi People, would really appreciate your advice as we are debating best practice and advice seems very subjective depending if we are talking to our dev or SEO team. We are developing a website aimed at the South American market with content entirely in Spanish. This is our first international site so our experience is limited. Should we be using Spanish characters (such as www.xyz.com/contáctanos) in URLs or should we use ASCII character replacements? What are the pros and cons for SEO and usability? Would really be great to get advice from the Moz community and make me look good at the same time as it was my suggestion 🙂 Nick
Technical SEO | | nickspiteri0 -
URL Format
Often we have web platforms that have a default URL structure that looks something like this www.widgetcompany.co.uk/widget-gallery/coloured-widgets/red-widgets This format is quite well structured but would it just be more effective to be www.widgetcompany.co.uk/red-widgets? I realise that it may depend on a lot of factors but generally is it better to have the shorter URL if targeting the key phrase "red widgets" One thing, it certainly looks a bit keyword stuffy with all those "widgets"
Technical SEO | | vital_hike0 -
Are my Domain URLs correctly set up?
Hi Im struggling with this probably easy concept, so I am sure one of you guys out there can answer it fairly easy! My website is over50choices.co.uk and whilst using the free tools in Majestic it said that I had: 77 Referring Domains pointing to www.over50choices.co.uk and only 35 pointing to www.over50choices.co.uk/ And in Moz it said: The URL you've entered redirects to another URL. We're showing results for www.over50choices.co.uk/ since it is likely to have more accurate link metrics. See data for over50choices.co.uk instead? Does this mean that my domains arent set up correctly and are acting as separate domains - should one be pointing to the other? Your help appreciated. Ash
Technical SEO | | AshShep10 -
Long URL
I am using seomoz software as a trial, it has crawled my site and a report is telling me that the URL for my forum is to long: <dl> <dt>Title</dt> <dd>Healthy Living Community</dd> <dt>Meta Description</dt> <dd>Healthy life discussion forum chatting about all aspects of healthy living including nutrition, fitness, motivation and much more.</dd> <dt>Meta Robots</dt> <dd>noodp, noydir</dd> <dt>Meta Refresh</dt> <dd>Not present/empty</dd> <dd> 1 Warning Long URL (> 115 characters) Found about 17 hours ago <dl> <dt>Number of characters</dt> <dd>135 (over by 21)</dd> <dt>Description</dt> <dd>A good URL is descriptive and concise. Although not a high priority, we recommend a URL that is shorter than 75 characters.</dd> </dl> </dd> <dd> URL: http://www.goodhealthword.com/forum/reprogramming-health/welcome-to-the-forum-for-discussing-the-4-steps-for-reprogramming-ones-health/ The problem is when I check the page via edit or in the admin section of wordpress, the url is a s follows: http://www.goodhealthword.com/forum/ My question is where is I cannot see where this long url is located, it appears to be a valid page but I cant find it. Thanks Pete </dd> </dl>
Technical SEO | | petemarko0 -
URL paths and keywords
I'm recommending some on-page optimization for a home builder building in several new home communities. The site has been through some changes in the past few months and we're almost starting over. The current URL structure is http://homebuilder.com/oakwood/features where homebuilder = builder name Oakwood Estates= name of community features = one of several sub-paths including site plan, elevations, floor plans, etc. The most attainable keyword phrases include the word 'home' and 'townname' I want to change the URL path to: http://homebuilder.com/oakwood-estates-townname-homes/features Is there any problem with doing this? It just seems to make a lot of sense. Any input would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | mikescotty0 -
Difference between URL Rewrites and 301 Redirects for Rankings
What is the difference between URL rewriting and 301 redirects? Specifically if my home page is rewriting the www. version and the /index.html version rather than 301 redirecting them is this equivalent? Does it still pass the link juice on those alternate variations the same way a 301 redirect will?
Technical SEO | | rcarll0 -
Duplicate canonical URLs in WordPress
Hi everyone, I'm driving myself insane trying to figure this one out and am hoping someone has more technical chops than I do. Here's the situation... I'm getting duplicate canonical tags on my pages and posts, one is inside of the WordPress SEO (plugin) commented section, and the other is elsewhere in the header. I am running the latest version of WordPress 3.1.3 and the Genesis framework. After doing some testing and adding the following filters to my functions.php: <code>remove_action('wp_head', 'genesis_canonical'); remove_action('wp_head', 'rel_canonical');</code> ... what I get is this: With the plugin active + NO "remove action" - duplicate canonical tags
Technical SEO | | robertdempsey
With the plugin disabled + NO "remove action" - a single canonical tag
With the plugin disabled + A "remove action" - no canonical tag I have tried using only one of these remove_actions at a time, and then combining them both. Regardless, as long as I have the plugin active I get duplicate canonical tags. Is this a bug in the plugin, perhaps somehow enabling the canonical functionality of WordPress? Thanks for your help everyone. Robert Dempsey0