The URL Inside
-
Howdy SEO'ers,
I have a quick question for the SEO gurus out there.
When constructing "better" search friendly URLs would one of these be better than the other?
Example 1:
http://Domain.com/Category/Sub-Category/Product-name
Example 2:
http://Category.Domain.com/Sub-Category/Product-name
In this example the category could be phones and the sub-category brands of phones.
Is either one of these URLs "better" than the other in terms of ranking?
Thanks!
I'll hang-up and listen to your answer.
Jonathan
-
Mystripping the category is "safer", because I've seen so many eCommerce that assign a product to more then 1 category. This causes at least 2 urls with the same content... Duplication with all the risks dupes have for a site health.
-
I agree with Gianluca and for the reasons he provided.
Alan, I could not get the URL link you shared to work, but it seems Matt is directly referring to the crawling and indexing of the page, not the ranking.
The ranking of the page has much greater potential on an established site with DA rather then on a sub-domain which does not have the DA of the main site.
The only part of Gianluca's advice which seems debatable is whether or not to include the category in the URL. I am sure you will find solid SEO reasons to support both methods.
-
Gianluca is absolutely correct. Example one (main site) is much better. Subdomains were used by spammers many years ago and are no longer a good strategy.
For every subdomain you make for each product you're basically creating a separate site too which needs to be put into GWMT seperately, so that gets a little crazy. It's just not a good strategy, even when someone wants to create a blog only for their site I tell them to put it under the main domain for PR and Google webmster compliance reasons, and you're talking about creating dozens of subdomains. There is only downside to doing it that way.
Good luck
-
I would have to disagree
Matt Cutts December 10, 2007 at 10:48 am
<dd class="comment byuser comment-author-matt-cutts bypostauthor even thread-even depth-1">
“Which one is to be expected to be indexed and show on Google first; subdomain or subdirectory?”
Harith, to the best of my knowledge neither one has an advantage for crawling/indexing first.
</dd>
OK its old, but i could not find any metion after that date.
What i think is important is if the appear to be diffrenct sites, this can be the same for subdirectories -
Discard the subdomain option, because it's a link building killer. A subdomain is an independent site for the search engine respect the main domain, therefore you would have to do X link building campaign for the X category of product you have. Then all the link gained by a subdomain would not have ranking value for the others, because they a different sites. Therefore, for categories, the best is: www.domain.com/category. For the product page the best is always to strip the categories and subcategories from the URL: www.domain.com/product. This diminishes a lot the risk of duplication content, that can appear when you assign a product to more than category or subcategory.
-
This question has been asked many times, and i would say that they are the same if linked well. i would cross link them so that they do not look like seperate sites.
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
-
How defined does the anchor text need to be for a domain url?
Ok, I'm looking to clean up my domain with irrelevant Anchor text linking to specific URL's. Whether, it's my root domain or a particular product URL. I'm finding a wide variety of terms (anchor text) pointing to my homepage, category and finally my product pages. Example, the Anchor text "Paragon Print Systems" is pointing to my homepage "barcodefactory.com" does this hurt my homepage enough to either have the link/anchor text removed from linking to my homepage? thanks much!, Warren
On-Page Optimization | | Warren.W0 -
Is tracking code added to the end of a URL considered duplicate content
I have two URLs one with a tracking coded and one without. http://www.towermarketing.net/lets-talk-ux-baby and http://www.towermarketing.net/lets-talk-ux-baby/**#.U6ghgLEz64I ** My question is will this be considered as two separate URLs, will Google consider this as two pages with duplicate content. Any recommendations would be much appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | TowerMarketing0 -
Question about url structure for large real estate website
I've been running a large real estate rental website for the past few years and on May 8, 2013 my Google traffic dropped by about 50%. I'm concerned that my current url structure might be causing thin content pages for certain rental type + location searches. My current directory structure is:
On-Page Optimization | | Amped
domain.com/home-rentals/california/
domain.com/home-rentals/california/beverly-hills/
domain.com/home-rentals/california/beverly-hills/90210/
domain.com/apartment-rentals/california/
domain.com/apartment-rentals/california/beverly-hills/
domain.com/apartment-rentals/california/beverly-hills/90210/
etc.. I was thinking of changing it to the following:
domain.com/rentals/california/
domain.com/rentals/california/beverly-hills/
domain.com/rentals/california/beverly-hills/90210/ ** Note: I'd provide users the ability to filter their results by rental type - by default all types would be displayed. Another question - my listing pages are currently displayed as:
domain.com/123456 And I've been thinking of changing it to:
domain.com/123456-123-Street-City-State-Zip Should I proceed with both changes - one or the one - neither - or something else I'm not thinking of? Thank you in advance!!0 -
404 errors on page urls that don't even exist
The Seomoz crawler found 404error of pages dont even exist. Ho can that be possible?? Pages like: URL: http://www.yoxo.it/catalog/seo_sitemap/category/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/falli/
On-Page Optimization | | yoxo0 -
Can Sitemap Be Used to Manage Canonical URLs?
We have a duplicate content challenge that likely has contributed to us loosing SERPs especially for generic keywords such as "audiobook," "audiobooks," "audio book," and "audio books." Our duplicate content is on two levels. 1. The first level is at our web store, www.audiobooksonline.com. Audiobooks are sometimes published in abridged, unabridged, on compact discs, on MP3 CD by the same publisher. In this case we use the publisher description of the story for each "flavor" = duplicate content. Can we use our sitemap to identify only one "flavor" so that a spider doesn't index the others? 2. The second level is that most online merchants of the same publisher's audio book use the same description of the story = lots of duplicate content on the Web. In that we have 11,000+ audio book titles offered at our Web store, I expect Google sees us as having lots of duplicated (on the Web) content and devalues our site. Some of our competitors who rank very high for our generic keywords use the same publisher's description. Any suggestions on how we could make our individual audio book title pages unique will be greatly appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | lbohen0 -
Page authority 1 for new URLs
Hi There Quite a beginner question. I have changed url structure last week and is already avaliable on google.What i find strange is that the PA reported by SEOMOZ is 1 and there's no google cache. If the page has to crawled yet, why it's avaliable on google index already? Dario
On-Page Optimization | | Mrlocicero0 -
Site URL's
We are redeveloping our website, and have the option to amend URLs (with 301 redirects from old URL to new), so my question is: Would 'golfsite.com/golf-clubs' achieve superior rankings than 'golfsite.com/clubs' for the search term 'golf clubs' if all other factors were the same? Should the URL reflect the intended search term wherever possible?
On-Page Optimization | | swgolf1230