Page URL Hiearchy
-
So I have read on here that page URL Hiearchy is important. My question is from a search engine standpoint which of the following methods would be the best to use (or another if not listed)
COMPACT and naturally hierarchical
MountainBiking.com/adventures ( a list of the pages below )
MountainBiking.com/adventures/in whistler (for each page)
MountainBiking.com/adventures/in utah
OR VERBOSE but reptetive
MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking adventures ( intro + a list of the pages below )
MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking Adventures/Mounting Biking adventures in whistler
MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking Adventures/Mountain Biking Adventures in Utah
It seemed like the blog I read suggested the compact form, but it seems to me that the verbose (though admittedly a bit clunky) seems better so far as exact keyword match etc.
Experience and or advice on this?
-
My opinion: mountainbiking.com/adventures/mountain-biking-adventures-in-utah/ Why like this? Because when you put less than 3 or more than 5 words in the URL google gives less importance for the keywords in the URL based in what mattcutts said. And for user point of view, If I see a sub-folder with MOUNTAIN BIKING too( assume the domain already have the keywords ) will look spammy for me.
-
The only problem with that would be that all of the links would have to be on the home page, which I don't want.
I have a landing page, then a couple of searchable content categories/catalogs, similar to a blog structure ( excerpts to the full page )
Personally I like the flat structure better, but worry about losing out on points for not having an exact enough URL
-
I was going to add - between the words, is there a reason that more compact form (no - ) is better?
So the part that looks like it's phishing is the repetition of mountain bike adventures in the catalog section?
My thought was, and perhaps incorrectly that if someone searched for "Mountain Bike Adventures" then they would get the catalog page, but if something more specific the expanded page.
So to clarify you think that MountainBiking.com/adventures if all else on the page was optimized would work better than MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking adventures/
Thanks for the help, really appreciate it.
-
I've read that a flat URL structure is best -
"MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking Adventures In Whistler" instead of "MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking Adventures/Mountain Biking Adventures In Whistler".
This format is easier for bots to crawl. Since only around 130 characters of the URL show in SERPs anyway, searchers won't see the whole URL if it's too long. You also avoid the appearance of "keyword stuffing" by using a flat URL structure.
-
The second format looks blatantly like SEO-'phishing' and I would not go to a website like that. Having the spaces in there could also cause some serious issues. You can always have the final destination being verbose:
MountainBiking.com/adventures/mountainbikingadventuresinwhistler
Although this looks crappy again. I think just having all these in your domain will be enough, so go with the clean, compact format, for your visitor's sake.
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
-
Hi i have a few pages with duplicate content but we've added canonical urls to them, but i need help understanding what going on
hi google is seeing many of our pages and dupliates but they have canonical url on there https://www.hijabgem.com/index.php/maxi-shirt-dress.html has tags https://www.hijabgem.com/maxi-shirt-dress.html
On-Page Optimization | | hijabgem
has tagshttps://www.hijabgem.com/index.php/quickview/index/view/id/4693
has tags
my question is which page takes authority?and are they setup correct, can you have more than one link rel="canonical" on one page?0 -
To avoid the duplicate content issue I have created new urls for that specific site I am posting to and redirecting that url to the original on my site. Is this the right way to do it?
I am trying to avoid the duplicate content issue by creating new urls and redirecting them to the original url. Is this the proper way of going about it?
On-Page Optimization | | yagobi210 -
New Page Not ranking?
One of this client's top keyword is "oak beams". They already rank well in the UK for other related terms like "reclaimed oak beams" at /reclaimed-oak-beams/ and "air dried oak beams" at /air-dried-oak-beams/ We have created a page at /oak-beams/ but this page ranks nowhere? Instead the reclaimed oak beams or air dried oak beams page ranks for the term "oak beams". Any ideas why Google is swapping between those pages and not choosing the /oak-beams/ page? A few notes are that the /oak-beams/ page is newest page on the site and yes I know there are no links pointing to it but there are no links pointing to the other pages either?
On-Page Optimization | | Marketing_Today0 -
Unique Pages with Thin Content vs. One Page with Lots of Content
Is there anyone who can give me a definitive answer on which of the following situations is preferable from an SEO standpoint for the services section of a website? 1. Many unique and targeted service pages with the primary keyword in the URL, Title tag and H1 - but with the tradeoff of having thin content on the page (i.e. 100 words of content or less). 2. One large service page listing all services in the content. Primary keyword for URL, title tag and H1 would be something like "(company name) services" and each service would be in the H2 title. In this case, there is lots of content on the page. Yes, the ideal situation would be to beef up content for each unique pages, but we have found that this isn't always an option based on the amount of time a client has dedicated to a project.
On-Page Optimization | | RCDesign741 -
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 -
Autogenerated pages
My main product is database conversion software. As it supports tons of databases, it's fairly easy to generate thousands of landing pages simply by variating source/target database names, connection information etc. In fact, I autogenerated almost 25k pages that way. As I didn't want to jeopardize my main site, I placed all that content to a new microsite (www.fullconvert.com) which had no history and no inbound links. Results were nice - site is live two months and in second month already had 1300 visitors. Now, my question is - should I create the same thing on my (old and rather authoritative) main site www.spectralcore.com? I could use a different template to avoid duplicate content. Of course, my main concern is being penalized by Google. In my opinion, this autogenerated content is fine because it provides (tons of) laser-focused landing pages, so visitors will instantly recognize they found what they're looking for. But Google might disagree! What do you think? Is there a danger in trying to leverage authority of my main site in adding 20k+ autogenerated pages with inbound no links to them?
On-Page Optimization | | metadata0 -
Faq page
We are redoing our faq page and we were trying to decide on the best format. 1. Create each question on a separate page 2. Create one page with all the question and have the questions expand 3. Create different faq category pages (like 4) and divide the questions between them From my perspective #1 seems the best ---. you can create hyper relevant content for the user and optimize each question really well Any experience with this?
On-Page Optimization | | Morris770 -
Page Indexing
Hello All Nice easy question! I've made some on page changes to page titles, content, H1s etc but wanted to know if there was a way to check if Google has reindexed the page since the changes were made? I appreciate the different factors that will help improve your crawl rate like new content, external links, domain authority etc. I made these changes around 2 weeks ago. Google has cached the pages since I made the changes but not picked up on the new page titles in the search results. Cheers Todd
On-Page Optimization | | todd75850