Url structure with dash or slash
-
Hi There
We have a content website. We don't rank well category image related searches but we get quite good traffic for those keywords. Those keywords are mostly like "category images". We want to change our url structure and we have 2 options now.
1- domain.com/category/category-images
option 1 repeats the category name so it looks spammy
option 2 doesn't really have the keyword.
any ideas which one tho choose?
Thanks!
ps: we don't want to use domain.com/category-images (too many root link)
-
Hey Rob,
Just throwing some ideas in here.
Is it folder depth or distance in terms of number of clicks from Homepage that makes a difference? It was my understanding that using a very flat structure was pretty outdated SEO?
One of the issues I think that get overlooked a lot when considering URL structure is how to structure URLs so you can drill down easily into different types of content/categories/channels.
As I understand it Google see a slash as the root of a folder. You can see this in Analytics, a page with a slash at the end of it has a folder icon next to it and you are shown the stats for that folder. This means that if you remove the trailing slashes from actual pages you can see how separate areas of the site are performing as a whole.
Another argument for using a folders to structuring URLs could be that "link juice" spreads throughout the folder, perhaps even contextually. For instance if I have a folder which contains all of my pages about widgets then as my link profile to the pages in the widgets folder all the pages in that folder benefit. It seems logical that if an item was in a relevant directory that x contextual links then it would benefit.
As I said, just a bit food for thought, not sure if my theories are correct but I'd be interested what you guys think?
Neil.
-
Thanks Wesley,
if difference between category-images and category/images is that small, I would like to with option 2 then.
-
Hi donford
Thanks for your answer, but I don't ask about image searches, the keyword is "category images" so it is not about image tags/desciription.
(we already have correct tags and names)
-
In my experiences and tests (although some disagree in search) don't forget to consider that (folder depth) IE - number of directories beyond the URL may have an impact on your search performance I can have an impact/factor in how deep spiders both crawl and index sites with regards to relevance and competitive landscape mapping. Just keep in mind
So you with www.domain.com/category/images/anotherfolder/ might be much longer to get your images ranking vs www.domain.com/images/ - but again, it doesn't always work in a framework for architecture if you have multiple, hundreds or thousands of /category/ sections in the sites design.
Try to trim down your URL to make it the most simplified, but user friendly (as possible :). Keeping it short for any pages and or directories also makes it more user friendly in that people can remember where the file was and the URL it was on
Folder location still has impact on crawl depth and rankings. The above mentioned features to improve relevancy for images are still useful (see post above), so ensure to name each image, and use hyphens between words, use the IMG ALT text on every image to identify, and the location of said images on various location page/URL's.
If you can get around removing the /category/ folder and reducing the URL to www.domain.com/images/ where all your image files are located, that might be better, but I have only used this in a handful of cases. Usually, more often than not .
Hope that helps!
-
The basic question (correct me if I'm wrong) is how to rank better for Image searches.
The answer, has little to do with the options you listed.The best way to achieve this
- Name the image appropriately (example Red-Ford-Mustang-Convertiable-2014.jpg not rfmc2014.jpg)
- Use appropriate image alt text (example "Car's Side View 2014 Mustang Convertible")
- Place images on appropriate pages, meaning you wouldn't want to show a red ford mustang on a page about staplers (the content of the page helps the image
Hope this helps
-
It's such a subtle difference SEO wise (if, in fact, there is a difference at all) that it really works out to what's best in terms of the user experience (internally or externally). I wouldn't waste much time considering it--just pick the one that seems to work best for your architecture/visitors and go with it.
-
I would recommend going for option 2 -> domain.com/category/images
The keyword you mentioned is "Category images". Both of these words are now in the URL structure. The difference SEO wise is very very very small though.
The structure of option 2 is much simpler and more straightforward. It looks less spammy and is easier to type in. Therefor it's better for the user and for you to use option 2.If you have any other questions feel free to ask me
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
-
Will page be marked as 404 if you replace country specific letters from url?
What I'm reffering to is replacement of Polish characters from i.e "ł" to "l" or "ę" to "e". I believe it relates same way as other similar Slavic languages.
On-Page Optimization | | Optimal_Strategies0 -
Phone number formatting - Periods vs Dashes
Are there any best practices on phone number formatting regarding using periods XXX.XXX.XXXX vs dashes XXX-XXX-XXXX? What about using parentheses on the area code (XXX)XXX-XXX? This is regarding a phone number on a contact apge...
On-Page Optimization | | WorkhorseMKT0 -
Rel=canonical vs noindex/follow - tabs with individual URLs
Hi everyone I've got a situation that I haven't seen in quite this way before. I would like some advice on whether I should be rel=canonicalzing of noindexing/following a range of pages on a clients website. I've just started working on a website that creates individual URLs for tabs within each page which has resulted in several URLs being created for each listing: Example URLs: hotel-downtown-calgary hotel-downtown-calgary/gallery?tab hotel-downtown-calgary?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/map?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/facilities?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab hotel-downtown-calgary/in-the-area?tab Google has indexed over 1500 pages with the "?tab" parameter (there are 4380 page indexed for the site in total), and also seems to be indexing some of these pages without the "?tab" parameter i.e. ("hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews" instead of "hotel-downtown-calgary/reviews?tab") so the amount of potential duplication could be more. These tabbed pages are getting minimal traffic from organic search, so I've got no issues with taking them out of the index - the question is how. There are the issues I see: Each tab has the same title as the other tabs for each location, so lots of title duplication. Each individual tab doesn't have much content (although the content each tab has is unique). I would usually expect the tabs to be distinguished by the parameters only, not have unique URLs - if that was the case we wouldn't have a duplication issue. So the question is: rel=canonical or noindex/follow? I can see benefits of both. Looking forward to your thoughts!
On-Page Optimization | | Digitator0 -
Changing the url of a page
Hello. I would like to change the url of a page. It currently has very few inbound links. I would set up a 301 redirect to the new url. Is there anything else I should take into account before changing the url? Is there a downside to changing a url? Do inbound links carry the same value when a 301 redirect is involved? Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | nyc-seo0 -
Title and Url Agreement
In the case of trying to hit a wide taxonomy, is it better to keep your title and URL in agreement, or to vary them slightly for exact search matching. For instance this blog post which has the following url: http://www.simplifiedbuilding.com/blog/build-your-own-standing-desk/ has the title "Make a Stand Up Desk - Better Working, Longer Living" The ideas is that build and make are similar words and "stand up" and "standing" are also similar. So what is the better way to go?
On-Page Optimization | | CPollock0 -
Should a title tag and the URL be a 100 percent match?
My understanding is that a URL should be as short as possible and also match the title tag, but in order to keep the URL shorter, can you abbreviate it? For example: Title Tag: Eat Your Way to Beauty with Superfoods URL: websitename.com/sbeauty-with-superfoods
On-Page Optimization | | KimCalvert0 -
URL extensions naming
I have always wrote URL extensions as www.mysite.com/two_words.html .... when I need to separate two words, I use _ as the separator ... I am a first time SEO Moz user ... I While looking around the tools on SEO Moz, I happened to stumble across the on-page analysis. A great tool indeed, rather worryingly though, one issue it flagged to me was my URL extension "Characters which are less commonly used in URLs may cause problems with accessibility, interpretation and ranking in search engines. It is considered a best practice to stick to standard URL structures to avoid potential problems." Can someone advice me if this really is a problem, its just not this project, its tons of sites I have already developed that I am also worried about ... I always write file extensions with more than one word using _ to separate the words. How should I write the extension, I am almost embarrassed to ask this question ... Surely, even Google's algorithms are not smart enough to decipher two words without some some sort of spacing .... Regards J
On-Page Optimization | | Johnny4B0 -
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
On-Page Optimization | | creativedepartment0