We are changing ?page= dynamic url's to /page/ static urls. Will this hurt the progress we have made with the pages using dynamic addresses?
-
Question about changing url from dynamic to static to improve SEO but concern about hurting progress made so far.
-
Thanks! What I meant by "hurting progress so far" was that some of these pages are highly ranked and we are trying to improve their ranking further by changing from dynamic (?page=) to static addresses without hurting the ranks--since the whole point is to improve the ranks.
-
Not sure what you mean about hurting progress you've made so far. If you implement 301 Redirects, and if your new method is based on SEO best practices (in other words not going TOO far with keyword stuffing), and you've got sound content organization, there should be no problem whatever in the switch.
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 necessary is it to disavow links in 2017? Doesn't Google's algorithm take care of determining what it will count or not?
Hi All, So this is a obvious question now. We can see sudden fall or rise of rankings; heavy fluctuations. New backlinks are contributing enough. Google claims it'll take care of any low quality backlinks without passing pagerank to website. Other end we can many scenarios where websites improved ranking and out of penalty using disavow tool. Google's statement and Disavow tool, both are opposite concepts. So when some unknown low quality backlinks are pointing and been increasing to a website? What's the ideal measure to be taken?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
The images on site are not found/indexed, it's been recommended we change their presentation to Google Bot - could this create a cloaking issue?
Hi We have an issue with images on our site not being found or indexed by Google. We have an image sitemap but the images are served on the Sitecore powered site within <divs>which Google can't read. The developers have suggested the below solution:</divs> Googlebot class="header-banner__image" _src="/~/media/images/accommodation/arctic-canada/arctic-safari-camp/arctic-cafari-camp-david-briggs.ashx"/>_Non Googlebot <noscript class="noscript-image"><br /></span></em><em><span><div role="img"<br /></span></em><em><span>aria-label="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada"<br /></span></em><em><span>title="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada"<br /></span></em><em><span>class="header-banner__image"<br /></span></em><em><span>style="background-image: url('/~/media/images/accommodation/arctic-canada/arctic-safari-camp/arctic-cafari-camp-david-briggs.ashx?mw=1024&hash=D65B0DE9B311166B0FB767201DAADA9A4ADA4AC4');"></div><br /></span></em><em><span></noscript> aria-label="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada" title="Arctic Safari Camp, Arctic Canada" class="header-banner__image image" data-src="/~/media/images/accommodation/arctic-canada/arctic-safari-camp/arctic-cafari-camp-david-briggs.ashx" data-max-width="1919" data-viewport="0.80" data-aspect="1.78" data-aspect-target="1.00" > Is this something that could be flagged as potential cloaking though, as we are effectively then showing code looking just for the user agent Googlebot?The devs have said that via their contacts Google has advised them that the original way we set up the site is the most efficient and considered way for the end user. However they have acknowledged the Googlebot software is not sophisticated enough to recognise this. Is the above solution the most suitable?Many thanksKate
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KateWaite0 -
URL structure change and xml sitemap
At the end of April we changed the url structure of most of our pages and 301 redirected the old pages to the new ones. The xml sitemaps were also updated at that point to reflect the new url structure. Since then Google has not indexed the new urls from our xml sitemaps and I am unsure of why. We are at 4 weeks since the change, so I would have thought they would have indexed the pages by now. Any ideas on what I should check to make sure pages are indexed?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ang0 -
Why isn't the Google change of address tool working for me?
Last night I switched my site from http to https. Both sites are verified in Webmaster Tools but when I try to use the change of address it says- Your account doesn't contain any sites we can use for a change of address. Add and verify the new site, then try again. How do I fix this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
Ecommerce URL's
I'm a bit divided about the URL structure for ecommerce sites. I'm using Magento and I have Canonical URLs plugin installed. My question is about the URL structure and length. 1st Way: If I set up Product to have categories in the URL it will appear like this mysite.com/category/subcategory/product/ - and while the product can be in multiple places , the Canonical URL can be either short or long. The advantage of having this URL is that it shows all the categories in the breadcrumbs ( and a whole lot more links over the site ) . The disadvantage is the URL Length 2nd Way: Setting up the product to have no category in the URL URL will be mysite.com/product/ Advantage: short URL. disadvantage - doesn't show the categories in the breadcrumbs if you link direct. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | s_EOgi_Bear1 -
Using Canonical on home page
Our home page has the canonical tag pointing to itself (something from wordpress i understand). Is there any positive or negative affect that anyone is aware of from having pages canonical'ed to themselves?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | halloranc0 -
WIll Splash Page Triggered Only for iPhones Hurt SEO
Background We are in the process of launching a website where ticket inventory and processing are handled by a third party. Our primary means of traffic generation (at least at first) will be through SEO traffic. One of the things that they require of us is a script that will detect people with an iPhone and, upon entering the site, display a page giving people the option to call for help or continue to the site. (see attached screenshot) We will still get credit for the transaction (tracked through the phone #) and they say that this increases conversion rate, so it is something that we would like to use, unless it will affect our ability to rank in mobile. Problem My concern is that we will be penalized by Google (or rank poorly in Mobile search) because the page that iPhone users (not iPad users) are served is hosted on a different domain and not optimized at all for the keywords people are searching for. This is obviously a non-issue if Google never sees the page, but I have heard that Google will emulate different devices when crawling pages. Question Can anyone provide any insight about this? I feel like we are adding value to customers by giving them the option to speak to customer support, but I'm afraid that Google will think we are cloaking or at best providing the same page to anyone entering with an iPhone. Here is a link to the soon-to-be-launched website:http://dev.concerttickets.com.vhost.zerolag.com/ -- so you can check it out on your iPhone. Is there a possibility that this could effect SEO traffic from other devices? Any suggests will or advice will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance! EP1nA EP1nA EP1nA.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | highlyrelevant0 -
Should I 301 Poorly Worded URL's which are indexed and driving traffic
Hi, I'm working on our sites structure and SEO at present and wondering when the benefit I may get from a well written URL, i.e ourDomain / keyword or keyphrase .html would be preferable to the downturn in traffic i may witness by 301 redirecting an existing, not as well structured, but indexed URL. We have a number of odd looking URL's i.e ourDomain / ourDomain_keyword_92.html alongside some others that will have a keyword followed by 20 underscores in a long line... My concern is although i would like to have a keyword or key phrase sitting on its own in a well targeted URL string I don't want to mess to much with pages that are driving say 2% or 3% of our traffic just because my OCD has kicked in.... Some further advice on strategies i could utilise would be great. My current thinking is that if a page is performing well then i should leave the URL alone. Then if I'm not 100% happy with the keyword or phrase it is targeting I could build another page to handle the new keyword / phrase with the aim of that moving up the rankings and eventually taking over from where the other page left off. Any advice is much appreciated, Guy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | guycampbell0