Is it better to have trailing slash or no trailing slash in URLs and what if both variations work?
-
Hi I have a situation on a website where the links are structured like this http://website.com/myurl/ so anywhere you click you will land on a page with a trailing slash but if i remove the trailing slash like this http://website.com/myurl the page is still going to open the same content.
1. so it works with and without the trailing slash. is this considered as duplicate content by google? and if so what is the best way to go? should i redirect al the non trailing slash urls to trailing slash or the opposite?
2. if i redirect am i going to loose some link juice from existing external links which mainly already point to urls without th trailing slash.
3. i've noticed that the sitemap.xml contains links without the trailing slash .. should it contain the urls with the trailing slash?
Also there's many external links pointing to this site but withouth the trailng slash like this http://website.com/myurl
-
The problem you're describing is almost exactly the reason why canonical URL functionality exists. Just pick your canonical (with or without slash - it doesn't matter) and make sure you roll it out consistently across your website and sitemap.
Regards,
George
-
I would personally suggest you not to go for 301 as it will increase the page load time of the website which direct affects the rankings in search engines. I would rather prefer to choose the preferred version and use canonicals on every page of the website. This way Google will have an idea about what URL is the preferred and crawl the stuff accordingly.
Hope this helps!
-
Hi,
I would suggest that you verify whether 301 redirects are even a possibility. For example, if the website is hosted on IIS server, then the 301 redirect rule might result into a redirect loop. In such a scenario, I would suggest you place self canonical tag on the page. For example on the page domainA.com/page 1, we will have the following tag in the head section of the page -
For the PDF files, place the canonical tag in the header response.
On the links front - You will not be losing a lot
Regards,
Sajeet
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
-
Does having active urls with and without trailing .html impact SEO?
A recent update resulted in duplication of urls on our site due to inconsistent url structure: Example: /category2.html and /category2 both active on the site as the same page Will this hurt and should we create redirects using only one version of the url? /category2.html redirect to /category2
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Karri_Parks0 -
Index an URL without directly linking it?
Hi everyone, Here's a duplicate content challenge I'm facing: Let's assume that we sell brown, blue, white and black 'Nike Shoes model 2017'. Because of technical reasons, we really need four urls to properly show these variations on our website. We find substantial search volume on 'Nike Shoes model 2017', but none on any of the color variants. Would it be theoretically possible to show page A, B, C and D on the website and: Give each page a canonical to page X, which is the 'default' page that we want to rank in Google (a product page that has a color selector) but is not directly linked from the site Mention page X in the sitemap.xml. (And not A, B, C or D). So the 'clean' urls get indexed and the color variations do not? In other words: Is it possible to rank a page that is only discovered via sitemap and canonicals?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Adriaan.Multiply0 -
Status Codes - Deleted URLs
Hi I have a dev team 'cleaning' their database and from what I can tell deleting old URL's - which they say are not in use. I don't have much visibility on how our URLs are managed in the back end of the site, but my concern is these URLs should never be deleted, they should have a 301, 404 or 410. This includes product pages no longer available and category pages - my concern is losing authority. Am I worrying over nothing or is this a big issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Replicating keywords in the URL - bad?
Our site URL structure used to be (example site) frogsforsale.com/cute-frogs-for-sale/blue-frogs wherefrogsforsale.com/cute-frogs-for-sale/ was in front of every URL on the site. We changed it by removing the for-sale part of the URL to be frogsforsale.com/cute-frogs/blue-frogs. Would that have hurt our rankings and traffic by removing the for-sale? Or was having for-sale in the URL twice (once in domain, again in URL) hurting our site? The business wants to change the URLs again to put for-sale back in, but in a new spot such as frogsforsale.com/cute-frogs/blue-frogs-for-sale as they are convinced that is the cause of the rankings and traffic drop. However the entire site was redesigned at the same time, the site architecture is very different, so it is very hard to say whether the traffic drop is due to this or not.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CFSSEO0 -
Duplicate content across internation urls
We have a large site with 1,000+ pages of content to launch in the UK. Much of this content is already being used on a .nz url which is going to stay. Do you see this as an issue or do you thin Google will take localised factoring into consideration. We could add a link from the NZ pages to the UK. We cant noindex the pages as this is not an option. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jazavide0 -
Linking to Short vs Long URL
Suppose I have a long url on an established site and created a shorter version of it so it is easier for people to enter directly and click. I 301 the short version to the long. I don't think there is much concern for people linking to the long version pages, but will there be a tendency for people to link to the short url instead of the long for the domain links? Will I not benefit as much from links to the short vs the long? Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AWCthreads0 -
Canonicalization issue I cant work out
Seo Moz have kindly brought to my attention some canonicalization issues with my site. Firstly I've adjust http://capitalalist.com to 301 redirect to http://www.capitalalist.com via htaccess. But the crawl has shown for every page in my site the problem below: http://www.capitalalist.com/cirque-du-soir http://www.capitalalist.com/cirque-du-soir/ It's just that last / that's causing the problem. But I can't seem to see anyone having the same issue before. BTW im using wordpress if that makes a difference. Can anyone elaborate on the issue? How would i adjust my htaccess file to redirect a request with a / on the end of it? Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AdenBrands0 -
Changing URL Structure
We are going to be relaunching our website with a new URL structure. My question is, how is it best to deal with the migration process in terms of old URLS appearing whilst we launch the new ones. How best should we launch the new structure, considering we've in the region of 10,000 pages currently indexed in Google.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NeilTompkins0