Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Numbers in URL
-
Hey guys! Need your many awesome brains. This may be a very basic question but am hoping you can help me out with some insights beyond "because Google says it's better".
I only recently started working with SEO, and I work for a SaaS website builder company that has millions of open/active user sites, and all our user sites URLs, instead of www.mydomainname.com/gallery or myusername.simplesite.com/about, we use numbers, so www.mysite.com/453112 or myusername.simplesite.com/426521
The Sales manager has asked me to figure out if it will pay off for us in terms of traffic (other benefits?) to change it from the number system to the "proper" and right way of setting up these URLs. He's looking for rather concrete answers, as he usually sits with paid search and is therefore used to the mindset of "if we do x it will yield us y in z months".
I'm finding it quite difficult to find case studies/other concrete examples beyond the generic, vague implication that it will simply be "better" (when for example looking at SEO checklists and search engine guidelines). Will it make a difference? How so?
I have to convince our developers of the importance and priority of this adjustment, or it will just drown in the many projects they already have. So truly, any insights would be so very welcome. Thank you!
-
The reference uses the words "Consider" and "when possible", which is not as clear as other suggestions Google make. Instructions are crystal clear for other on-page techniques, such as hreflang.
As a power user who works with clients in multiple languages, I frequently switch between languages using the URL, like going from https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/76329?hl=en to https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/76329?hl=fr. This wouldn't be possible if the URL was https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/keep-a-simple-url-structure. For this particular use, I would argue the former are more "user-friendly" than the latter!
More and more the URL is becoming a relic of the past. Sitename and Breadcrumbs are replacing it in SERPs. Browsers on mobile hide it by default. There is no URL bar in recent in-app browsers (Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn).
On the hand, it has been said in the past that keywords in URLs help search engines understand the context of a link when there is no anchor text.
A few things to consider:
- The need to create 301 redirects and the risk of losing trafic
- The impact on on-site SEO (hreflang, canonicals, sitemaps, internal links, etc.)
- The qualitative impact (do your users expect this feature? do visitors expect this feature?)
- Most importantly, the fact that it's probably a low priority optimization!
- If at all possible, consider running an experiment.
Hope this helps! I left out a clear answer on purpose - because I don't have one.
-
Just offering my opinion. There is no such thing as "concrete proof" that can't be disproven in this case due to the complexity of SEO.
Every factor is just one among many. So a site that has "proper" URL syntax can easily and readily outrank and outperform a site that doesn't if enough individual factors across the whole spectrum are strong enough.
Conversely, A site that has numeric URL structure and "non-ideal" syntax can also easily and outrank / outperform a site that has "proper" URL syntax if that site has enough strength from other factors to outweigh the "proper" structured URL site.
Anyone who has a case study claiming otherwise is not acknowledging how complex the reality of what we do is, and how any sub-group of signals can be so strong as to far outweigh any other sub-group of signals.
-
True story, Highland. Very useful case, thank you!
-
I really like how Stack Exchange handles their URLs
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30526714/seo-and-user-friendly-urls-for-multi-language-website
So to break down the URL, they have a directory questions, then the question ID and THEN the SEO friendly tag. Since the URL can be edited by anyone, it preserves the reference the system needs to access it regardless of what URL you're using. This might help your programmers if they know they can keep the ID in the URL. Otherwise you have the overhead of looking up the URL and then loading the correct page. Does that keep it typeable? No, but let's be honest... when was the last time you actually typed a URL (more than just the domain name) into your browser?
-
Click through rate is an excellent line of thought as well. Nice one. You're 100% right, as well.
-
Hey John,
I think you're onto something there. Putting it in a context of "us against them" and showcasing that we're actually falling (and staying) behind because we don't have these basics in order could be very effective. I think I got stuck in their mindset demand of "show us quantitative data!". So thanks a lot for offering me a different perspective, appreciate it!
-
Michelle
Matts answer is perfect but if you want me all you can do is condense common sense to them in a written form. I will try and give some suggestions. Firstly I would also give them online examples. Specifically I would use best in class pure online operators that your bosses would be familiar with. Competitors and not keeping up with them always rankle good bosses.
Hence showing examples between agreed world class operators and what you are doing would clearly highlight the lack of "best in class" attributes of your company SOP.
As Google states a Google indicator in page ranking is the words in the URL. Hence if you bosses are capable enough and type car insurance into www.google.com.au - nearly all websites will display a website like the below.
<cite class="_Rm">www.comparethemarket.com.au/car-insurance/</cite>Hence even your bosses with only a few key strokes should be able to see what is best practice. Ask them to show you a world class online operator that states www.comparethemarket.com.au/123456 for the keyword car insurance.So in summary I would show them what is happening in a the real world - simply ask them to type in a query to bring up a good online operator. Best still show them what your competitors are up to.Good luck with them.
-
Hi Carlos, and thanks!
Yeah, for sure it will help out a lot of our users (which is just as much a priority for me as optimizing SEO for our own main site). Our own main site (www.simplesite.com) does have just words in the URL. It's just the sites from our users/customers that has numbers. Which is just endlessly frustrating for me AND our users, because they obviously want their pages and titles reflected in their URLs. So yeah, CTR is a really good point. Thanks again!
-
Hi Michelle,
I can think of 2 main benefits of using words in URLs have instead of numbers.
If you are reading an article about Paella, and there is a list of recipes from different pages:
The second link is most likely to get more clicks. The same situation on Google search page, although the title is more important a readable URL will always be better to the user.
The second benefit for SEO purposes is that matching keywords from the title of you page and the URL will give you a boost, how much will be it is to discuss.
Here is an excellent MOZ article about the topic
https://moz.com/blog/15-seo-best-practices-for-structuring-urls
Hope it helps,
Carlos
-
Thanks again, MattAntonino, really appreciate it! Enjoy the rest of your Friday.
-
There really isn't a higher authority than "Google said so in WMT guidelines" when it comes to SEO for your site.
I know they're looking for case study or whatnot but all I can suggest is explain that Guidelines ARE the rules, Guidelines specifically and directly cover this question. So you should follow the Guidelines.
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35769?hl=en says "Following these guidelines will help Google find, index, and rank your site."
I looked for case studies on this but search is done in words not numbers so I assume it's because it's fairly obvious that it can only help. Good luck!
-
Thanks so much for your quick response, MattAntonino! Totally agree with it.
Unfortunately, that's also exactly my problem. I personally agree that it is clear and tells us exactly what we should do, and I know most (if not all) SEOs would agree with you/the above statement. My problem is that I'm trying to convince people who are not sitting with SEO every day, and if I cannot give them more than this, they simply won't prioritize it over other projects.
-
I'll do the best I can, which is take you directly to the source:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/76329?hl=en
"Consider organizing your content so that URLs are constructed logically and in a manner that is most intelligible to humans (when possible, readable words rather than long ID numbers)."
That's fairly clear and exactly what you're trying to get at. This article is a direct piece of the "Webmaster Guidelines" section - and should be followed where possible. This should be enough to get you across the line.
I also think most SEOs would agree that Google uses keywords in the URL to at least some extent. We know they use search with synonyms and related keywords. So if your URL contains /seo/ it's much more related to "seo" searches than /123/ is. So yes, it will help. It's hard (impossible) to quantify by how much though.
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 do I deindex url parameters
Google indexed a bunch of our URL parameters. I'm worried about duplicate content. I used the URL parameter tool in webmaster to set it so future parameters don't get indexed. What can I do to remove the ones that have already been indexed? For example, Site.com/products and site.com/products?campaign=email have both been indexed as separate pages even though they are the same page. If I use a no index I'm worried about de indexing the product page. What can I do to just deindexed the URL parameter version? Thank you!
Technical SEO | | BT20090 -
Redirect URLS with 301 twice
Hello, I had asked my client to ask her web developer to move to a more simplified URL structure. There was a folder called "home" after the root which served no purpose. I asked for the URLs to be redirected using 301 to the new URLs which did not have this structure. However, the web developer didn't agree and decided to just rename the "home" folder "p". I don't know why he did this. We argued the case and he then created the URL structure we wanted. Initially he had 301 redirected the old URLS (the one with "Home") to his new version (the one with the "p"). When we asked for the more simplified URL after arguing, he just redirected all the "p" URLS to the PAGE NOT FOUND. However, remember, all the original URLs are now being redirected to the PAGE NOT FOUND as a result. The problems I see are these unless he redirects again: The new simplified URLS have to start from scratch to rank 2)We have duplicated content - two URLs with the same content Customers clicking products in the SERPs will currently find that they are being redirect to the 404 page. I understand that redirection has to occur but my questions are these: Is it ok to redirect twice with 301 - so old URL to the "p" version then to final simplified version. Will link juice be lost doing this twice? If he redirects from the original URLS to the final version missing out the "p" version, what should happen to the "p" version - they are currently indexed. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
Technical SEO | | AL123al0 -
Why xml generator is not detecting all my urls?
Hi Mozzers, After adding 3 new pages to example.com, when generating the xml sitemap, Iwasn't able to locate those 3 new url. This is the first time it is happening. I have checked the meta tags of these pages and they are fine. No meta robots setup! Any thoughts or idea why this is happening? how to fix this? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
Approved Word Separators in URLs
Hi There, We are in the process of revamping our URL structure and my devs tell me they have a technical problem using a hyphen as a word separator. There's a whole lot of competing recommendations out there and at this point I'm just confused. Does anyone have any idea what character would be next-best to the hyphen for separating words in a URL? Any reason to prefer one over another? Some links I've found discussing the topic: This page says that "__Google has confirmed that the point (.), the comma (,) and the hyphen (-) are valid word separators in URL’s.": http://www.internetofficer.com/seo/google-word-separator/ This page suggests the plus (+) symbol would be best: http://labs.phurix.net/posts/word-separators-in-urls This guy says he's tested and there's a whole bunch of symbols that will work as word separators: http://www.webproguide.com/articles/Symbols-as-word-separators-a-look-inside-the-search-engine-logic/ I'm leaning towards the tilde (~) or the plus (+) sign. Usage would be like so: http://www.domain.com/shop/sterling~silver OR /shop/sterling+silver etc... Thanks in advance for your help!
Technical SEO | | Richline_Digital1 -
Special characters in URL
Hi There, We're in the process of changing our URL structure to be more SEO friendly. Right now I'm struggling to find a good way to handle slashes that are part of a targeted keyword. For example, if I have a product page and my product title is "1/2 ct Diamond Earrings in 14K Gold" which of the following URLs is the right way to go if I'm targeting the product title as the search keyword? example.com/jewelry/1-2-ct-diamond-earrings-in-14k-gold example.com/jewelry/12-ct-diamond-earrings-in-14k-gold example.com/jewelry/1_2-ct-diamond-earrings-in-14k-gold example.com/jewelry/1%2F2-ct-diamond-earrings-in-14k-gold Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Richline_Digital0 -
Optimal Structure for Forum Thread URL
For getting forum threads ranked, which is best and why? site.com**/topic/**thread-title-goes-here site.com**/t/**thread-title-goes-here site.com**/**thread-title-goes-here I'd take comfort in knowing that SEOmoz uses the middle version, except that "q" is more meaningful to a human than "t". The last option seems like the best bet overall, except that users could potentially steal urls that I may want to use in the future. My old structure was site.com/forum/topic/TOPIC_ID-thread-title-goes-here so obviously any of those would be a vast improvement, but I might as well make the best choice now so I only have to change once.
Technical SEO | | PatrickGriffith0 -
Duplicate canonical URLs in WordPress
Hi everyone, I'm driving myself insane trying to figure this one out and am hoping someone has more technical chops than I do. Here's the situation... I'm getting duplicate canonical tags on my pages and posts, one is inside of the WordPress SEO (plugin) commented section, and the other is elsewhere in the header. I am running the latest version of WordPress 3.1.3 and the Genesis framework. After doing some testing and adding the following filters to my functions.php: <code>remove_action('wp_head', 'genesis_canonical'); remove_action('wp_head', 'rel_canonical');</code> ... what I get is this: With the plugin active + NO "remove action" - duplicate canonical tags
Technical SEO | | robertdempsey
With the plugin disabled + NO "remove action" - a single canonical tag
With the plugin disabled + A "remove action" - no canonical tag I have tried using only one of these remove_actions at a time, and then combining them both. Regardless, as long as I have the plugin active I get duplicate canonical tags. Is this a bug in the plugin, perhaps somehow enabling the canonical functionality of WordPress? Thanks for your help everyone. Robert Dempsey0