Should I shorten my urls?
-
For my informational site I have a lot of urls that are way too long. When I first created the site, I wrote a script that takes out the common words of a post and fashions a url. So, for example, if the first few words of a question were:
Hi there, I have a question about back pain. I'm wondering what drugs would be good for relief and how I can get some help?
then my url may be:
www.mydomain.com/question?id=123-question-back-pain-wondering-drugs-good-relief-how-get-some-help
Once I got learning about seo I realized that these urls were too long but I never did anything about them. Should I be shortening these, or is my time best spent doing something else?
-
That is brilliant Marcus. The if-else idea regarding the ID makes so much sense. I will leave the old ones as is and change the ones from this point on.
Thanks!
p.s. I noticed that seomoz does the same thing with the Q&A urls. This one's not too long because I asked a short question but some of the question urls in here are quite long!
-
Hey
That's a solid point from EGOL - if there are ones that are working well at the moment, don't rock the boat and look to improve new content. The dynamic thing does make it a bit more tricky but really, it should not be a massive problem.
If your URLs are generated by the script and you have some kind of ID relating to the content you are adding it should be easy enough to put something in place that uses better quality URLs for new content.
If contentID > x Then
Build new URL Structure
Else
Build old URL Structure
End
Whether you do this entirely in the code or with some URL rewriting to add polish is up to you and in some part depends on how things work on your back end but...
Where there is a will there is a way and if you can shorten future URLs it will provide some benefit.
Maybe you could do some testing to see if it is going to be worth your while
- Create a few hard coded new pages over the next month
- Track them against the current pages
- see if there is a statistical improvement in clicks, conversions, impressions etc
I am pretty much of the opinion that if you can change them going forward, you should as they are not brilliant at the moment but I would not expect miracles from this though so don't bust a blood vessel over it.
Cheers
Marcus -
You could definitely redirect URLs using .htaccess and mod_rewrite. An example rule would be something like
RewriteRule ^q/(.*) /?question=$1
or
RewriteRule ^q/(.*)-(\d+) /?question=$2-$1
See the mod_rewrite documentation or just ask a competent developer about the rules above.
-
I definitely agree with the "messy" thing. Every few months I think, "Oh, I should fix that long url thingy", but then my brain gets shorted out trying to think of how to do it. I wanted to do a htaccess redirect but because the url is written with a php script I just can't figure out how to do it.
Invariably what happens is that I manage to get my mind onto other more exciting things and then I just do nothing and I end up having more and more ugly long urls.
-
ahh... this question is getting messy...
I don't know exactly how the rel-canonical tag will work in this situation.
-
Thanks guys. One of my problems is that all of these urls are generated dynamically. So, I'm thinking of changing the script on that page so that it generates a shorter url. Then, I think I can use the rel-canonical tag to tell Google that the short urls are the ones to use.
If I do that will the long ones drop out of the index?
-
If you can change future URLs without changing the historic URLs then I would leave the old ones "as is". (Meaning... change future but not old ones)
It will take work to change them and if you do a 301 then there might be some link power lost.
I always like to base my decisions at least in part on analytics, so if these pages are pulling nice traffic and ranking in the SERPs then I would not do a thing about the old ones.
Just an opinion.
-
Hey, they are too long and don't really make any sense so... I think they need improving.
In an ideal world your URL should describe the content of the page as it will help win clicks and may give you an SEO boost through links that use the URL itself as the anchor.
Shorten them though, should be easy enough and certainly gives a usability boost.
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
-
URL Too Long vs. 301 Redirect
We have a small number of content pages where the urls paths were setup before we started looking really hard at SEO. The paths are longer than recommended (but not super crazy IMHO) and some of the pages get a decent amount of traffic. Moz suggests updating the URLs to make them shorter but I wonder if anyone has experience with the tradeoffs here. Is it better to mark those issues to be ignored and just use good URLs going forward or would you suggest updating the URLs to something shorter and implementing a 301 redirect?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | russell_ms0 -
Google ranking 301 redirected vanity urls
We use vanity URLs for offline marketing. An example vanity URL would be www.clientsite.com/promotion, this URL 301 redirects to a page on the site with tracking parameter ex: www.clientsite.com/mainpage?utm_source=source&utm_medium=print&utm_campaign=xyz. We are running into issues with Google ignoring the 301 redirect and ranking these vanity URLs instead of the actual page on the website. Any suggestions on how to resolve?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | digitalhound0 -
Client wants to remove mobile URLs from their sitemap to avoid indexing issues. However this will require SEVERAL billing hours. Is having both mobile/desktop URLs in a sitemap really that detrimental to search indexing?
We had an enterprise client ask to remove mobile URLs from their sitemaps. For their website both desktop & mobile URLs are combined into one sitemap. Their website has a mobile template (not a responsive website) and is configured properly via Google's "separate URL" guidelines. Our client is referencing a statement made from John Mueller that having both mobile & desktop sitemaps can be problematic for indexing. Here is the article https://www.seroundtable.com/google-mobile-sitemaps-20137.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB
We would be happy to remove the mobile URLs from their sitemap. However this will unfortunately take several billing hours for our development team to implement and QA. This will end up costing our client a great deal of money when the task is completed. Is it worth it to remove the mobile URLs from their main website to be in adherence to John Mueller's advice? We don't believe these extra mobile URLs are harming their search indexing. However we can't find any sources to explain otherwise. Any advice would be appreciated. Thx.0 -
Cleaning up backlinks and changing URLs
Currently we are performing very poorly in organic clicks. We are a e-commerce site with over 2000 products. Issues we thought plagued us: Copied Images from competitors Site wide duplicate content duplicate content from competitor site Number of internal links on a page (300+) Bad backlinks (2.3k from 22 domains and ips) being linked to from sites like m.biz URLs URLs are abbreviated, over 50% lack our keywords Lack of meta descriptions, or too long meta descriptions Current State of fixing these issues: 50% images are now our own Site wide duplicate content near 100% completed Internal links have been dealt with Rewrote content for every product 90% of meta descriptions are fixed From all of these changes we have yet to see increase in traffic...10% increase at best in organic clicks. We think we have penalties on certain URLs. My question for the MOZ community is what is the best way to attack the lack of organic clicks. Our main competition is getting 900% more clicks than us. Any more information you need on the topic let me know and will get back to you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TITOJAX0 -
Massive URL Migration with thousands of 301
Hey Everyone! I'm currently working on a project that we have A Lot of product pages and we have thousands of URL's that need to be 301'd over. I know this can be a major issue and could lead to tons of errors. What is everyone's thought of doing such a huge Migration, Should I do it all in phases? or should I do them all at once so they can all be indexed together? What would you suggest to be the best way to go about doing such a massive migration?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rpaiva0 -
Should we use URL parameters or plain URL's=
Hi, Me and the development team are having a heated discussion about one of the more important thing in life, i.e. URL structures on our site. Let's say we are creating a AirBNB clone, and we want to be found when people search for apartments new york. As we have both have houses and apartments in all cities in the U.S it would make sense for our url to at least include these, so clone.com/Appartments/New-York but the user are also able to filter on price and size. This isn't really relevant for google, and we all agree on clone.com/Apartments/New-York should be canonical for all apartment/New York searches. But how should the url look like for people having a price for max 300$ and 100 sqft? clone.com/Apartments/New-York?price=30&size=100 or (We are using Node.js so no problem) clone.com/Apartments/New-York/Price/30/Size/100 The developers hate url parameters with a vengeance, and think the last version is the preferable one and most user readable, and says that as long we use canonical on everything to clone.com/Apartments/New-York it won't matter for god old google. I think the url parameters are the way to go for two reasons. One is that google might by themselves figure out that the price parameter doesn't matter (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/1235687?hl=en) and also it is possible in webmaster tools to actually tell google that you shouldn't worry about a parameter. We have agreed to disagree on this point, and let the wisdom of Moz decide what we ought to do. What do you all think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peekabo0 -
Blocking out specific URLs with robots.txt
I've been trying to block out a few URLs using robots.txt, but I can't seem to get the specific one I'm trying to block. Here is an example. I'm trying to block something.com/cats but not block something.com/cats-and-dogs It seems if it setup my robots.txt as so.. Disallow: /cats It's blocking both urls. When I crawl the site with screaming flog, that Disallow is causing both urls to be blocked. How can I set up my robots.txt to specifically block /cats? I thought it was by doing it the way I was, but that doesn't seem to solve it. Any help is much appreciated, thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Whebb0 -
How to get better URL description when ranking #3
OK, last question of the week. I promise. I'm doing something right. I distribute for manufacturers. For some of my less known manufactuers I am #3 or #2 rank. For my main product the manufacturer is #1,2 with some numerical code as the discription. The manufacture will sell direct. To get the customers attention I need to PPC, and luckily it's inexpensive. Is there any way to control what the content is of the listing?. I would like to state in my #3 rank " 10-10-PP, In stock, same day shipping, best pricing." Does Google choose what to display and if so is there some where on my site I can influece this? For you experts, perhaps this is the joke of the week.? Please do not have a heart attack when laughing.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Wales0