Rewriting dynamic urls to static
-
We're currently working on an SEO project for http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/.
After a crawl of their site, tons of duplicate content issues came up. We think this is largely down to the use of their brand filtering system, which works like this:
By clicking on a brand, the site generates a url with the brand keywords in, for example:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-cid77.html
filtered by the brand Mammut becomes:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-Mammut-cid77.html?filter_brand=48
This was done by a previous SEO agency in order to prevent duplicate content. We suspect that this has made the issue worse though, as by removing the dynamic string from the end of the URL, the same content is displayed as the unfiltered page.
For example
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-Mammut-cid77.html
shows the same content as:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-cid77.html
Now, if we're right in thinking that Google is unlikely to the crawl the dynamic filter, this would seem to be the root of the duplicate issue.
If this is the case, would rewriting the dynamic URLs to static on the server side be the best fix? It's a Windows Server/asp site.
I hope that's clear! It's a pretty tricky issue and it would be good to know your thoughts.
Thanks!
-
I use canonical references on all my pages no matter what. Most professional sites I encounter do as well. You will notice they are used on SEOmoz.
I would use a rewrite rule mainly to do something alone the lines of directing all your non www traffic to their www counterpart. For the type of issue you are working on, I would use canonical tags on every page.
-
Thanks for answering so quickly. We were going to add a canonical tag as well to make sure, but I thought a rewrite might be the best bet to start with. Would you do both, or just the canonical?
S
-
Canonicalizing your pages will solve your issue.
You can have a page and present it to visitors with various URLs. What Google needs to understand is which is the primary version of the page. Using your example:
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-cid77.html
http://www.gear-zone.co.uk/3-season-synthetic-Mammut-cid77.html
You can put the following tag on the pages:
That tag lets Google know that you have a single page which you are presenting to visitors with different URLs. This is a very common practice. For example, you may have a product page and sort it ascending by price, descending by product name, etc. These pages all offer the same content but just presented a bit differently for your visitor's benefit.
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
-
Submitting URLs After New Search Console
Hi Everyone I wanted to see how people submit their urls to Google and ensure they are all being indexed. I currently have an ecommerce site with 18,000 products. I have sitemaps setup, but noticed that the various product pages haven't started ranking yet. If I submit the individual url through the new Google Search Console I see the page ranking in a matter of minutes. Before the new Google Search Console you could just ask Google to Fetch/Render an XML sitemap and ask it to crawl all the links. I don't see the same functionality working today on Google Search Console and was wondering if there are any new techniques people could share. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | abiondo
Anthony1 -
Duplicate content on URL trailing slash
Hello, Some time ago, we accidentally made changes to our site which modified the way urls in links are generated. At once, trailing slashes were added to many urls (only in links). Links that used to send to
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yacpro13
example.com/webpage.html Were now linking to
example.com/webpage.html/ Urls in the xml sitemap remained unchanged (no trailing slash). We started noticing duplicate content (because our site renders the same page with or without the trailing shash). We corrected the problematic php url function so that now, all links on the site link to a url without trailing slash. However, Google had time to index these pages. Is implementing 301 redirects required in this case?1 -
Htaccess rewrite rule (very specific)
Hello, Awhile back my company changed from http: to https: sitewide (before i started working here). We use a very standard rewrite rule that looks like this: RewriteEngine On
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Waismann
RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://opiates.com/$1 [R,L] However, with this rule in place, some http: urls are being redirected with a 302 status code. My question is, can I safely change the above code to look like this: RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://opiates.com/$1 [R=301,L] to ensure that every redirected is returned with a 301 status code. The only change is in the [R,L] section. Thanks to whomever can help with this. I'm pretty sure its safe but I dont want the site to go down, even for a second, so figured I would ask first.0 -
Complex URL Migration
Hi There, I have three separate questions which are all related. Some brief back ground. My client has an adventure tourism company that takes predominantly North American customers on adventure tours to three separate destinations: New Zealand, South America and the Himalayas. They previously had these sites on their own URL's. These URL's had the destination in the URL (eg: sitenewzealand.com). 2 of the three URL's had good age and lots of incoming links. This time last year a new web company was bought in and convinced them to pull all three sites onto a single domain and to put the sites under sub folders (eg: site.com/new-zealand). The built a brand new site for them on a Joomla platform. Unfortunately the new sites have not performed and halved the previous call to action rates. Organic traffic was not adversely affected with this change, however it hasn't grown either. I have been overhauling these new sites with a project team and we have managed to keep the new design but make usability/marketing changes that have the conversion rate nearly back to where it originally was and we have managed to keep the new design (and the CMS) in place. We have recently made programmatic changes to the joomla system to push the separate destination sites back onto their original URL's. My first question is around whether technically this was a good idea. Question 1 Does our logic below add up or is it flawed logic? The reasons we decided to migrate the sites back onto their old URL's were: We have assumed that with the majority of searches containing the actual destination (eg: "New Zealand") that all other things being equal it is likely to attract a higher click through rate on the domain www.sitenewzealand.com than for www.site.com/new-zealand. Having the "newzealand" in the actual URL would provide a rankings boost for target keyword phrases containing "new zealand" in them. We also wanted to create the consumer perception that we are specialists in each of the destinations which we service rather than having a single site which positions us as a "multi-destination" global travel company. Two of the old sites had solid incoming links and there has been very little new links acquired for the domain used for the past 12 months. It was also assumed that with the sites on their own domains that the theme for each site would be completely destination specific rather than having the single site with multiple destinations on it diluting this destination theme relevance. It is assumed that this would also help us to rank better for the destination specific search phrases (which account for 95% of all target keyword phrases). The downsides of this approach were that we were splitting out content onto three sites instead of one with a presumed associated drop in authority overall. The other major one was the actual disruption that a relatively complex domain migration could cause. Opinions on the logic we adopted for deciding to split these domains out would be highly appreciated. Question 2 We migrated the folder based destination specific sites back onto their old domains at the start of March. We were careful to thoroughly prepare the htaccess file to ensure we covered off all the new redirects needed and to directly redirect the old redirects to the new pages. The structure of each site and the content remained the same across the destination specific folders (eg: site.com/new-zealand/hiking became sitenewzealand.com/hiking). To achieve this splitting out of sites and the ability to keep the single instance of Joomla we wrote custom code to dynamically rewrite the URL's. This worked as designed. Unfortunately however, Joomla had a component which was dynamically creating the google site maps and as this had not had any code changes it got all confused and started feeding up a heap of URL's which never previously existed. This resulted in each site having 1000 - 2000 404's. It took us three weeks to work this out and to put a fix into place. This has now been done and we are down to zero 404's for each site in GWT and we have proper google site maps submitted (all done 3 days ago). In the meantime our organic rankings and traffic began to decline after around 5 days (after the migration) and after 10 days had dropped down to around 300 daily visitors from around 700 daily visitors. It has remained at that level for the past 2 weeks with no sign of any recovery. Now that we have fixed the 404's and have accurate site maps into google, how long do you think it will take to start to see an upwards trend again and how long it is likely to take to get to similar levels of organic traffic compared to pre-migration levels? (if at all). Question 3 The owner of the company is understandably nervous about the overall situation. He is wishing right now that we had never made the migration. If we decided to roll back to what we previously had are we likely to cause further recovery delays and would it come back to what we previously had in a reasonably quick time frame? A huge thanks to everyone for reading what is quite a technical and lengthy post and a big thank you in advance for any answers. Kind Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | activenz
Conrad0 -
301 forwarding old urls to new urls - when should you update sitemap?
Hello Mozzers, If you are amending your urls - 301ing to new URLs - when in the process should you update your sitemap to reflect the new urls? I have heard some suggest you should submit a new sitemap alongside old sitemap to support indexing of new URLs, but I've no idea whether that advice is valid or not. Thanks in advance, Luke
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | McTaggart0 -
Uppercase in URLs = Dupe Content
Hi Mozzers, My developers recently changed a bunch of the pages I am working on into all lower case (something I know ideally should have been done in the first place). The URLs have sat for about a week as lower case without 301 redirecting the old upper-case URLs to these pages. In Google Webmaster Tools, I'm seeing Google recognize them as duplicate meta tags, title tags, etc. See image: http://screencast.com/t/KloiZMKOYfa We're 301 redirecting the old URLs to the new ones ASAP, but is there anything else I should do? Any chance Google is going to noindex these pages because it seems them as dupes until I fix them? Sometimes I can see both pages in the SERPs if I use personalized results, and it scares me: http://screencast.com/t/4BL6iOhz4py3 Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Travis-W0 -
Best Format for URLs on large Ecommerce Site?
I saw this article, http://www.distilled.net/blog/seo/common-ecommerce-technical-seo-problems/, and noticed that Geoff mentioned that product URLs format should be in one of the following ways: Product Page: site.com/product-name Product Page: site.com/category/sub-category/product-name However, for SEO, is there a preferred way? I understand that the top one may be better to prevent duplicate page issues, but I would imagine that the bottom would be better for conversion (maybe the user backtracks to site.com/category/sub-category/ to see other products that he may be interested in). Also, I'd imagine that the top URL would not be a great way to distribute link juice since everything would be attached to the root, right?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eTundra0 -
In Report Card - Weird Characters in URL
We have an underscore in a lot of our links. My question is since it is difficult to change existing site architecture, is an underscore really that negative? Here is an example: http://www.winematch.com/profile_368-2005-Artesa-Vineyards--Winery-Merlot-Reserve.html Eventually we want to change this to http://www.winematch.com/wine/2005-Artesa-Vineyards-Winery-Merlot-Reserve.html but it is a big project.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | roundbrix0