Newly Acquired Website--Questions on Changing Permalink Structure
-
I just acquired a new website. The domain is about 7 years old with around 1000 indexed pages in google. Decent domain authority at 34, PR 4, a lot of inbound links.
The thing that's driving me crazy is the permalink structure--set up as month/post name in wordpress http://xxxxxxx.com/2015/01/sample-post/
Based on my experience and I could be wrong, but I would think that the structure would be more effective with just post name and no date.
Am I absolutely insane at this point to try and change it?
-
There are many times where I would take something similar to Scott's tact. I agree as well, he mentioned some good general practices. But this site has been in the wild for a bit and you just acquired it.
This means there's a good bit of homework to do before overhauling the entire permalink structure, for what I suspect is a considerable number of pages/posts. Knowing nothing else, the safest opinion I can render is to keep the structure as is for existing pages/posts (current traffic/link/revenue considerations) - and consider a custom post type and custom permalink workaround ('Sperimenting! Woooo!) for fun and profit(?). Your developer, or the WP development community, may have a better solution.
Though I generally tend to disagree with doing things simply because the competition is doing the same. If nothing else, the mentality tends to bleed over into everything. Just think of all the wasted time/opportunities. Some differentiation can be a good thing.
But if the custom permalink URLs tend to out-perform the slightly-lesser-than-pretty URLs over time, you can do a cost/benefit of total URL permalink change. (Rewrites... rewrites as far as the eye can see... buzzlightyear.jpg) But yeah, you'll probably have to confront the previous posts/pages permalinks at some time. I'm just saying confront the issue with some primary data, with the aid of secondary data.
-
Hmm...two contrasting opinions!! What do i do? While I agree with Samuel's general comments, Travis i tend to agree with you. Especially since all the top ranking competitors are doing the same thing.
-
My general rule as far as URLs is twofold:
1. They should reflect a logical hierarchy separated by website topics, functions, and whatnot.
2. They should be a short as possible because shorter URLs are viewed with more credibility, they are remembered more often, and they are clicked more often in SERPs. (See some Moz resources on URLs here and here.)
In your example, I would included a /blog/ layer as in website.com/blog/sample-post/ because the blog's "main page" is a second-level page in this hypothetical example:
Home Page
- About
- Products
- Blog
- Contact
Yes, I'd take out the date (Google knows when you published something). I hope this helps!
Edit: Oh, just be sure to 301 (permanent) -- not 302 (temporary) -- redirect each URL to the new one!
-
I'll start with: Leave the existing URLs alone!!!
With the current permalink structure, you're possibly getting a slight page load speed boost. Apparently it's easier for WP to query and return a URL with numbers. I don't really understand how the speed boost happens, since everything has a numeric ID# anyway until the URLs become Pretty, so yeah.... there's that.
If we had our druthers, you and I, everything would be page-name post-name. It looks cleaner, it's easier to read and remember. Though in sports, information is time sensitive. The date in the URL would help a slightly savvier user know if you're talking about a game won in this season, rather than last season from the SERP.
This may be a little bit of a workaround, and I'm not a WP developer (I can muddle along and play until I get in trouble.) but you can make a custom post type with a custom permalink. That way, the old URLs stay the same and anything new can be done the way you seem fit. I'm not sure about your level of comfort with the guts of WP, but here's something you can repurpose or show to a dev: Custom Post Type - Custom Permalink Tut
Best of luck.
-
I should also mention this is a sports related website, where it might be viewed that having the date in the permalink is a way of identifying how old the website is. I have examined a few other much larger higher ranking competitors and they are using the same permalink structure.
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
-
Silo Structure in the eye of google?
does silo structure has a positive point on Google Ranking or not, and what is the importance of internal linking, how google see the internal linking content as compared to less internal linking, I'm trying an experiment I do a lot of internal backlinking in Website Unionwell as compared to Website B (which has apparently less internal Links) so with your experience in SEO field which site will get traffic rapidly.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | saimkhanna0 -
Regret changing the URL structure, Would it be appropriate to change it back?
Hi Moz Community, We changed the URL structure 6 months ago for our new site, and we experienced a ranking drop since then. From my understanding, changing URL structure and using 301 redirects will lose link juice, more or less. We think the ranking drop is because of the loss of link juice, assuming other factors remain constant. Here are my questions: How do those link juice losses have an impact on our ranking? Would changing URL structure back to original version regain the lost link juice, with all the redirects done properly? Would it take a lot of efforts? Is it recommended to change it back? Thank you so much in advance. Any thoughts and opinions are appreciated! Best, Raymond
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | raymondlii0 -
Questions about duplicate photo content?
I know that Google is a mystery, so I am not sure if there are answers to these questions, but I'm going to ask anyway! I recently realized that Google is not happy with duplicate photo content. I'm a photographer and have sold many photos in the past (but retained the rights for) that I am now using on my site. My recent revelations means that I'm now taking down all of these photos. So I've been reverse image searching all of my photos to see if I let anyone else use it first, and in the course of this I found out that there are many of my photos being used by other sites on the web. So my questions are: With photos that I used first and others have stolen, If I edit these photos (to add copyright info) and then re-upload them, will the sites that are using these images then get credit for using the original image first? If I have a photo on another one of my own sites and I take it down, can I safely use that photo on my main site, or will Google retain the knowledge that it's been used somewhere else first? If I sold a photo and it's being used on another site, can I safely use a different photo from the same series that is almost exactly the same? I am unclear what data from the photo Google is matching, and if they can tell the difference between photos that were taken a few seconds apart.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lina5000 -
Questions about websites coupon codes
Hi guys, i have 2 questions about my website of coupon codes: should i do redirect people of google to mywebsite, e.g. Someone is looking coupons for Sony or LG and arrive to brand Sony in my website but i show him offers for Sony in Amazon when he click in some offer, ¿that is correct? Footer images links. I saw many sites that put their logos in footer of online stores to get authority, ¿should i do that? Thank you so much.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pompero990 -
A few important mobile SEO questions
I have a few basic questions about mobile SEO. I'd appreciate if any of you fabulous Mozzers can enlighten me. Our site has a parallel mobile site with the same urls, using an m. domain for mobile and www. for desktop. On mobile pages, we have a rel="canonical" tag pointing to the matching desktop URL and on desktop pages we have a rel="alternate" tag pointing to the matching mobile URL. When someone visits a www. page using a mobile device, we 301 them to the mobile version. Questions: 1. Do I want my mobile pages to be indexed by Google? From Tom's (very helpful) answers here, it seems that I only want Google indexing the full site pages and if the mobile pages are indexed it's actually a duplicate content issue. This is really confusing to me since Google knows that it's not duplicate content based on the canonical tag. But - he makes a good point - what is the value of having the mobile page indexed if the same page on desktop is indexed (I know that Google is indexing both because I see them in search results. When I search on mobile Google serves the mobile page and when I search on desktop Google serves me the desktop page.)? Are these pages competing with each other? Currently, we are doing everything we can do ensure that our mobile pages are crawled (deeply) and indexed, but now I'm not sure what the value of this is? Please share your knowledge. 2. Is a mobile page's ranking affected by social shares of the desktop version of the same page? Currently, when someone uses the share buttons on our mobile site, we share the desktop url (www. - not m.). The reason we do this is that we are afraid that if people are sharing our content with 2 different url's (m.mysite.com/some_post and www.mysite.com/some_post) the share count will not be aggregated for both url's. What I'm wondering is: will this have a negative effect on mobile SEO, since it will seem to Google that our mobile pages have no shares, or is this not a problem, since the desktop pages have a rel="alternate" tag pointing to mobile pages, so Google gives the same ranking to the mobile page as the desktop page (which IS being shared)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | YairSpolter0 -
Moving half my website to a new website: 301?
Good Morning! We currently have two websites which are driving all of our traffic. Our end goal is to combine the two and fold them into each other. Can I redirect the duplicate content from one domain to our main domain even though the URL's are different. Ill give an example below. (The domains are not the real domains). The CEO does not want to remove the other website entirely yet, but is willing to begin some sort of consolidation process. ABCaddiction.com is the main domain which covers everything from drug addiction to dual diagnosis treatment. ABCdualdiagnosis.com is our secondary website which covers everything as well. Can I redirect the entire drug addiction half of the website to ABCaddiction.com? With the eventual goal of moving everything together.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HashtagHustler0 -
Panda Recovery Question
Dear Friends, One of my customers was hit by the Panda, we were working on improve the tiny content on several pages and the remaining pages were: 1 NOINDEX/FOLLOW 2. Removed from sitemap.xml 3. Un-linked from the site (no one page on the site link to the pour content) As conclusion we can't see any improvement, my question is should I remove the pour content pages (404)? What is your recommendation? Thank you for your time Claudio
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SharewarePros0 -
Change to SiteLinks?
Hi All, Perhaps it's been like this all along (I don't think so) but can someone tell me why some pages with Google sitelinks now look like this (see the "Coke" search) while others look like this (see the "Amazon" search image). Is this because of Rich Snippet use? One of my client's SiteLinks used to resemble the Amazon one, but now resembles the Coke one (not preferred). Any input? Thanks, Chris Elevated Synergy Group - SEO coke.png amazon.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Chris.Bleill0