All the articles I Googled on this subject are dated back in 2004-2005.
Basically I am structuring precanned searches, and it is based off of categories the client will input.
Example
content/(term name)/index.htm
Does it matter if I used the raw term with a space, which is converted to %20 in the URL, or should I convert the link to '-' and remove that before querying for results?
I already have it working, but does anyone know if this definitely has a negative impact on SEO and ranking?
No impact on SEO. A - just looks nicer, that's all.
You'd use %20 if you needed to preserve the exact term including a proper space when you read it back from the URL. Probably you don't.
I personally think it should be "-"
I don't remember seeing a website that was using %20
"-" is one character and %20 is three, so you can put more stuff visible in the address bar
for an example, what is better
Do spaces in your URL (%20) have a negative impact on SEO?
or
Do spaces in your URL (%20) have a negative impact on SEO?
Yes don't use them - Google, Yahoo and bing does not know how to leverage the spaces and more importantly you are wasting good opportunity to communicate both with the consumer and search engines more about your product or page URL and what the topic of the content is all about.
However, sometimes it can't be helped because you have a website / ecommerce site for years and the site is indexed and already on good page ranking.
In that case, if you do want to get better naming convention, you will want to re-name the urls but take all of the existing url with space and place it into 301 redirect and map them to the new urls.
%20 does not effects SEO but it will destroy the readability of your URL. since the CMS have taken all the intention, so now it's easy to set-up dynamic URL structure. I recently read an article on SEO Friendly URLS which will help you to avoid Google penaltyimprove your chances to rankandmake your links meaningful hope it helps.
As mentioned, it really doesn't matter from a search engine perspective. With that being said, however, it's generally not good practice to use spaces in URLs (%20). Replace it with a dash or concatenate it.
I use blogger and while adding labels to blog post, the link to that label page has space which is converted to "%20" but i have no control over that with blogger. When I try to make the labels with '-' instead of space they are not nice to humans, so i go with spaces and "%20" in urls, i think this should not affect SERPs.
We use "%20" all over the place on our website and have not experienced any negative effects. We began doing this about two years ago, and at that time a few search engines had problems, but they have since disappeared. Some browsers will display a "%20" in the address bar, while others will display an empty space, but this really doesn't matter.
We're not so sure though that this has any positive effect on ranking, though it definitely has no negative effect. The thing to remember about Google is that while having a keyword as part of the base url, such as www.greatwidgets.com, is very helpful, using keywords as part of the page url, example: www.myexample.com/widgets.htm does not appear to result in any advantage. What matters is the page content and how many other pages out there have the exact same content. Also, incoming links from relevant websites with high rankings, without the rel="nofollow" tag are extremely important.
You cannot "trick" Google with fancy-looking URLs and h1 headers. That's right, h1 headers mean nothing, because Google doesn't require your input to tell them what's important.
Remember, if you're selling products and copying content from the manufacturer's website (or the competitor's website), Google's PANDA is going to be very angry. You'll need to reword your content so that it's not a verbatim copy from some other website. Google rewards originality, and severely punishes plagiarism. Seriously, PANDA will put the offending page on page 50 until it's brought into conformity with Google's policy on duplicate content.
Always use sitemaps to help the search engines.
I believe it looks better in a link if an underscore (_) is used.
content/term_name/index.htm
content/term-name/index.htm
content/term%20name/index.htm
It's better to use "-" instead of %20 since it shows unprofessional coding to the search engines and to the visitors. You really think a visitor could remember a URL with %20 ? Make the pages for the users and not for the search engines. You will get the most benefit form this and SE will appreciate it.
according to my view spaces in url should not be there as this is not good practice. we should use hypens between the URLS. the website should have sitemap.xml file.
according to my view spaces do have negative impact on seo. and secondly when creating a url structure hypens should be placed instead of underscores.
yes they do have negative effect as it effects the user experiences. the users would like to have easy to remember urls. google suggest you should seperetae your words with ' - ' and ideally not to use '_' or spaces '%20' .
Something else to consider is that if you use spaces in your URLs, it will break automatic URL detection in many software (e.g. emails, chat, etc) where they think that a space is the end of URL. This might impact negatively the "sharability" of your URLs.
Using spaces in URLs is still not common practice in 2020 and Google still recommends to use - instead:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/76329?hl=en
Related
Currently I have a site developed in cakephp that has the following type of URL's:
http://www.travelenvogue.com/clubs/page/accommodations/1-Ritz_Carlton_Club_Bachelor_Gulch
I have heard that because our most valuable keywords "Ritz Carlton Club Bachelor Gulch" are so far to the right of the beginning of the URL that they may not be helping us for SEO purposes. My first question is if this is accurate?
Secondly, my programmer told me he could change it for less time/money to:
Ex:travelenvogue.xxx/1-Ritz_Carlton_Club_Bachelor_Gulch/accommodations
(with the 1 before the keywords)
or (for more significantly more time/money) to:
Ex:travelenvogue.xxx/Ritz_Carlton_Club_Bachelor_Gulch/accommodations
Is the URL without the 1 in front of the keywords much more helpful than the one with the 1 in front of the keywords.
Any help is appreciated, I'm so confused! :)
The problem with rewriting the urls in backwards order like this is that it makes less sense to humans, especially since CakePHP's pretty-url structure is designed to conform to the accepted informal standard.
Here are Google's own recommendations: http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=76329&hl=en
A site's URL structure should be as simple as possible. 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). For example, if you're searching for information about aviation, a URL like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation will help you decide whether to click that link. A URL like http://www.example.com/index.php?id_sezione=360&sid=3a5ebc944f41daa6f849f730f1, is much less appealing to users.
The thing to remember is that Google are good at picking up keywords from your URLs and from your pages. So long as your pages and URLs follow a semantic, logical structure, there is very little to worry about.
Edit: As an addendum to the above - the 1 is redundant as far as both users and search engines are concerned, since it doesn't add any keyword value and is apparently some kind of identifier. It's the sort of thing that should be separated from the keywords somehow (usually by using a directory structure - http://example.com/accommodations/1/hotel-name ). Probably too late to change it now if it's a mature app, though. It would be better if it were a real keyword, say a particular country name or a location group or similar.
Yes it is right. More your main keyword close to the root folder more points it will get in Search engine.
This is not the only SEO thing.
in On page optimisation. your main keyword must be present in following.
Page title
H1 Tag
URL(in domain if possible)
In Image alt tag)
in Links on your home page.
meta keywords and description. (still some search count it)
first sentence of each paragraph
end of page.
you keyword must be sparse 20% in the whole page content in different places.
on off page optimisation, How popular you site with your keyword is on other sites.
Generally, there is more SEO weight for the page higher in the site hierarchy. For example, in order from good to bad.
www.mysite.com/page1
www.mysite.com/sub/page2
www.mysite.com/sub/sub/page3
Exactly how much weight depends the search engine. But keep in mind there are other factors.
In my opinion, the 1 before the title would not hurt you any more or less than the other example.
I will say the best would be: travelenvogue.com/1-Ritz_Carlton_Club_Bachelor_Gulch
In the end, SEO can be a bit of black magic. That is to say this particular optimization doesn't mean your page will appear ahead of another page that is under several sub directories. So you will have to decide time and budget.
I run an online shop and I wonder what would be more SEO-friendly URL for a product page:
a) domain.com/category-name/product-name OR
b) domain.com/product-name
I already have URL-s for product category pages with format domain.com/category-name.
On one hand I heard (but cannot find proof for) that Google like tree hierarchies in URL (vote for "a"). On the other hand though longer URL could lead to smaller kewyord density, also "product_name" comes as the last URL part so probably the least important (vote for "b"). Maybe both options are equally SEO-effective?
PS. I know about canonical URL's but this is not the case, I don't want/need both URL's formats, just want to choose the best.
In my opinion, category-name/product-name might drive more traffic compared to just product-name. Because former one has the advantage of two keywords, while the later just has one.
But, it may affect the results when user just searches for product-name. Because search engines will prefer the keyword which comes very first in the url. In this case, product-name will defeat category-name/product-name.
So, it depends on the product and category you are going to use. How the users will address the product. simply the product or always with the category name. Just do a little keyword research and decide which one to go with.
In a client case of mine, including both category and product name in the URL rendered much better SEO results. I have no empiric references, though. The keyword density landed on about 9-11 %.
smaller url are better. hard to manage as links grows.
so if you can do domain.com/product-name
nothing beats it. and it looks great on search result.
A sites URL structure should be as simple as possible:
Google Webmaster Central Advice on URL structure
http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=76329
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/09/dynamic-urls-vs-static-urls.html
Google does highlight the search terms if they appear in the URL.
In Googles words:
"While static URLs might have a slight advantage in terms of clickthrough rates because users can easily read the urls, the decision to use database-driven websites does not imply a significant disadvantage in terms of indexing and ranking."
As https://stackoverflow.com/users/290503/iamgopal stated. Smaller is better. More important if you use the category and at a later time you decide to put your product in another category you have changed the url. Which is not good even if you redirect.
We actually removed all categories from our url's (8 million products or so) to make re-categorization easier. We haven't noticed a significant drop in ranking after the redirect effect wore off.
What are the standards for managing URL redirects if you base your URL's off properties of the data that might change a few times, like the "title"?
I have a website with lots of images and I want to make the urls look like this:
http://www.mySite.com/images/132123/my-cool-image-title
Now say a bunch of people bookmark the image, and a week later I change it to:
http://www.mySite.com/images/132123/renamed-image-title
So now there has to be a redirect for the people that bookmarked the old one... Now lets say that happens on average 3 times per image. That means I'd have lots and lots of redirects to map. I'd have a database of redirects it seems.
What is best practice in this case, assuming I want to use pretty urls and not base it on some universally unique id, and that I'd like to reap as many benefits of SEO as possible?
Well I don't know what the downvote was about, this seems like a perfectly valid question to me.
My recommendation would be that if you know in advance you will be changing the data, it probably shouldn't be in the URL in the first place. If this is a requirement (perhaps its important for SEO or you are creating a blog or something, you have some choices:
Forget the old URL and use only the new. Probably not a good way to make friends ;)
Keep the old URL and accept the fact that the title and URL do not match now. This might be accomplished by each post having a slug field where the URL text is stored, separate to the post's actual title.
Keep the old URL and allow for new ones. A method for doing this might be to have a separate table which maps slugs to posts, each post having one or more slugs. That way, any number of changes are catered for.
If possible changes and backwards compatibility are a requirement, I'd go with something like option 3. Its certainly better to have it built in to your app than have to manage growing .htaccess files full or URL rewrite rules or something.
vote me down if you think my answer is stupid. I do not care it so much.
Not sure if your are using the same approach as StacOverflow, if you do then the slug, in your case my-cool-image-title and renamed-image-titledo not make a big difference as long as you keep the ID 132123 the same. So you need to to worry about your redirect stuff. That being said, in the perspective of social Bookmark users, I think changing slug may cause confusing, but it is not a redirect issue.
Am I wrong?
If I name my HTML file "Banks.html" located at www.example.com/Banks.html, but all the content is about Cats and all my other SEO tags are about Cats on the page, will it affect my page's SEO?
Can you name your files whatever you want, as long as you have the page title, description, and the rest of the SEO done properly?
Page names are often not very representative of the page content (I've seen pages named 7d57As09). Therefore search engines are not going to be particularly upset if the page names appear misleading. However, it's likely that the page name is one of many factors a search engine considers.
If there's no disadvantage in naming a page about cats, "cats.html", then do so! If it doesn't help your SEO, it will make it easier for your visitors!
If you want to be on better place when someone searchs for 'banks', then yes, it can help you. But unless you are creating pages about cats in banks I'm sure that this wont help you very much :)
It shouldn't affect your search engine ranking, but it may influence people who, having completed a search on Google (or some of the other great search engines, like um...uh...), are now scanning the results to decide where to click first. Someone faced with a url like www.dummy.com/banks.html would be more likely to click than someone faced with www.dummy.com/default.php?p_id=1&sessid=876492u942fgspw24z because most people haven't a clue what the last part means. It's also more memorable and gives people greater faith in getting back to the same site if you write your URLs nicely. No one that isn't Dustin Hoffman can remember the second URL without a little intense memory training, while everyone can remember banks.html. Just make sure your URL generation is consistent and your rewriting is solid, so you don't end up with loads of page not found errors which can detriment search engine ranking.
Ideally, your page name should be relevant to the content of the page - so your ranking may improve if you call the page "cats.html", as that is effectively another occurrence of the keyword in the page.
Generally, this is fairly minor compared to the benefits of decent keywords, titles, etc on the page. For more information take a look at articles around Url Strategy, for example:
"I’ve heard that search engines give some weighting to pages which contain keywords users are searching for which are contained within the page URL?"
Naming your pages something meaningful is a good idea and does improve SEO. It's another hint to the search engines what the page is about, in addition to the title and content. You would be surprised if you opened a file on your computer called "Letter to Grandma.doc" and it was actually your tax return!
In general, the best URLs are those that simply give a page name and hierarchical structure, without extensions or ID numbers. Keep it lowercase and separate words with dashes, like this:
example.com/my-cats
or
example.com/cats/mittens
In your case you will probably wanna keep the .html extension to avoid complexities with URL rewriting.
Under circumstances this can be considered a black-hat SEO technique. Watch out not to be caught or reported by curious users.
Google's PageRank algo has hundreds, thousands or even millions of variables and factors. From this point of view, you can be sure that the name of the files that you use on your website will affect your pagerank and/or your keyword targeting. Think about it.
There are few on-page elements that have significance. The URL, while it can be /234989782 is going to be more beneficial if it's named relevantly.
From any point of view, Google and all search engines like to see a coherence between everything: if you have a page named XYZ, then google will like it better if the text, meta, images, url, documents, etc, on the page to have XYZ in them. The bigger this synchronisation between the different elements on a page, the more the search engine sees how focused the content of that page is, resulting in more hits for you when someone looks up that focused search term.
If you have an image for example, you're better off having the same:
caption
description
name
alt text
(wordpress users will recognize that these are the four parameters that can be set for images on wordpress).
The same goes for all files you have on your website. Any parameter that can be seen by a search engine is better of optimized in regards to the content that goes with it, in sync with all the other parameters of this same thing.
The question of how useful this all is arises afterwards. Will I really rank lower if my alt text is different than the name of my image? Probably not by a lot. But either way, taking advantage of small subtleties like these can take you a long way in SEO. There are so many things we can't control in SEO (or that we shouldn't be able to control, like backlinks), that we have to use what we can control in the best way possible, to compensate.
It's also hard to tell if it is all useful after the Google Panda and Penguin. It definitely has less of an impact ever since those reforms (back then, this kind of thing was crucial), the question is simply how much of an impact it still has. But all in all, as I said, whenever possible, name your files according to your content.
Today algorithm is totally different when the SEO was introduce. The seo today is about content and its quality. It must produce a good reader and follower so any filename and description are no longer important.
Page name doesn't affects much in terms of SEO. but naming a page is also one of the Google 200 SEO signals.
Naming a url different sure will reduce your bounce rate a little. Because any user comes to your site through organic search results doesn't understand what the page has.
Even search engines loves when a page name is relevant to the topic in the page.
I am looking for url encoding tips for SEO compliant site.
I have a list of variables I need!
hypen = used to split locations, Leeds-UK-England
space = underscore for where spaces occur
hypen = plus sign used in some british locations (stafford-upon-avon)
forward slash = exclamation used in house for names of things.
Are the ones chosen bad or good? Are there any better ones, I'm pretty sure I need all the data, in order to decode the url's properly.
My "SEO" gave me a list of things which are bad, but not good. I've searched these and google seems to give the same type of results.
Cheers, Sarkie
Google used not to recognise underscores as word separators - see this article from 2005. This has entered into received wisdom and most of the 'experts' and articles you will find on SEO will still be recommending this.
However, last year this changed: underscores are now recognised as word separators so it opens things up for URL design. This now allows using dashes as dashes and underscores as spaces which some consider more natural. I've not found many people who have caught up with this, including SEO consultants I deal with professionally.
As to a good system for your use case, I would recommend asking around some non technical people (colleagues, friends, family, etc) to see what they like.
Hyphens for spaces is the usual and preferred method.