Date in permalinks. Bad?
-
Hello!
I have a recipe website with over 1000 posts. Currently I have the month and year in the permalink that everyone is hinting off to me is bad. On the same front people tell me if I change the permalinks to just the post name it's going to significantly slow down my site.
I'm torn on this one about changing. From Google's standpoint is it better to change to the post name and if so should I be fearing I'm going to run into trouble with the change?
Any suggestions you have would be appreciated.
Thanks!!!
-
I'm assuming the permalink is the domain.com/blog/year/month/date/postname type structure, the Wordpress default? Going from so many unnecessary folders to fewer seems like it can only speed things up a bit.
I'd recommend a structure such as domain.com/recipes/�tegory%/%postname%/ if you have them categorized by types of meal. Google likes to see a logical folder structure. Makes for solid human readability as well.
And don't forget to redirect old permalinks to new permalinks. If there are any posts linked out there, you'll want to be sure they redirect to the new permalink.
-
Thank you for this info. I've been going back on forth in removing the dates probably for at least a year now. Always concerned about performance but I know that leaving the dates in there is just bad. We're going to give it a shot and see what happens. People keep telling me with as many posts that I have the concern is performance but maybe this is just bad info. Thanks!
-
The problem is that it dates your posts, so your click-through & time on page could be negatively impacted if the audience believes it's outdated information.
My advice is to make the change and check the performance speed after. I believe that Wordpress has addressed this issue anyway with this update. If you are worried you can add a post ID to the post name tag, but I personally wouldn't be worried about it. If performance is truly that bad you can always go back.
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
-
Best Practice Out-of-Date Sales and Events
Hi Everyone, http://www.palaceresorts.com/cozumelpalace/en/cozumel-ironman-triathlon I found an out-of-date event in the clients' crawl report that returns a 404 not found Status Code. I remember to have read an article advising webmasters to don't ever remove a single landing page, but instead to advise that the sale/event it's expired and some information about the upcoming event. Does anyone have had this experience before ? Could you provide me with a real case scenario. Thank You
Technical SEO | | Ariadna-US0 -
Traffic drops when showing post dates?
Hello. My blog is 9 years old and i just got serious with regards to earnings. I have observed that whenever i showed published date traffic drops immediately. For years i stopped showing dates. But now, i feel dates are an important factor in Rich snippets because most of competitors who are shown in rich snippets are also showing dates. So i started showing "UPDATED ON" in the Genesis theme framework. Traffic drop is the same as before. Why is traffic dropping whenever i show dates? Even when i show updated dates, wherein all articles show dates of just 1-2 years and none of them are showing how old the site is. And yes, quality is high, content is high. URL is www.marketing91.com
Technical SEO | | marketing910 -
Will Adding Publish Date at end of Page Title for Blog posts Hurt SEO?
I'd like to be able to easily track blog posts by month but in Google reports when you set a date range obviously older blog post still appear and with amount of blog posts we generate without seeing the date in the title it's not obvious what was published and when it was published. For example if a Blog Title was "/dangers-of-sharing-KM-knowledge-01-11-15 would it hurt SEO? The reason is I'd like to have a quick way to know how new posts do each month compared to older content
Technical SEO | | inhouseninja0 -
Could schema.org and GoodRelations be bad for SEO?
One of my clients is going through a redesign and I am considering implementing schema.org and GoodRelations as it is an e-commerce website. The site sells cutting edge products and competes with some of the top tech blogs for rankings on the first page. Essentially, this means that e-commerce product listings are competing with news stories. It is becoming more and more difficult to rank as Google puts more emphasis on news over products in the serps, especially prior to a product release. My concern is that in implementing schema.org and GoodRelations, detailing to seach engines that this is in-fact a product page and not news could harm rankings. What opinions do others have on this?
Technical SEO | | pugh0 -
Reciprocal links with guest posts bad?
I'm curious do you think Google would fault you or you'd get less link power if you made a page (on your website) of your guest posts from across the net and linked out to them?
Technical SEO | | benjaminspak1 -
Why is therea date in the deescription meta?
Please see the attached example, why is the date here and how can I get rid of it? Capture.PNG
Technical SEO | | cottamg0 -
Javascript bad for SEO?
If we utilize javascript to pull information from a database to display on a site, is that bad for SEO? Can search engines still see the data?
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Converse.com - flash and html version of site... bad idea?
I have a questions regarding Converse.com. I realize this ecommerce site is needs a lot of seo help. There’s plenty of obvious low hanging seo fruit. On a high level, I see a very large SEO issue with the site architecture. The site is a full page flash experience that uses a # in the URL. The search engines pretty much see every flash page as the home page. To help with issue a HTML version of the site was created. Google crawls the Home Page - Converse.com http://www.converse.com Marimekko category page (flash version) http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko Marimekko category page (html version, need to have flash disabled) http://www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko Here is the example of the issue. This site has a great post featuring Helen Marimekko shoes http://www.coolmompicks.com/2011/03/finnish_foot_prints.php The post links to the flash Marimekko catagory page (http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko) as I would expect (ninety something percent of visitors to converse.com have the required flash plug in). So the flash page is getting the link back juice. But the flash page is invisible to google. When I search for “converse marimekko” in google, the marimekko landing page is not in the top 500 results. So I then searched for “converse.com marimekko” and see the HTML version of the landing page listed as the 4<sup>th</sup> organic result. The result has the html version of the page. When I click the link I get redirected to the flash Marimekko category page but if I do not have flash I go to the html category page. ----- Marimekko - Converse All Star Marimekko Price: $85, Jack Purcell Helen Marimekko Price: $75 ... www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko - Cached So my issues are… Is converse skating on thin SEO ice by having a HTML and flash version of their site/product pages? Do you think it’s a huge drag on seo rankings to have a large % of back links linking to flash pages when google is crawling the html pages? Any recommendations on to what to do about this? Thanks, SEOsurfer
Technical SEO | | seosurfer-2883190