Service Keyword in URL - too much?
-
We're working on revamping the URL structure for a site from the ground up. This firm provides a service and has a library of case studies to back up their work. Here's some options on URL structure:
1. /cases/[industry keyword]-[service keyword] (for instance: /cases/retail-pest-control)
There is some search traffic for the industry/service combination, so that would be the benefit of using both in URL. But we'd end up with about 70 pages with the same service keyword at the end.
2. /cases/[industry keyword] (/cases/retail)
Shorter, less spam potential, but have to optimize for the service keyword -- the primary -- in another way.
3. /cases/clientname (/cases/wehaveants)
No real keyword potential but better usability.
We also want the service keyword to rank on its own on another page (so, a separate "pest control" page). So don't want to dilute that page's value even after we chase some of the long tail traffic.
Any thoughts on the best course of action? Thanks!
-
Awesome, thanks
-
two or three layers into it, hyphens vs. slashes is not as critical as too many hyphens in the primary domain name.
Personally, I believe it's better user experience to go with slashes rather than hyphens to clearly visually split out services vs. industries vs. company names. But that's just my preference and belief regarding usability.
-
That's what I needed to hear. I think maybe a cases/pest-control/industry-company or industry/company structure will work nicely then. I can fix a good link structure no problem. Thanks!
-
the number of directories is pretty much illusionary - it's how many clicks to get to something that matters.
That's the key. It ultimately depends on how many case studies you're dealing with as to how you link to them.
Here's an example
Cases is a top level site-wide link.
On the Cases page, there's a description of each service, and a link within that description to that service's page.
Then on that service page, there's a brief snippet for each case study, where you group them on that page by industry type.
That's three clicks down to the individual case study. And in that scenario, you can go with the URL syntax I previously suggested.
So while the "folder structure" "appears" to be four layers deep
case-studies/pest-control/retail/company-name/
The linking methods above are only three deep. So you're totally within SEO best practices.
-
Ah, now that's a question! As far as I WAS aware it was always best to go for a "flat as possible" structure (so minimal directories). BUT... I've recently been informed (on these very boards, and from a very experienced pro) that it no longer matters as long as the linking structure is good, so there's plenty of links from strong pages, such as the homepage pointing in... so it will get crawled no matter how deep.
-
Alan, you've made me think of a question myself on that... you know the whole rule about not having too many hyphens in a domain, well how much of that extends to the rest of the URL/path after the initial domain?
Not sure I worded that very well. I mean, as we know, www.thing-blah-flip-flop.com is bad... and www.thing-blah.com is okay, but what about: www.thing-blah.com/flip-flop-give-a-dog-a-bone-is-this-too-many-hyphens-in-this-part-of-the-url-after-the-domain.html
I know there's tonnes of it about, but does it matter?
(Sorry to hijack the question lol, I assume it's still relevant though).
-
I suppose I meant the depth of the directories... Finding the page three or four directories in (I asked the same in response to Alan).
Thanks for all the help!
-
So when working with the directories, if we structure navigation so that you can get to a specific case study with two clicks, does that offset the depth of the directory structure? So, if it happened to be (hopefully not) cases/retail/pest-control/MI/Detroit/company-name, will the number of subfolders be an issue, as long as you could get to the page through two clicks from home?
-
How many is too many? I mean you don't want a directory per page or anything.
-
Yes definitely!
I assume if they're all landing pages then you wouldn't be targeting each page with the same keywords anyway, as that would be massive canibalization. You want to just assign 2 or 3 keywords to each page, then have one of them in the URL (the main one).
-
Would it make any sense to you to group them by service? so...
cases/pest-control/industry-company
Less spammy, but wonder about the impact of too many directories.
-
whether you do retail-pest-control or retail/pest-control - either is acceptable and as long as the sequence ordering is consistent you will achieve the same results.
So they should all be industry-service or service-industry.
-
The idea is that yes, they can all be landing pages. The pages as they're sitting now are driving some traffic from these long-tail keyword combinations -- we'd like not to lose that when we make the change.
Can the service keywords be variations? So, could it be retail-pest-control, restaurant-termite-control, athletic-ant-extermination? (samples again, of course)
-
Unless there's only one company in each combination of service and industry, having the company name or another differentiator as the last element in the URL is vital for individual page topical relevance. Company Names make the most sense from a user perspective.
-
I agree. Find a way to use no.1 and make it not spammy.
-
It depends on which is more important to you whether best practices dictate the industry first or the service type first, however generally speaking, they should both be in the URL.
So for example:
case-studies/pest-control/retail/company-name/
case-studies/retail/pest-control/company/name/
Some might argue that can cause long URLs, it's best practices, especially since Google is quite efficient these days when a site is structured properly like this, to be able to display portions of URLs most relevant to a search. So if the search was for pest control in the retail field, the URL in the search result might look like:
yourdomain.com/case-studies/retail/../pest-control/...
And doing it one of these two ways is the best way to build topical relationships, which in turn boosts the relevance of the site for the industries and services.
Oh - and you can do this and still have all the core content no more than two or three clicks from the top level.
-
I'd check others' opinions too, but mine is option 1 without dupe service keywords for the win... why must every page have that same keyword at the end, are they all landing pages you're optimizing?
Anyway, if option 1 without doing that then it's not spammy as far as I see and do, it's descriptive, allows link architecture to map site architecture... and you've got your keywords in there. Gets my vote, but yeah I'd wait for clarification or disagreement from others on that before taking any action
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
-
Keyword Stuffing - Ecommerce websites
Hey Mozzers, Im undertaking a content audit and its going very well, we have written some better content for the first set of pages, it still needs some improvement but we have a good base and starting point from which we can make an SEO log and work on it over time. For the content I used the following formula for how many times to include a keyword Word Count / Length of Keyword. (eg. 600 words / 3 word keyword = 200). Then 1-4% of this (2-8 times). This has worked well for me in the past and has been a good base guide. I have ran the pages through Moz optimiser and every single page hit an A for keyword page optimisation. However many of the pages failed on keyword stuffing, which obviously has high priority. My dilemma is that, moz counts 15 as the cut off for keyword stuffing with the written text we have done really well with using it a set number of times. But these pages are product category pages. The keyword in the extreme of cases is listed 7-9 times in the side nav menu. 7-9 times in the product category listings. Take for example *** it is optimised for thermometers (i know it a tough single word keyword, and we have fairly modest aims with it, im using it here for example purposes). The word is used a good number of times within the article but is sent through the roof with the links to the sub categories. This page for example mentions the keyword 30 times. Can anybody suggest any ways to improve on this? Is how we display the categories in the nav bar and in the page excessive? As always many thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ATP0 -
Keyword Rankings: One keyword dropped, dragging other rankings down. Possible or not?
Hey moz fans, So these week I noticed significant drop in rankings... But what caught my attention is that one specific keyword dropped 18 positions, and all the other just 1-3. Print screen: http://prntscr.com/7fb4g4 Do you think it's possible that the drop of that page, that went 18 positions down, brought the whole domain down? Or is it another cause?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kokolo0 -
Keywords in WMT
Hello, In Googles Web master tools under "content keywords" 2 of my major keywords are missing. My site used to rank well for the keyphrase "short hairstyles" but gets very little traffic from google at all now, about 1% of what it did before april 2012. Someone did a negative seo number on us by pointing 10k+ spammy links to us from message boards, this and the timing of the traffic loss leads me to suspectthe penguin update. I am removing them as best I can but no increase in traffic has resulted so I'm looking for any and all issues and the missing keywords seems to be an oddity. The missing keywords include "short" which is pretty fundemental. The word is in the domain and plenty of times in the content. Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jwdl0 -
How much % of directories are punished?
Hi I was checking a site and I found lots of directory listings. 70% of the directories are punished in the list which I created (pagerank 0). Except from the directories which are listed here in seomoz, how much % of the others outside are punished? Also I noticed that this punished directories with pagerank 0 have most of them authority 30-40 according to the seomoz tool bar. I should bother to put a link or not? Why I see this difference? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nyanainc0 -
Canonical URL Tag Usage
Hi there, I have a .co.uk website and a .ie website, which have the exact same content on both, should I put a canonical tag on both websites, on every page? Kind Regards
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Paul780 -
How much is too much content for a home-page?
Hey guys, I'm looking to implement a strategy where I put a 20,000 word article on my home-page. It won't be a super-long page, this content will be divided into nested tabs. The content will also be found on individual pages (corresponding to the tabs) on the site, but these will have a canonical tag pointing to the home page, Will I get penalized for this kind of structure? Cheers, JC
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | trx0 -
Keyword Significance
I am seeing some very interesting changes in our non-branded keywords, and am curious to know how keyword significance in Google Webmaster Tools plays into ranking of a site. Say for example we are a photography website selling photography supplies. At one point our most significant word was Canon, but now it is photography. Would that mean that we would start seeing a lot of non-branded keywords generating from Google like "camera strap", "camera lens hood", etc. This is really good for us, but curious to know if the only reason we are seeing this is the shift in our keyword significance. Any insight? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NaHoku0 -
Limiting URLS in the HTML Sitemap?
So I started making a sitemap for our new golf site, which has quite a few "low level" pages (about 100 for the golf courses that exist in the area, and then about 50 for course architects), etc etc. My question/open discussion is simple. In a sitemap that already has about 50 links, should we include these other low level 150 links? Of course, the link to the "Golf Courses" is there, along with a link to the "Course Architects" MAIN pages (which, subdivides on THOSE pages.) I have read the limit is around 150 links on the sitemap.html page and while it would be nice to rank long tail for the Golf Courses. All in all, our site architecture itself is easily crawlable as well. So the main question is just to include ALL the links or just the main ones? Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JamesO0