Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 23.22.140.143

Forum Moderators: phranque

Message Too Old, No Replies

Best URLs for Static Pages

/dog-bones.html or /dog_bones.html or /dogbones?

     
4:07 am on Aug 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 29, 2005
posts:44
votes: 0


I'm creating a new site with rewritten static pages. Whats everyones opinion on the best url to pick?

example: If I am targeting the keyphrase "dog bones"
I could name the page...
example.com/dogbones
example.com/dog-bones
or
example.com/dog_bones

[edited by: msgraph at 3:29 pm (utc) on Aug. 8, 2005]
[edit reason] example'd urls [/edit]

4:14 am on Aug 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 20, 2005
posts:22
votes: 0


I have had better luck with /dog-bones.html over the others.
4:30 am on Aug 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:June 12, 2005
posts:7
votes: 0


dog-bones.html better than dog_bones.html
2:50 pm on Aug 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 29, 2005
posts:44
votes: 0


Hmm.. I guess I'll try the dash then. Thanks guys
4:09 pm on Aug 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

joined:Feb 19, 2003
posts:695
votes: 0


It absolutely does not matter. I get the same results with all three.
8:26 pm on Aug 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 2, 2005
posts:9
votes: 0


what about this (? ) :

what is better?

example.com/dog/dog-bones.html
example.com/dog-bones.html
dog.example.com/dog-bones.html

[edited by: msgraph at 9:31 pm (utc) on Aug. 8, 2005]
[edit reason] example'd urls [/edit]

10:48 pm on Aug 11, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 10, 2005
posts:54
votes: 0


dog-bones(with dash) means two words "dog and "bones" and therefore all the following search keywords will work with your domain or file name
"dog"
"bones"
"dog bones"

however dog_bones(with underscore) is one word and will only work for one keyword
"dog bones"

Therefore dash will give you more exposure to more keywords and is better....

10:50 pm on Aug 11, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Mar 10, 2005
posts:54
votes: 0


coming to your original question
example.com/dog-bones.html
is the best option as it has all the keywords once which is enough to get the credits for "keywords in URL"
10:57 pm on Aug 11, 2005 (gmt 0)

Preferred Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 26, 2003
posts:371
votes: 0


I think that, in theory, example.com/dog-bones.html would be the best choice from the options offered; but I also think that, in practice, it won't make a whole lot of difference.

The notion of "over-optimization" comes to mind... Just try to be natural! (As cynics say: "Once you can fake *that*, you've got it made.")

12:56 pm on Aug 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 24, 2002
posts:87
votes: 0


Slightly off-topic, but in relation to this. I have several pages that have been around for a few years. Scoring pretty good in SERPS (between nr 1 and first page), BUT, the naming is suboptimal. It uses dogbones.html instead of dog-bones.html.

I want to change the name of the files, but am afraid that renaming the URL's will affect my position in the SERPS negatively (mainly in Google, getting a PR0 instead of the current one).

How do I rename those URL's without the risk of affecting my positions in the wrong way? I know I could use RedirectPermanent, but lots of spiders and search-engines don't support it properly. And if I update the links on the site in question, I'm afraid search-engines will see the renamed pages as new ones instead of moved ones....

1:02 pm on Aug 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from CA 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member encyclo is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2003
posts:9063
votes: 2


Orange_XL, if the pages are fully indexed and performing well, don't rename them. The advantage you might gain is marginal, but the risk of the pages disappearing into an abyss for six months or more is significant. Work instead on other factors: keyword density, inbound links, in-site linking, whatever, just don't touch the file names!
4:01 pm on Aug 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 24, 2002
posts:87
votes: 0


@encyclo: The thing is, there is not much more I can do (without getting unethical). Some extra inbound links would be welcome, but that is about it. And looking at other search-engine's, some really do appreciate good naming of pages.
1:28 pm on Aug 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 21, 2005
posts:3
votes: 0


Orange_XL, I "feel" you should keep the names unchanged. If you change them to follow a trend for some SE, nobody can assure that trend will not change in 3 or 4 months. The risk is to frustrate the job you did until today.

If your contents already follow the good rules, istead of over-optimize the site, it's better to improve contents: think as a customer, try to find new needs (real needs) and add new related contents.
Good contents written in the proper way and language, in "long-term view" are stronger than too many SEO actions.
(Customers will appreciate for sure)

6:24 am on Sept 2, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Jan 19, 2005
posts:117
votes: 0


My suggestion is to keep the existing pages in place and introduce new pages with new names you want and try to get high rank for new pages and once you did it the older pages either can be removed or remain in place as it is right now.

I hope this will not put negative impact on your current statistics

7:16 pm on Sept 2, 2005 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member caveman is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member

joined:Apr 17, 2003
posts:3744
votes: 0


Yes - and I think that GG has posted to that effect in WW before.

We always use dashes now...because top rankings are a game of inches.

But I suspect the reason that some feel it doesn't matter *much* is that the days of ranking well by stuffing kw's in URI are long gone. There are so many other considerations to ranking well now that "dog-bones.html" versus "dog_bones.html" is probably little more than a tie breaker if all other things are exactly equal.

The thing is, given how many algo elements are at play, a *lot* of individual measures may be little more than tie-breakers, in terms of their overall importance ... so why not get 'em all right. ;-)

1:38 pm on Sept 5, 2005 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 24, 2002
posts:87
votes: 0


A small note. I changed all of my URL's to the new naming and surprise surprise. MSN has picked them up effortlessly. Within a week, all my url's are reindexed / moved and scorng above their previous SERP's. Google ... don't mention Google. Sigh.

I wrote them my exact problem, and the only thing I got back was a useless reply which said the same as is already on their website :-¦ Google really seems to be losing the edge...

3:57 pm on Sept 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2005
posts:25
votes: 0



Google (read Matt Cutts) has always advocated underscores versus the hyphens. So I'd go with that, just like izahmad said.

Also, stay away from subdomains. They've long been abused by spammers and the SEs are wary of them now.

Lastly, to do well, at the risk of sounding trite and rehashing what others have said, you need to do what comes naturally. The unnecessary directory in "example.com/dog/dog-bones.html" will not do you any good.

Hope that helps!

3:01 pm on Sept 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 31, 2005
posts:25
votes: 0


Doh! I should concentrate on reading better than reading faster. Please nix my previous post vis-a-vis Matt Cutts. Here's what his blog states:
So if you have a url like word1_word2, Google will only return that page if the user searches for word1_word2 (which almost never happens). If you have a url like word1-word2, that page can be returned for the searches word1, word2, and even 'word1 word2'.
4:21 pm on Sept 7, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Nov 10, 2003
posts:238
votes: 0


How about example.com/dog-bone/dog-bones.html or example.com/dog-bones/dog-bones.html?

Folders help with the theme of the page in my experience. Just gotta watch it doesn't get outta hand.

7:27 am on Sept 8, 2005 (gmt 0)

New User

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 2, 2005
posts:9
votes: 0


@Digerati

Stay away from subdomains.
Why?

4:13 pm on Oct 6, 2005 (gmt 0)

Full Member

10+ Year Member

joined:Aug 12, 2003
posts:244
votes: 0


I have always hated dashes, they just don't read as well.

this-dash-looks-like-crap-dash

As for dog.example.com/dogbones/dog-bones.html I also think that the URL should read well and make sense.

example.com/products/dog-bones.html makes sense to me.

example.com/dog-bones/dog-bones.html just looks dumb and reads dumb. You are in the dog bones x 2 section?

If you are doing that, would just use the folder:

example.com/dogbones/

BZ