Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs)

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2011

It keeps the original formatting. numero = 106163
interpreted = N
texte = --Apple-Mail-4--231207031Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printableContent-Type: text/plain;charset=us-asciiIn our tests, over several years off and on, we certainly seemed to =notice a difference when the url did not contain a ? and variable pairs. =It's so difficult to tell with Google as they obviously don't tell you =but Colin and myself used to keep track of search positions from month =to month. We varied urls, descriptions, content, titles etc, all =individually and monitored the results. Colin subscribed to other like =minded forums and at the end of a lot of fiddling we came up with a few =simple rules.The basics of these were that at all times the more, on subject, well =written text you can put everywhere, the better! Or put another way, try =and avoid lots of variable pairs.=20=46rom a user point of view I think it is always better it stuff reads =correctly. Imagine going to a site and looking for support, it's much =better if I can guess domain.com/support than to try and get to =domain.com?pageid=3D28.Assuming you have written good text that stays on subject, you have =filled all the meta fields and added a good title, then the only thing =that has any major impact to your ratings is how "popular" your site is, =in other words how many sites link to you.Sorry if this is all common sense but it works.Cheers=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DSteve Craig - Asylum Interactive LtdTel +44 1330 860550 Fax +44 1330 860880=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3Dhttp://www.asylumweb.comEmail: steve@asylumweb.comSkype: s.craig - iChat: steve.craig=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DOn 24 Jan 2011, at 19:55, Dan Strong wrote:> William/Steve,> =20> What is you opinion regarding a URL like this:> http://webdna.us/page.dna?numero=3D1&topic=3Dtechnical-reference> =20> Thanks,> -Dan>=20> From: Steve Craig> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 11:50 AM> To: talk@webdna.us> Subject: Re: [WebDNA] To be or not to be friendly (URLs)>=20> Definitely agree with the real words in URL stuff. Both myself and =another WebDNA user who has sadly since died, used to do lots of tests =for each other and our experience was that it certainly improved our =listings.>=20> Both of us spent a bit of time programming our own CMS and both were =totally rooted in supplying readable urls to google. We both score very =highly with most of our sites.>=20> Cheers> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> Steve Craig - Asylum Interactive Ltd> Tel +44 1330 860550 Fax +44 1330 860880> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> http://www.asylumweb.com> Email: steve@asylumweb.com> Skype: s.craig - iChat: steve.craig> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D==3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D>=20>=20>=20>=20> On 24 Jan 2011, at 18:42, Dan Strong wrote:>=20>> I consider myself to be fairly SEO savvy, so I'm not asking this out =of ignorance nor am I looking for an exhaustive lesson on SEO, but I =would like to get some opinions from the SEO experts on the list.>> =20>> Personally, I prefer friendly URLs, mostly for cosmetic reasons, but =back around 2005, when I first started using them, the consensus was =that having keywords in the URL was good for SEO and for my sites, it =did seem to be the case.>> =20>> My impression these days is that, like always, relevant original =human-readable content is the key, and a google sitemap is a very good =idea, but beyond that the typical SEO best practices (validated =html/css, descriptive title attributes in links, backlinks from =authority sites, etc.) while they don't hurt, don't necessarily help =either. Is that a fair statement?>> =20>> Specifically, on the webdna.us site, the links are now like this:>> http://webdna.us?page.dna?numero=3D152>> =20>> I'd prefer they were like this, but it's beginning to look like a =time-sink:>> http://webdna.us/introduction.dna>> =20>> So, with everything above in mind, what are your opinions about URLs =like this as they relate to SEO:>> http://webdna.us/page.dna?numero=3D152&topic=3Dintroduction>> =20>> Where "topic" is an unused variable with no purpose other than to put =descriptive words in the URL>> =20>> Thanks,>> -Dan>> =20>> =20>> =20>> =20>> =20>> =20>> --------------------------------------------------------- This =message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . =To unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: =http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: =support@webdna.us>=20> --------------------------------------------------------- This message =is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To =unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: =http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: =support@webdna.us> --------------------------------------------------------- This message =is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To =unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: =http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: =support@webdna.us--Apple-Mail-4--231207031Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printableContent-Type: text/html;charset=us-asciiIn =our tests, over several years off and on, we certainly seemed to notice =a difference when the url did not contain a ? and variable pairs. It's =so difficult to tell with Google as they obviously don't tell you but =Colin and myself used to keep track of search positions from month to =month. We varied urls, descriptions, content, titles etc, all =individually and monitored the results. Colin subscribed to other like =minded forums and at the end of a lot of fiddling we came up with a few =simple rules.

The basics of these were that at all =times the more, on subject, well written text you can put everywhere, =the better! Or put another way, try and avoid lots of variable =pairs.