Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Subscribe to HRA Now!

 



Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?

Share and download Custom Google Analytics Reports, dashboards and advanced segments--for FREE! 

 



 

 www.CustomReportSharing.com 

From the folks who brought you High Rankings!



Photo
- - - - -

Don't Use Querystring ?id=


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
25 replies to this topic

#1 Phil CK

Phil CK

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 26 July 2003 - 11:57 AM

I only recently found out that Google doesn't like pages that use the querystring ID= as it leads googlebot to think its a session ID. This was pointed out on another forum, so I changed my pages to use NUM= rather than ID= & that lead to Googlebot indexing all my product pages in 24 hours & in the index in under 48 hours !

So, a little tip if you didn't know... don't use ID=

#2 robwatts

robwatts

    HR 5

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 308 posts

Posted 26 July 2003 - 12:47 PM

Hi Phil

Welcome to the forum.

Thanks for sharing that Phil. Good to hear it had such an immediate and pronounced effect!

-_-

#3 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 33,210 posts

Posted 26 July 2003 - 01:31 PM

Wow, what a simple, but effective tip. Thanks Phil, and welcome! :bye:

Jill

#4 Toadally

Toadally

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 26 July 2003 - 02:27 PM

Hi Phil
What shopping cart do you use? Mine unfortunately is MIVA which prevents a lot of products from getting spidered. -_-

#5 Phil CK

Phil CK

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 26 July 2003 - 05:44 PM

I don't -_- :blink:

I run an affiliate off Amazon using a custom built ASP set-up to call up products & details as required, so I designed & built the whole thing to ensure the spiders could come visiting..... which is why is was so confused when thy didn't with ID=, and then happy when I realised that was the problem (& it was so easy to change the code !!!)

#6 markymark

markymark

    HR 4

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

Posted 27 July 2003 - 01:53 AM

Toadally, there are a few commercially available modules for Miva that will make it spiderable. Here's one you might want to take a look at:

http://www.modstop.c...od=CBS-SEOSUITE

Disclaimer: I've never used this, so can't vouch for it's effectiveness but reading through the info on each module, it looks pretty solid to me.

#7 Toadally

Toadally

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 27 July 2003 - 08:50 AM

Thanks Markymark. Will check it out.

#8 Matt B

Matt B

    The modem is the message.

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 558 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 08:18 AM

Phil,

Where did you find this info out? We've used both ID= and NUM= and haven't really seen a big difference either way . . .

#9 daniel

daniel

    HR 4

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 234 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 08:27 AM

I only recently found out that Google doesn't like pages that use the querystring ID= as it leads googlebot to think its a session ID. This was pointed out on another forum, so I changed my pages to use NUM= rather than ID= & that lead to Googlebot indexing all my product pages in 24 hours & in the index in under 48 hours !

Hi Phil

Obviously chaning id to num seemed to work extremely well for you. However, I'm not sure Google will necessarily ignore pages that contain id= in their URL.

A search on Google for .php?id= brings up some 3 millions results, and a quick glance through shows a fair few pages that have been indexed with this string in the URL.

From experience, I've seen that Google seems to cope OK with URLs containing one or two query strings, but doesn't seem to like those that are more complex. Session ids are definitely an issue - but I'm not sure that Google regards URLs that contain id= as containing a session id.

We tend to rewrite the URLs to make them 'search-engine friendly', and this is something I'd defnitely recommend.

Of course, you saw immediate results when you removed id= from your URLs, so there must be some truth in it.

Does anyone have anything to add on this?

Cheers,

Daniel

#10 Phil CK

Phil CK

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 11:27 AM

The info came from a post by GoogleGuy @ WMW where he said..

Tip #4: Avoid session ID's. If you can, use fewer dynamic parameters and stay away from the parameter "id=" in urls--Googlebot tries to stay away from things that might be session ID's.


I think the key word is "tries" and therefore Google doesn't categorically exclude pages with ID=, but why risk something that might hurt ?? (and certainly seemed to help me !!)

#11 schecky

schecky

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 48 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 02:04 PM

The info came from a post by GoogleGuy @ WMW where he said..

Tip #4: Avoid session ID's. If you can, use fewer dynamic parameters and stay away from the parameter "id=" in urls--Googlebot tries to stay away from things that might be session ID's.


I think the key word is "tries" and therefore Google doesn't categorically exclude pages with ID=, but why risk something that might hurt ?? (and certainly seemed to help me !!)

FWIW, ID=1Q2W3T.... assuming it is an NT server is not AFAIK a SessionID. SessionID's generated by IIS are a string of didgets only and therefore a search using ID= will return results. I belive the posts referred to on another forum pointed this out with an explaination of why the postee believed using ID= and a string of digets could potentially be identified as a SessionID which Google itself has said there is a problem.

#12 schecky

schecky

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 48 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 02:15 PM

PhilCK, it would possibly benefit all if you could share the value in the ID param or at least indicate whether it was a string of didgets or alphanumeric.

#13 Phil CK

Phil CK

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 23 posts

Posted 28 July 2003 - 04:54 PM

It was only the very simplest of numeric values, eg. .ASP?ID=12

#14 schecky

schecky

    HR 2

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 48 posts

Posted 29 July 2003 - 12:04 AM

It was only the very simplest of numeric values, eg.    .ASP?ID=12

Interesting, that's what I thought you'd say!

#15 chill105

chill105

    HR 1

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 15 August 2003 - 10:15 PM

Thank you for that information. We have a lot of different identification variables on our site. Fortunately, we've been using unique terms- such as custID and brandID.

Hopefully the SE's won't have any problems with that.




SPAM FREE FORUM!
 
If you are just registering to spam,
don't bother. You will be wasting your
time as your spam will never see the
light of day!