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
- - - - -

Will Url Rewriting Hurt Current Page Rank?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 blogdog

blogdog

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 17 April 2011 - 11:34 AM

Hi Everyone-

I have some pages ranking very well for their keywords. However, the urls have a query string in them and are not very human friendly. These are brand new pages so I don't have any traffic history. If I use url rewriting to make them more human friendly (ie: www.domain.com/product/productA), will this dilute the current page rank?

Will the SE's index both urls and think they are two seperate pages with identical content thus hurting the first page's rank? Shoud I just leave well enough alone?







#2 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 6,938 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 17 April 2011 - 05:45 PM

It won't "dilute" it in the slightest, it will wipe it out completely, not that SGB PR is worth anything in the first place.


PR, "real" and the toolbar varieties are assigned to a URL so any change to the URI means it is different.

#3 blogdog

blogdog

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 18 April 2011 - 12:34 AM

QUOTE(chrishirst @ Apr 17 2011, 03:45 PM) View Post
It won't "dilute" it in the slightest, it will wipe it out completely, not that SGB PR is worth anything in the first place.
PR, "real" and the toolbar varieties are assigned to a URL so any change to the URI means it is different.



Thanks for your reply. Wasn't sure what SGB meant but found it here, that's a good acronym.

After reading up on URI's , I'm not sure I understand what you're saying.

If there are two urls:

URL #1 : Something like www.domain.com/products.aspx?product=A&color=red&size=small&productID=1234567 and is indexed by google

URL #2: Rewriting is set up so url #2 is created and is something short and sweet like www.domain.com/products/productA The url is then rewritten server side into url #1


Now the resource could be obtained using url #1 or #2, #1 being real and #2 being virtual.

So wouldn't their URI's be the same as their URL's, each unique but also resolving to the same page content? Is that why it would wipe it out?





#4 Tiggerito

Tiggerito

    HR 2

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Location:Adelaide, South Australia

Posted 18 April 2011 - 04:22 AM

QUOTE(chrishirst @ Apr 18 2011, 08:15 AM) View Post
It won't "dilute" it in the slightest, it will wipe it out completely, not that SGB PR is worth anything in the first place.
PR, "real" and the toolbar varieties are assigned to a URL so any change to the URI means it is different.


To solve this problem you need to make your old URL cause a 301 Permanent Redirect to the new URL. This tells visitors and Search Engines that the old page has gone and is now being represented by the new page. Google stated that it will transfer most of the PageRank to the new page.

#5 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,963 posts

Posted 18 April 2011 - 10:32 AM

Ditto what Tiggerito said.

You don't want any piece of content to be found on 2 URLs our you'll have duplicate content issues that split your link popularity.

#6 chrishirst

chrishirst

    A not so moderate moderator.

  • Moderator
  • 6,938 posts
  • Location:Blackpool UK

Posted 19 April 2011 - 05:30 AM

QUOTE(blogdog @ Apr 18 2011, 06:34 AM) View Post
URL #1 : Something like www.domain.com/products.aspx?product=A&color=red&size=small&productID=1234567 and is indexed by google

URL #2: Rewriting is set up so url #2 is created and is something short and sweet like www.domain.com/products/productA The url is then rewritten server side into url #1
Now the resource could be obtained using url #1 or #2, #1 being real and #2 being virtual.

So wouldn't their URI's be the same as their URL's, each unique but also resolving to the same page content? Is that why it would wipe it out?
As you said they are unique, now if you were simply reading source code would you know straight away that they were the same location. URIs/URLs are simply pointers to a resource location.

It is exactly the same thing as www.domain.tld, domain.tld, www.domain.tld/index.ext, domain.tld/index.ext being four pointers to the same resource. Each one is a unique address for the same resource.

To all useragents both URLs are completely seperate entities, to SEs this means each one has it's own links, it's own entry in the index and for Google it's own PR value.

As said above, using a permanent redirect will merge the "values" for both into a single URI, without the redirect the rewritten URI has nothing pointing to it at all.

#7 blogdog

blogdog

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 11:04 AM

QUOTE(chrishirst @ Apr 19 2011, 03:30 AM) View Post
As you said they are unique, now if you were simply reading source code would you know straight away that they were the same location. URIs/URLs are simply pointers to a resource location.

It is exactly the same thing as www.domain.tld, domain.tld, www.domain.tld/index.ext, domain.tld/index.ext being four pointers to the same resource. Each one is a unique address for the same resource.

To all useragents both URLs are completely seperate entities, to SEs this means each one has it's own links, it's own entry in the index and for Google it's own PR value.

As said above, using a permanent redirect will merge the "values" for both into a single URI, without the redirect the rewritten URI has nothing pointing to it at all.




Ahhhh, ok, I see. So it becomes a canonical issue. So if I redirect the virtual url to the real url (#2 to #1) then problem solved.

For that matter, I could create as many human friendly urls I wanted as long as long as they all redirect to the real url (not just rewrite). I don't think I can redirect the real to the real (#1 to #1 ) cause the server (IIS) would get stuck in a never ending loop.

Now if the real url was not already indexed by google, I could have submitted a site map to google with virtual urls for google to index and then use a rewrite server side to the real url. Because in that scenario, google (and all other user agents) would only have the virtual url to index and never know about the real url.


Is all that correct, Chris?





#8 Jill

Jill

    Recovering SEO

  • Admin
  • 32,963 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 12:18 PM

No, you have it backwards. You want to redirect the non-rewritten URLs to the rewritten ones, otherwise, there's no reason to rewrite them to begin with. (Which may be the case anyway.)

#9 blogdog

blogdog

    HR 1

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 21 April 2011 - 11:36 AM

QUOTE(Jill @ Apr 19 2011, 10:18 AM) View Post
No, you have it backwards. You want to redirect the non-rewritten URLs to the rewritten ones, otherwise, there's no reason to rewrite them to begin with. (Which may be the case anyway.)



Thank you all for your help. Thank you Jill!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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!