9 replies to this topic

[Webseeker]

Let's say I have a page url that is like the below:

http://www.onlinestore.com/kitapp.html

... and what to change the page to:

http://www.onlinestore.com/kitchen-appliances.html

I know I'll have to change my optimized inbound links, anchor tags, etc. My concern is that I do have excellent serp now, but lose them once I change the page url to the modified info.

What should I expect for those pages and their serp position with Google once I make the change? Will I regain those serps again? If so, how long should I expect the results to happen?

Thanks,

Webseeker

P.S. "I have another post related to this about what to do with the old urls once the changes occurs."

[OldWelshGuy]

The real question is , why are you changing them at all? I hope it is not for some mythical SEO benefit, because while it is good to have meaningful URL's on a site, I would never re-write the urls you ae suggesting.

[chrishirst]

Surely

I do have excellent serp now,

Tells you that the URL wording means practically nothing at all, so why are you looking to kill ALL the "rankings" and any traffic that comes from SE referrals for several weeks or months, possibly permanently, simply to change the "page names" for an unspecified reason.

[Jill]

For the record, any 301 redirect changes should be seamless and not cause any problems. With our forum upgrade I instituted more friendly urls and haven't noticed problems or a lack of search traffic.

[Webseeker]

Man, I'm having problems trying to formulate a simple reply! This is the third time now I'm editing out my own words just trying to stick to the point. To make it simple this time, I'll simply just answer the questions directly as they were asked...

quote = "why are you changing them at all?"

quote= "why are you looking to kill ALL the "rankings..."

1.) Because when I look through my folders and files it's easier for me to identify what page I'm referring to or looking for. Like for instance a folder like /psbx.html is less identifiable and harder to find or refer to than /psp-xbox.html.

2.) Because once I made it in the top 3 serp position at G with 1 keyword in my meta keyword tag area and NEVER had the word on that page... thus found out what just happened is what the whole seo industry says, can't happen because they say meta keywords are almost weightless and without value. However, in a non-competive situation, like what I purposely hunt for prior to engaging in a venture, G has to pull something from somewhere to return a result to their users. So if that can happen, an "optimized" URL is better than one that is not... in my opinion and personal observations.

3,) But here is my most important reason... for the viewer and what they see in the serps. G will pull words or snippets from a page it believes matches or describes what the viewer is looking for. In so doing, part of what a searcher may see is an URL like onlinestore.com/gdpldkr.html. However, if they see onlinestore.com/goldplated-kittylitter.html, and if they're looking for that, often the keyword or phrase match is highlighted bold making it easier to see and pulls the searcher in since there's a match.

Now can anyone offer an idea, opinion or reference their experience with my original questions?

"What should I expect for those pages and their serp position with Google once I make the change?"
"Will I regain those serps again?"
"If so, how long should I expect the results to happen?"

Thanks for the replies. Appreciate it.

Webseeker

[Jill]

As I said above, all should be fine.

[chrishirst]

Because once I made it in the top 3 serp position at G with 1 keyword in my meta keyword tag area and NEVER had the word on that page.

And are you 100% sure that it was the meta keyword that put it there, because there are scrapers and directories that will read the meta keywords and/or description from the home page and link to the page using that data.

Don't ever accept that what you think you see it actually what happened.

1.) Because when I look through my folders and files it's easier for me to identify what page I'm referring to or looking for. Like for instance a folder like /psbx.html is less identifiable and harder to find or refer to than /psp-xbox.html.

And that is a perfectly valid reason for changing the structure.

For the record, any 301 redirect changes should be seamless and not cause any problems. With our forum upgrade I instituted more friendly urls and haven't noticed problems or a lack of search traffic

Yep, but the caveat is that, not every site or page has built up the "reputation" and huge natural link base to many, many pages other than the "home" page that HR undoubtably has. So the loss of rankings and traffic is a worst case scenario for a large proportion of site owners/operators who go changing URI structures, and if you are prepared for that eventuality, anything less than that is a bonus.

[qwerty]

I agree that you may derive some slight benefit from changing your URLs, and if your main reason is something other than rankings, you should go ahead. I also agree that the redirects should, for the most part, protect you from any harm associated with this change. But please don't use the redirects as the fix itself. That is, don't leave links on your site pointing to the old URLs because you believe the redirect will take care of everything. I like to think of redirects as band-aids: you need to move a page for whatever reason, so you do the real work, finding and recoding all the links that had pointed to the old URL. The redirect is put in place to deal with the links you couldn't update -- either you missed them, or you never controlled them.

I do have to take some exception with your apparent belief that it was a keywords presence in your meta keywords tag that got the page to rank for that keyword. The search engines have gotten a lot better over the years at recognizing synonyms. Assuming the keyword in question is relevant to the page, I expect that the presence of a synonym of the keyword on the page is playing a part in getting the page to rank for the keyword. There may also be links pointing to the page that use the keyword in the anchor text. But assuming we're talking about Google, I see no reason to doubt them when they say they don't pay any attention to the meta keywords tag.

[Webseeker]

<sup>Hello!

Ok, I have read your replies and appreciate the feedback you have given me. Qwerty, I never considered the term "synonym", but Honestly, I NEVER had any words to the key word that was in my meta tags on that page I pulled a top 3 ranking at G. Anyway, I thought it to be an anomaly and haven't checked it since, BUT I DID get a position at G for something that was in my meta tags! I too don't hold much water with meta tags keywords, but in that particular instance, I did well. LOL!

Anyway, doing my "due diligence", I fill in the meta keyword stuff "just in case". LOL!

It's always a pleasure coming here and expecting a good reply based on experience and from people who have weathered the storm in the world of seo.

And christhirst, appreciate your input too!

Thank you very much for your opinion and input.

Take care,

Webseeker</sup>

Edited by Webseeker, 04 April 2012 - 12:03 AM.

[Webseeker]

_{Also, don't understand the screwed up font size, but it's NOT my fault. LOL!}