+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 77

Thread: Matt Cutts on kw in your URL

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Depends on the day. Right now, the UK.
    Posts
    95

    Matt Cutts on kw in your URL

    Found this this morning. Thinks its a good piece of information about a long time dispute within the SEO community.

    Don't know where the original post came from, I can't find it on Matt's blog or anywhere.

    Here it is, per Matt Cutts:
    Most bloggy sites tend to have words from the title of a post in the url; having keywords from the post title in the url also can help search engines judge the quality of a page.
    I've believed this from the beginning. It doesn't take a genius to do a search and look at the amount of times the kw is in the url, but many have said that it doesn't matter.

    IMHO I think Google places weight on it, but that several other factors play into the SERP's with them like registration date, kw density and bl's, and outrank them on a sliding scale.

    But its still good to hear this from the horses mouth, considering overall I have several million pages over many websites designed this way already.

    GaryTheScubaGuy

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Dordrecht NL
    Posts
    5,507
    Yup, I read that too.

    I just wonder what he meant by "judging the quality".

    I also believe that urls like keyword1-keyword2-keyword3.php don't necessarily breathe 'quality'. So he may be judging in the sense of 'punishing'

    I'm sure there's an optimal balance somewhere...
    Hey, DIY your SEO and smile!... Gotta love my host (no kidding)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    God's Own country
    Posts
    2,612
    Yeah... about the balance... there is...

    When am seeing a change in the URl here... I may think about re-writing my 'hy-phe-nat-ed' ones...
    Search Engine Marketing India "With a Virtue of being Practical...!!!".
    DD:"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Depends on the day. Right now, the UK.
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by kichus
    Yeah... about the balance... there is...

    When am seeing a change in the URl here... I may think about re-writing my 'hy-phe-nat-ed' ones...
    I wouldn't change them if they already have dashes. Cuttshas said _ and- are the same, but other SE's see it as a character.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Dordrecht NL
    Posts
    5,507
    I remember Cutts once saying that the hyphen was better for some ANCIENT reason.....

    But IMV too many hyphens are evil

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    God's Own country
    Posts
    2,612
    AFAIK...

    'matt-cutts' == 'matt cutts'
    and 'matt_cutts' == 'mattcutts'

    I could be wrong though...
    Search Engine Marketing India "With a Virtue of being Practical...!!!".
    DD:"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Depends on the day. Right now, the UK.
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by kichus
    AFAIK...

    'matt-cutts' == 'matt cutts'
    and 'matt_cutts' == 'mattcutts'

    I could be wrong though...
    Bingo

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    104
    - used as a word seperator
    _ is not

    it is one of the many many many factors in SEO, albeit to a small degree....
    Distinct SEO Calgary Consulting | My SEO Blog

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    11
    I have different thinking on - and _. I may be wrong though. I believe that both of them are equal from character grammer point of view. But when you go for the readability and usability '-'s are far more better than '_'s.
    Search engine rate the higher which are user friendly. Consider the following:
    search-engine and search_engine. The first one is easily identified as dash but the second one is a bit difficult to identify as underscore.
    I think this is a sort of spamming (hyperbole) like same color font as of background. When you show something which is confusing it is spam (my definition). So -s are better than _s.

    With regards,
    Mandar Thosar

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    God's Own country
    Posts
    2,612
    When you show something which is confusing it is spam (my definition).
    Such confusion vary from person to person.... Isn't it???

    Neither this says anything similar...

    I think the later is more correct...
    Search Engine Marketing India "With a Virtue of being Practical...!!!".
    DD:"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts