Please vote :

1. domain.com/post_name.html
2. domain.com/category/post_name.html
3. domain.com/category/subcategory/post_name.html
4. domain.com/post_name
5. domain.com/category/post_name
6. domain.com/category/subcategory/post_name
7. domain.com/index.php?post_name
8. domain.com/post?=1


What is the best URL structur for SEO ?
Give me reason please ...

I would say #3 or #6 since it has the best chances of having search term keywords in the url.. just my thought... no SEO expert here

All of them are equal

So modern search engines see all urls the same? I know the query urls used to be the big no no... But I suppose alot has changed in the last couple years huh

My site uses #7 on the forums. Google picks it up pretty well.

They are not equal... #8 is definitely the worst because it has no keywords identifying the post, just the post ID...

You don't get keywords from the URL ....

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet." - Shakespeare

Apply that to your URL's : ).

Well, Im thinking more about the url when it comes to linking rather than how it shows up in the SERPs... Not sure if thats whatlilianchen is refering to however.

You DO get keywords from the URL.

Because in many cases the URL becomes the anchor text.

Whenever your URL is posted on a forum, for instance, most people aren't going to bother giving the link anchor text, they are just going to provide the URL.

So your URL *becomes* the anchor text, like this: http://playitontheweb.com/games/Super-Mario-World-game.htm

Those keywords appearing in the anchor text DO affects SERPS for those keywords, because part of the formula is how many backlinks you have where the anchor text contains the keywords the user is searching for.

If my website was just using ID numbers instead of the game name (or article name, or post name, or whatever), like this: http://www.playitontheweb.com/games/17336 (broken link btw, because my site doesn't do it like that)

Then anybody who linked without providing anchor text, like most forum postings across the net referencing your site, that anchor text would not contain keywords for the individual game/article/post and you are losing an opportunity to improve your SERPS.

See.. that was my thinking..

You DO get keywords from the URL.

Because in many cases the URL becomes the anchor text.

Whenever your URL is posted on a forum, for instance, most people aren't going to bother giving the link anchor text, they are just going to provide the URL.

Yep, and this is the only time where "keywords" in the URL or of any benefit.

HOWEVER! given that most forum and blog software will truncate the centre of the URL when it is used as anchor text it pretty much negates it as a viable reason.

So just think very carefully, because your carefully worded URL of

www.site.com/is-analysis-of-the-farming-community-in-sussex-right/

might just become

www.site.com/is-anal... ...sex-right/

My vote for #3 and #6

Hi there,
i vote for "domain.com/category/subcategory/post_name.html"

is the best URL structure for SEO.

I think #3 is the best. But instead use dash ( - ) not underscore( _ ) . Dash is more SEO friendly

"1. domain.com/post_name.html", it is OK but it should be like this : domain.com/post-name.html

#4 will be my choice, specially if it is a blog.

If its an ecommerce site, you may like to go with #5 and #6.In any case, avoid repeatition of keywords in url

Hi,
I prefer #3 and #6 , but instead of underscore ( _ ) I will go for dash ( - ) in URL.

The second one, since it also has the category name in it. It is best to have short, concise URLs, without session ids and other unimportant data.

I vote for 3... I use #2 because I don't have any subcategories. but if I have I'd go for #3