from Darth Autocrat (Lyndon NA) | by Darth Autocrat (Lyndon NA)

. :: To change a URL, or to not change a URL? :: Honestly, it's not much of a question. I'm shocked that "non-sensical" is not the first item listed! (/index.php?item=1343xf68aql) Don't think : "SEO Friendly URL" instead, think : "User Friendly URL" >>> #SEO #URL #301redirect t.co/gL76LONmcx

>>> So if the URL isn't particularly helpful, informative or clear to a person ... you can consider changing it. Now - it used to me "not worth it". 301's used to "lose" about 15% of value, and G took time to update. Between loss and fluctuations - it hurt. >>>

>>> But since 2017(?) G pass 100% value through 301's, and are far faster at updating. So the only real reason to not do it ... is internal issues (approval, implementation, testing and resources etc.). That said ... you shouldn't expect to see any real "SEO gains". >>>

>>> Google's @JohnMu has repeatedly said (suggested?) that the "value" of a URL is tiny, and typically short-lived (they may use it initially, but once the page is parsed, and G have a better idea of the content, the URL content is kind of redundant). >>>

>>> Also, don't change URLs to alter "the page depth". Moving from domain.tld/dir1/dir2/dir3/dir4/page to domain.tld/dir1/dir2/d3-d4-page isn't important - it's the IA/links that matter. (moving a page closer to root isn't important, sorting your Nav/Links out is) >>>

>>> Can you think of anything else? Bad reasons, Good reasons, clever tricks?