I recently got sent an article written by John C. Dvorak from PCMAG.com about Long SEO Url’s. The article “SEO Fiascoes: The Trouble with Search Engine Optimization” was a huge rant about how someone gave him advise on using long urls so that Search Engines find his articles better and return better findings, and how he thought the whole thing was a load of crap! Wow, first of all, I encourage anyone who finds this post, or the above article to hold onto their seats, because it is really an amazing display of bad advice and rants about what he obviously knows nothing about. Now I have read other content written by John, and he is animated, and does know a lot about technology and the industry. But on this topic, I think he should stay away.
A guy I know also read this post and sent me the posts on this article. Frankly, unless I am blind, I did not even see anywhere on the story itself to post a comment, or read comments. In this case, I think it was a good idea that the author did not get raked over the coals on the same page as his article. So, please read the replies he got here, because these people obviously know way more than the author.
I agree with every rebuttle to this article – first of all, the developer he talks about, either did not know, explain, or convey the concept of the url to the author. Now, I am not a SEO expert and have some differing opinions on some SEO strategies than some of my colleagues, but we all agree that it is NOT a “snake-oil sale” as stated by the author. I agree with the use of “longer” urls to convey what the story is about – note that PCMAG, does not even try to use SEO in its own pages. Who can gather anything out of sitename.com/111,3456,22.000.aspx? This is their url strategy! Now their page titles are very SEO friendly. Why not at least make your url sitename.com/article2/SEO_Fiascos_Trrouble_with_SEO_id=12456.asp? Now the person who alerted me to the discussions (who also deals with SEO on a daily basis – read some of his posts here - shameless plug Rob), would say to me – Thomas, why not just show the article title in the url and get rid of the other garbage that no one cares about. Well, I don’t think taking the other content, id and page extension out makes that big of a difference.
Please seek out the advise of a good SEO expert when looking to improve your SEO strategy. Do not find mindless postings online like the above mentioned one and think that you are wasting your time. If you think you are wasting your time with SEO, don’t rely on a web presence to increase your business traction. Seek out resources to help you that have good information:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_optimization
http://searchenginewatch.com/
http://www.pubexec.com/
http://www.emediastrategist.com/blog/
Maybe, actually, the author did this on purpose – to get more traffic and raise controversy and to get attention. See, I am posting info about it. If I am, I am sure others are, which actually brings more traffic back to his article and site. Maybe he knows what he is doing afterall:)