Need help from any SEO experts here.

[abshard]

Thinking about changing my tube script and was wondering if it will negatively effect my google ranking?

Currently it uses dynamic urls like site.com/video.php?id=DjfmHJDd

And most likely the new script will use static urls like site.com/videos/blah-blah-blah.htm

I plan to leave the old dynamic urls active for now just not link to them from the main page and basically start from scratch adding content with the new script.

Am I gonna screw my google listings? Im only concerning about my listing for the root domain not any listings I might have for individual videos.

Anyone gone thru a change like this and know the effect it will have?

[Deputy Chief Command]

you need to pay somebody to review your site , no free advice

[lucas131]

it is like if you ask are there any women experts here?

[potter]

Originally Posted by abshard

Currently it uses dynamic urls like site.com/video.php?id=DjfmHJDd

And most likely the new script will use static urls like site.com/videos/blah-blah-blah.htm

I plan to leave the old dynamic urls active for now just not link to them from the main page and basically start from scratch adding content with the new script.

You should add in 301 redirects for all the old URLs to the new URLs.

[abshard]

The reason I wanna do this is because I wanna be proactive about the new changes coming for sponsor hosted content and tubes.

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...ded-value.html

Im gonna start hosting a lot of the content and hopfully get some unique content from sponsors that's not all over the tubes with unique descriptions etc. My current script cant do that its just for hotlinking

[abshard]

Originally Posted by potter

You should add in 301 redirects for all the old URLs to the new URLs.

Well I have 60k videos currently I don't plan to add that many back right away with the new script im hoping close to 5k to start. Since it will be alot of work writing custom descriptions etc. So the 301 redirect is 1 line per videos page in an htaccess? That would be a huge htaccess file. unless there is a better way to do it.

[Ringo]

proactive is the key

[Relentless]

Impossible to give you any meaningful specific advice without actually looking through your site, analytics, etc etc... Based only on what you posted, be very careful not to be creating duplicates of every page on your site by creating new URLs and leaving up old URLs with identical content.

Good luck.

[Jesse1984]

Originally Posted by potter

You should add in 301 redirects for all the old URLs to the new URLs.

+1 on this, static URL's should help you in the long run, theoretically. If they match the vid title and have keywords.

[abshard]

Is there an easy way to implement a 301 redirect for thousands of pages? Seems impossible the way my site is setup using a random id tag for each page.

I'm trying to possibly move from nubilestube to mechbunny if that helps

[Lichen]

it doesn't matter, SEO is dead

[abshard]

Originally Posted by Lichen

it doesn't matter, SEO is dead

Its not dead for me as I get a lot of SE traffic currently I just wanna keep it.

[brassmonkey]

[Klen]

Originally Posted by abshard

Is there an easy way to implement a 301 redirect for thousands of pages? Seems impossible the way my site is setup using a random id tag for each page.

I'm trying to possibly move from nubilestube to mechbunny if that helps

Easy way?Well only if you have some unique pattern,so for example if you had url id=titleid
and new tube script have /titleid structure,then a simple str replace plus 301 redirect with PHP will do the job,but if there are no pattern,then you will have to manualy generate each url.

[dunhill]

Originally Posted by abshard

Is there an easy way to implement a 301 redirect for thousands of pages? Seems impossible the way my site is setup using a random id tag for each page.

I'm trying to possibly move from nubilestube to mechbunny if that helps

You can change the video.php script to something like:

PHP Code:

$id = $_GET['id']; //obviously clean this shit to avoid SQLI
//SQL Query: SELECT permalink FROM videos WHERE id='$id' LIMIT 1;
//$new_link = Query result || throw 404 header if id not found and exit script

header('HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently');
header('Location: /videos/'.$new_link.'.html');
//If Bing won't rely on headers:
?><!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<link href='http://site.com/videos/<?php echo $new_link;?>.html' rel='canonical'/>
</head>
<body>
<a href='http://site.com/videos/<?php echo $new_link;?>.html'>Moved</a>
</body>
</html>
<?php
die();

Update the sitemaps and set canonical url on the new pages.
I have moved some websites in a similar way but better to keep the old url format even if you update the script.
The old links looks less spammy in my opinion.

[fuzebox]

Originally Posted by dunhill

You can change the video.php script to something like:

PHP Code:

$id = $_GET['id']; //obviously clean this shit to avoid SQLI
//SQL Query: SELECT permalink FROM videos WHERE id='$id' LIMIT 1;
//$new_link = Query result || throw 404 header if id not found and exit script

header('HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently');
header('Location: /videos/'.$new_link.'.html');
//If Bing won't rely on headers:
?><!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<link href='http://site.com/videos/<?php echo $new_link;?>.html' rel='canonical'/>
</head>
<body>
<a href='http://site.com/videos/<?php echo $new_link;?>.html'>Moved</a>
</body>
</html>
<?php
die();

Update the sitemaps and set canonical url on the new pages.
I have moved some websites in a similar way but better to keep the old url format even if you update the script.
The old links looks less spammy in my opinion.

I concur

[icymelon]

static is gonna be better for seo. first thought is why not use the new script on a second site and not mess with things if you are currently getting a lot of traffic from the big G

[geirlur]

I'm going through the same thing and came to the conclusion it's better just to build a new site with 100% hosted content and use the old one for hosted flvs(see sig).

Mechbunny will aid you in changing scripts though, they can set you up with the same link structure as your current one too. At least that's what they told me ;)

[abshard]

Originally Posted by icymelon

static is gonna be better for seo. first thought is why not use the new script on a second site and not mess with things if you are currently getting a lot of traffic from the big G

Well im worried about the new changes google is talking about sponsor hosted content that was mentioned here http://googlewebmastercentral.blogsp...ded-value.html

Not sure if its because its sponsor hosted, or they all have the same descriptions or all the videos are the same also.

Im gonna try to slowly replace the hosted stuff with more unique content that's not all over the place , that is if sponsors are willing to provide the content.

[dunhill]

Originally Posted by icymelon

static is gonna be better for seo. first thought is why not use the new script on a second site and not mess with things if you are currently getting a lot of traffic from the big G

The content is gonna be better for seo, talking about google here, it won't help the "spammy-keyword-another-keyword.html" structure. Even if you rewrite the url structure for "SEO", the bot will check the headers(like Server and X-Powered-By) and template patterns to figure out that the pages are not static. Better focus on a clean site that user will like instead of wasting time with "SEO".

[patrique007]

All for the user, thats automatically SEO

[Barry-xlovecam]

http://www.askapache.com/htaccess/ht...-rewrites.html
http://www.askapache.com/seo/seo-adv...-indexing.html