14 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
14 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

http://www. or www. ???

by keenstyle1
12 replies
  • SEO
    • |
Does it matter how I insert the url? Is one better than the other?
#http or or www #http or or www #www
  • Profile picture of the author GeorgR.
    insert where?
    Signature
    *** Affiliate Site Quick --> The Fastest & Easiest Way to Make Affiliate Sites!<--
    -> VISIT www.1UP-SEO.com *** <- Internet Marketing, SEO Tips, Reviews & More!! ***
    *** HIGH QUALITY CONTENT CREATION +++ Manual Article Spinning (Thread Here) ***
    Content Creation, Blogging, Articles, Converting Sales Copy, Reviews, Ebooks, Rewrites
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1611475].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bettersocial
    the "www." prefix is considered redundant these days, so stick to the non www version.

    However, make sure that the "www." version redirects to the sans-www version
    Signature
    --->>> Make $$$ Sharing Images on Twitter - With NO Website, NO Investment! <<<---
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1611549].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rlopes
    You should always use the "http", as some (rare) browsers and user agents may not work well without it.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1611724].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author JamesM
    The "http" portion tells the browser to request a document (in most cases a web page) via hypertext transfer protocol, as opposed to ftp or another transfer mechanism, while the "www" portion is actually a subdomain.

    TBH I thought the OP was asking which should be used as a display URL when setting up PPC ads?! Got to say the question isn't too clear!
    Signature

    If this post has been helpful please click the "thanks" button ;-)

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1612752].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Adam H
      Who said that www is redundant ? you have any proof to back that up..no didnt think so.

      Also who said that the trailing slash has anything to do with it , on the contrary the trailing slash imo would be worse than the direct domain, although they are pretty much considered to be the same thing.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1613024].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author askloz
        Actually, its not.

        forward slash is the proper way of typing your links along with http://

        if you type in a domain name without the /, it will put one in there for you. It's telling you that it's searching inside the folder of your domain root level, since your domain name is a folder in itself, which has another folder in it that you contain all your other folders and files.

        and non-www is preferred over www, since it has a higher precedence over www on a SEO perspective.

        Originally Posted by Riverwire View Post

        Who said that www is redundant ? you have any proof to back that up..no didnt think so.

        Also who said that the trailing slash has anything to do with it , on the contrary the trailing slash imo would be worse than the direct domain, although they are pretty much considered to be the same thing.
        Signature
        HEADS UP - EVEN NEWER -->> 27 Dollar FX Systems - Ultimate Golden Cross - FX Signal Book
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1614008].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author carlos123
          Originally Posted by askloz View Post

          and non-www is preferred over www, since it has a higher precedence over www on a SEO perspective.
          I beg to differ on that.

          In my understanding neither has any SEO benefit over the other one. http://www.somedomain.com is just as valid as http://somedomain.com.

          If there is a benefit to be gained either way it is in deciding which one we want Google to recognize as our site in it's index.

          Google considers http://www.somedomain.com and http://somedomain.com to be two different web pages such that our link juice will get divided up between them.

          That's not good.

          In other words if we link to our home page at times with the www. form and other times not Google will assign the backlinks as though there were two different pages being linked to.

          The way around that is to simply pick one form of the url. Doesn't really matter which one.

          Then go into Google Webmaster Tools and set one to be the canonical url that Google will always use to recognize your domain.

          From then on whichever one you pick will be considered the one being pointed to across it's index. Whether you use the www. form or not.

          Again it doesn't matter which form you use when backlinking to your site as long as you are consistent and as long as you tell Google which one you prefer that it recognize you as.

          Carlos
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1614195].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author kindlebitsols
    we can use {ctrl with enter} wafter writting the only site name like write {google} on upper of internet explorer and then hit on {ctrl enter}.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1614143].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author rypher21
    it gives you same site..the issue is just in backlink thingy...so its much better to use 301 redirect..
    Signature
    Business Consulting Services - Kittelson & Carpo Consulting
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1614356].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author srhudson
      Originally Posted by rypher21 View Post

      it gives you same site..the issue is just in backlink thingy...so its much better to use 301 redirect..
      I agree, I think Matt Cutts explains this "Canonical Link Element" quite well in this video:


      It's semi-lengthy but I'm sure it will clear some things up for you.



      Seth
      Signature
      Dream big. Work hard. Have fun.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[1614541].message }}

Trending Topics