When you redirect a URL you send a status message of 301 Moved Permanently.
Just remember John, you are going to need to maintain these URL's into the future. I made a very bad decision years ago with phpbb2 implementing a very poor URL rewriting scheme, it's poor in that the URL's provide no benefit over the standard URL's for URL text which is the primary benefit if you rewrite. It's been a maintenance nightmare maintaining that to the point I'm still on 3.0.14. If support for that product you are using is dropped in the future you may have an issue especially if phpBB implements their own URL rewriting scheme that is incompatible with your own.John connor wrote: ↑Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:11 amI used that SEO extension and it was a giant cluster F^%$. Not only did it cause problems, but once I removed the extension I was getting a lot of Google not found links. That in its self is bad for SEO. Just don't use it. Use this instead. https://www.inveostore.com/phpbb-seo-extension-40
Does it work really well and is it easy to install?John connor wrote: ↑Thu Aug 10, 2017 8:29 amNo it don't. It's crap and it messed up my forum with all kinds of trouble.
Here's a pro version that I would use. https://www.inveostore.com/phpbb-seo-extension-40
In addition to that I would use the SEO Sitemap extension. https://github.com/LotusJeff/sitemap
It's not for live sites, but I haven't had any trouble.
standard? Is there a pro version or something else too?kaspir wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:24 amNo. Nothing is wrong with the standard phpBB package. What I'm simply saying here is a meta description tag is displayed to humans when the url is shown on search results, therefor enticing human clicks, my definition of being 'used'. And this topic author apparently feels the same way, which is why I offered my post. They see empty descriptions, or ugly ones. Less enticing for human clicks...
Does having a meta name=description help ranking, I believe it will always be debatable.. BECAUSE human clicks does! So yes, I stand on the side of having one, is more helpful than not.
I don't wish to have another SEO debate in a highjacked a topic. You may feel free to PM for further conversation.
But does that extension help?HiFiKabin wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:02 pmunzip the download and open
There you will find the name entry which will be like this
you create a directory using the name from before the / (hifikabin in this case) and name the unzipped download what is after the /
So when you upload to your server you end up with your directory structure like this:-
with all of the extensions files in headerbanner
I wouldn't agree with that either, one of the issues with phpBB is inconsistency in URL's. As I noted previously the f parameter for example, pages being accessed without f parameter should be redirected or get rid of the -f paremaeter.... The other issues most links on the forum use the f parameter yet the canonical URL does not have it.
Clearly it's the most important thing but SEO is not something that should be ignored either.Content.. content.. content.. TELL'EM James!
Not easily automated with a forum, typically it's just the first part of the first post. This is actually something better left to the bot.There IS a butt (i'll keep adding this), I still like my meta descriptions to be filled.. makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside..
So glad you said this!The other issues most links on the forum use the f parameter yet the canonical URL does not have it.
I'm going to need another reason please, any site with a mass of content (like forums!) runs into this issue. Besides, all the information I've read 'from' search engine literature, still points to the direction of letting the engines do the work on dynamic urls. I'm almost certain this advice is shared to the public because it would cause more problems with more webmasters' mistakes. But that last sentence is only 'my' theory.Just to add one of the reasons this is important is you give the bot a clear path to pages and content. Less resources for both the bot and your server, more content indexed or reindexed.
It IS easy to auto-generate a topic meta description, I have already done so back in FEB 2017, and shared the core edits with Dmzx, so I know he can confirm. It's NOT easy making the extension (at least for me lol). Over the past few months, I have done my best to build n extension to share this element with others. I believe John Conner is testing it out now among others, and I have it running/working on two sites. both 3.2.x, sorry all you 3.1 people, GO UPGRADE, meow!Not easily automated with a forum, typically it's just the first part of the first post. This is actually something better left to the bot.
The canonical URL has nothing do with meta descriptions. A canonical URL is meta tag that tells the bot what is the base URL when the same content can be accessed with different URL's.kaspir wrote: ↑Sat Aug 19, 2017 6:25 amSo glad you said this!The other issues most links on the forum use the f parameter yet the canonical URL does not have it.
Well, I have not yet seen a fresh phpBB package display any meta descriptions yet for 'topic urls', so not sure about what we are letting phpBB do there, if anything?! Inconsistency in URL's is a needed, no? This is why titles don't end up as duplicate urls to your site. That's NOT something you want to let up to the author, choosing the url!?
Code: Select all
I'm going to need another reason please, any site with a mass of content (like forums!) runs into this issue.
Bots can handle it but again if you are providing clear and direct paths to the content they don't have to. It's much more efficient for the bot to already have the URL's you want indexed, less wasted resources, more content indexed or reindexedBesides, all the information I've read 'from' search engine literature, still points to the direction of letting the engines do the work on dynamic urls.
Currently yes I am but as already mentioned this was very poor implementation going back to phpBB2. I have clear path but the URL's themselves are not using text that is human readable. It's been very problematic maintaining this through the years. This forum is getting moved to another domain within a week and I'll be redirecting to the stardard phpBB URL's to rid myself of this maintenance nightmare.Question for you coalman, do you rewrite your urls on your phpBB install?
NEPA here.:waves: to my fellow pennslyvanian! I'm near the burg coalman!
Like I said I'm going with the standard phpBB URL's with some minor modifications. It's just easier...EDIT2: I went for another cup of coffee and thought more about what you said. I like solutions better than none, so what about this for a starter solution. What if one were to rewrite for just forum categories, that would clearly give you a 'friendly url' for just the viewforum.php?f=1 into domain.com/category-name/ (since it's something the webmaster will control).
You add the the topic ID.Either way, I clearly don't understand how you wouldn't eventually end up with duplicates without a dynamic url for topics.
Code: Select all
You should read the README file with the package and follow what it says.
My implementation goes back to phpBB2 before the -f parameter was introduced in phpBB3. As I said it's poor implementation because it doesn't add human readable link text to the URL. The only real benefit of having this over the years is my site is well indexed with very clean URL's.
The only thing I'll be doing is making simple edits to the core files to make sure all URL's include the f- parameter and redirect any requests to the url with the -f parameter that do not.And you're actually switching back you say? I'm interested in your 'minor modification'! Already thinking about a routing solution for this to add to extension.