SEO Tycoon

**TWD** · 05:42 AM

The reason i say is because WordPress has to pull it's content from several sub-folders deep.

The file that controls my site theme is at:

www.mydomain.com/ blog/ wp-content/ themes/ default/ index.php

It seems like a long way for search engines to dig

?

By comparison the path to the same as a static page:

www.mydomain.com/index.php

Most SEO "experts" warn against burying content too deeply so I was really wondering if WordPress content is at a disadvantage vis a vis the same content presented in static format.

Opinions?

**chrishirst** · 03-03-2009, 06:29 AM

Nope. pages are pages are pages. What matters is the CLICK DEPTH not the site structure.

If a URI is 10 folders deep and is linked from the "home" page it has the same "importance" as a page in the root folder that is linked from the "home" page.
For SEs BTW the "home" page is actually any page they can enter the site through, so if you have a very big site, having HTML section maps (a REAL site map of each section) linked from the "home" page can benefit the site crawling greatly.

And unfortunately, most SEO "experts" don't have a clue what they are prattling on about.

**TWD** · 03-03-2009, 08:02 AM

Makes sense. thanks!

**tehfincheh** · 03-03-2009, 07:23 PM

The file that controls your site's theme in Wordpress isn't the same URL that Google will be referencing the content to.

It's a dynamic template...

In any case, I'd say that static pages offer better opportunities for good SEO purely because they're entirely customizable whereas a CMS is often - but not always - restricted in the quality of code it can output.

That said, Wordpress kicks the good crap out of most other CMS solutions when it comes to SEO. It's a brilliant system and you won't have any trouble ranking with it.