Organise Pages

I think the best way would be to sort pages by name and let you organize order with proper naming of pages

You can also use folders to group your pages

Thanks for the reply, don’t have notice it was sort by name, the page I have added actually is by name should be the last

We don't have sorting by name yet. It's just a thought for considering

Haaaaa ok ok lol

But we have folders 🙂

Just have added one for this situation, but maybe until the CMS be done and I maybe need to do some re-work for what I have done

thank you for this 😉

JJohn Siciliano

My short term suggestion for this is to pin Home at the top then organize alphabetically. I think long term it would be nice to reorganize manually though.

isn't a combination of folders + alphabetic enough?

too much flexibility can also hurt

JJohn Siciliano

probably

JJohn Siciliano

folders + alpah + pin home at top

Hmm, alphabetical is a sorting pattern that would never come my mind when thinking of a small site. I would sort by sequence of appearance, without exception.

Thinking of a portfolio, one surely would create folders for categories and pages to present projects. The homepage would be used to show teaser-cards for all – or at least many projects. It gave great guidance while editing, when the folder structure followed what's shown on the screen.

One of the first projects I might recreate in WS is a presentation – similar to slides – about 25 of them. Of course, these slides / pages have a clear sequence and I'd surely force it by numbering pages. I see that you can set H1 and slug independent from page-names – yet manual sorting would be far superior.

Buiding a site architecture with pages and folders

I realize that larger projects should get handled with a CMS. Yet, there may be relatively small sites where your users want to group pages with categories. The current folder approach in WS allows doing this – kind of.

Folders or Categories in WS are indeed just empty directories – they by design cannot hold content on their own. Hiding category pages is often suggested – but in many cases this is a wasted SEO-opportunity.

An unknown photographer in Boston will likely not gain organic traffic from the project pages (some image-heavy case study with a few captions), but the category "Industrial Photography Boston" where you explain your approach (while using local keywords) has good chances to attract visitors.

My point is, that the folder concept in WS – by design – forbids showing these valuable categories. Currently, there's only a hacky way to introduce visible category pages: You avoid folders altogether – and set your hierarchical URL paths manually. In that case, you have no way inside WS to group your pages semantically.

I see two ways for improvement.

a) Remove folders and let us use every page as parent for other pages. That way, you group pages into directories that can hold content. That's slimmer and at the same time more versatile. If you don't want a visible category page, just leave it empty and set that parent-page to NoIndex.

b) Allow us to treat folders as normal pages – but in this case I no longer see the point for folders as a means to build your site architecture. They might still be useful to house content you don't want to have an URL and get published.

Are you talking about overview pages, like /blog vs /blog/my-article?

you can use folders to organize pages just for yourself, without impacting the url - just remove slug on the folder
you can always create a folder "blog" with slug "blog" and all articles would be. /blog/something and for blog overview you would create a page in the root with "/blog" as a path

Category Page
acme.com/boston-industrial-photography/
Page Title and H1: Industrial Photography in Boston
Breadcrumbs: Home > Industrial Photography in Boston

Project page (photography work for some local business)
acme.com/boston-industrial-photography/tyson-sawmill/
Page Title: H1 / Photo Shooting at Tyson Sawmill
Breadcrumbs: Home > Boston Industrial Photography > Tyson Sawmill

The category page is the one you typically want to rank for. It then has to have content on its own. Child pages, such as projects, often cannot rank standalone. Even if they do rank, they will usually not provide your site traffic (as nobody will search for the tyson sawmill in the context of photography).

Well constructed, these case study pages support the statement you make on your category page, occasionally they may grab very niche traffic on their own.

I have seen the option to remove the slug for folders. Yet, that does not solve the problem I describe, as the folder has to remain empty.

What you propose in 2 would work indeed. Yet, can you agree what I propose is simpler – and still would give you the option to create empty directories*?

*leaving away all implementation challenges for now.

The point I'm making: One could improve default SEO-performance with a different nesting structure. What you describe in 2) requires SEO background.

The current setup defaults to creation of sites without categories or hubs. This will make organic ranking harder.