Www v.s non www
-
The canonical URLs (and all our link building efforts) is on the www version of the site.
However, the site is having a massive technical problem and need to redirect some links (some of which are very important) from the www to the non www version of the site (for these pages the canonical link is still the www version).
How big of a SEO problem is this?
Can you please explain the exact SEO dangers?
Thanks!
-
Thanks for all your responses - I will use this as the basis of my answer to the technical team.
-
I'm endorsing Stephen's idea, because if you really have no choice, I think it's a good potential alternative. THB's comments (which I thumbed up) are very important, though.
If you really have no choice, I do think the 302 is safer here - the canonical tag should override it. There is some risk, though, and it's definitely not ideal.
I'm not clear on the problem, but could you return a 503? It basically says "We've got a temporary problem - come back later" and, if it really is temporary, Google won't de-index the pages. If you're talking a couple of days, this may be a better solution. If you're talking a few weeks, you may have to take Stephen's advice. You might want to pull in expert help, though, because my gut reaction is that there's a better way to fix what's broken here.
-
Hehe.
Generally speaking, and I've actually come across this quite a bit lately, it's better to just put your efforts towards fixing the technical issues than to try and manipulate the site using redirects and canonical tags. But it's easy to say when it's not my technical problem, nor my money/time on the line to fix it! However, that is always the best-case scenario in my opinion.
-
Agreed. It's a problem waiting to bite you in the proverbials....
-
I worry about setting up a canonical tag that points to a URL Google can't access (as it's just being redirected via 302 back to the non-www version anytime it will try and read the canonical URL). And since a canonical tag is kinda sorta like a 301, you'd ultimately be 301'ing (kinda sorta) back to the www version, only to have a 302 header sent, 302'ing Google back to the non-www. And endless loop, so-to-speak. I'm not sure how Google would handle this.
How about just working 24/7 to resolve the "technical problem" that is causing this? I know, easy for me to say
-
I'm no expert on this but I think you'll be fine IF you:
1 - 302 redirect (temporary redirect) to the non-www page
2 - Add a rel canonical on the non-www page giving the WWW version link credit.
When you've fixed your tech issues remove the 302 redirect.
I THINK google will play nice on this.
Hope that helps
Steve
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Worth redirecting non-www to www due to higher page authority with www?
When checking my domain I receive higher page authority for www vs non-www. I am considering moving to the www url and applying the necessary redirections but wanted to quickly check if this is worth it. The root page authority https://www.diveidc.com : PA 40 https://diveidc.com : PA 35 By redirecting would I just be transferring over negative signals to the www domain, thus voiding the point for doing any redirect at all?
Technical SEO | | MAGNUMCreative0 -
Community Discussion - What's been your experience with accessibility?
When Laura Lippay came to me with the idea to write a series of posts on the Moz blog about SEO and accessibility, it really got my gears turning. As the blog manager, I realized I'd been thinking about all sorts of ways to make the blog the best it can be, but accessibility was one place I had yet to explore in-depth. While I have my own goals and projects around this topic churning along in the background, I'd love to hear what the community's done to be inclusive to all users of the Internet. What've you struggled with in terms of making sites you've worked on accessible -- both technically and as an initiative in general? What's often missing that you've become passionate about including? Do you have any big wins you're especially proud of and want to share? Looking forward to reading your thoughts and stories, folks! 🙂
Technical SEO | | FeliciaCrawford1 -
Is it a Panda/Penguin hit? Or it's just a natural ranking drop?
My traffic comes from google. This is the traffic profile. Does it look like a Panda or Penguin hit? I have a hard time determining it myself. Thanks. ne0r7kg.png
Technical SEO | | ChelseaP0 -
Google PR Rank Question (s)
Hi
Technical SEO | | damientown
My Google PR rank is still 1/10 (www.abouttownmarketing.com) after 12 weeks of daily SEO work building what I thought were quality back links. Does anyone know how often Google updates its PR rank? Also is it a linear measure or link adwords quality score is it exponential?
Many thanks
Damien0 -
Pagination V Canonical
Hi Guys, I am needing some help with regards to duplicate page content issues. Using Zen Cart on an ecommerce platform and it is bringing up duplicate page content on pages. For instance:- http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/ is the same as:- http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/?sort=20a&page=1 Rel=Prev/Next as I understand it will treat http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/?sort=20a&page=1 http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/?sort=20a&page=2 http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/?sort=20a&page=3 as one page but won't solve the issue of the duplicate content issues between:- http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/ and http://www.blissfulkidsparties.com.au/store/1st-birthday-themes-barnyard-bash-1st-birthday-c-67_321/?sort=20a&page=1 am I better using rel=Canonical here instead??? Kind Regards Neil
Technical SEO | | jazzah0 -
When doing the ranking report I see my site showing up on google with out the www in front. So the report is not picking it up how do I fix that?
The ranking report is not picking up my site even though it's there. It would seem that the www. Is missing from the site on google so it's not registering in the report. How do i fix this?
Technical SEO | | ursalesguru0 -
Website's stability and it's affect on SEO
What is the best way to combat previous website stability issues? We had page load time and site stability problems over the course of several months. As a result our keyword rankings plummeted. Now that the issues have been resolved, what's the best/quickest way to regain our rankings on specific keywords? Thanks, Eric
Technical SEO | | MediaCause0 -
Using hyphenated sub-domains or non-hyphenated sub-domains? What is the question! I Any takers?
For our corporate business level domain, we are exploring using a hyphenated sub-domain foir a project. Something like www.go-figure.extreme.com I thought from a user perspective it seems cluttered. The domain length might also be an issue with the new Algorithm big G has launched in recent past. I know with past experience, hyphenated domains usually take longer to index, as they are used by spammers more frequently and can take longer to get out of the supplementary index. Our company site has over 90 million viewers / year, so our brand is well established and traffic isn't an issue. This is for a corporate level project and I didn't have the answer! Will this work? anyone have any experience testing this. Any thoughts will help! Thanks, Rob
Technical SEO | | RobMay0