Should I worry about these 404's?
-
Just wondering what the thought was on this.
We have a site that lets people generate user profiles and once they delete the profile the page then 404's. I was told there is nothing we can do about those from our developers, but I was wondering if I should worry about these...I don't think they will affect any of our rankings, but you never know so I thought I would ask.
Thanks
-
Kate, Chenzo is right re the 404 but you are likely not getting any real juice from a profile page. That said, a 302 is a temp redirect and does not convey juice. To me, I do not see a reason to do a 301. You could use either.
-
I'll see what they tell me. Sometimes it's difficult because they wont let me into the CPANEL for whatever reason.
-
Thanks for some reason they told me they can't fix it, but I kind of figured there had to be a way to fix those 404's. I'll send them over a couple of ideas and see what they tell me.
Thanks
-
I agree with Robert here Kate -
Keep in mind a 404 is like being placed in a room without any doors or windows.
The link juice stops and so do the bots.
It would be best to re-direct them and or take them down.
You could also implement a site wide script that can populate a landing page when a member has been removed vs a 404 error.
your pal
Chenzo
-
Can your developers instead put a 302 redirect that goes to the same page that says,,, this member profile does not exist?
Seems simple, unless you have a vast membership.
Would love to see other answers.
Robert
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
-
Google Search Console 'Change of Address' Just 301s on source domain?
Hi all. New here, so please be gentle. 🙂 I've developed a new site, where my client also wanted to rebrand from .co.nz to .nz On the source (co.nz) domain, I've setup a load of 301 redirects to the relevant new page on the new domain (the URL structure is changing as well).
Technical SEO | | WebGuyNZ
E.G. On the old domain: https://www.mysite.co.nz/myonlinestore/t-shirt.html
In the HTACCESS on the old/source domain, I've setup 301's (using RewriteRule).
So that when **https://www.mysite.co.nz/**myonlinestore/t-shirt.html is accessed, it does a 301 to;
https://mysite.nz/shop/clothes/t-shirt All these 301's are working fine. I've checked in dev tools and a 301 is being returned. My question is, is having the 301's just on the source domain only enough, in regards to starting a 'Change of Address' in Google's Search Console? Their wording indicates it's enough but I'm concerned, maybe I also need redirects on the target domain as well? I.E. Does the Search Console Change of Address process work this way?
It looks at the source domain URL (that's already in Google's index), sees the 301 then updates the index (and hopefully pass the link juice) to the new URL. Also, I've setup both source and target Search Console properties as Domain Properties. Does that mean I no longer need to specify that the source and target properties are HTTP or HTTPS? I couldn't see that option when I created the properties. Thanks!0 -
Google's ability to crawl AJAX rendered content
I would like to make a change to the way our main navigation is currently rendered on our e-commerce site. Currently, all of the content that appears when you click a navigation category is rendering on page load. This is currently a large portion of every page visit’s bandwidth and even the images are downloaded even if a user doesn’t choose to use the navigation. I’d like to change it so the content appears and is downloaded only IF the user clicks on it, I'm planning on using AJAX. As that is the case it wouldn’t not be automatically on the site(which may or may not mean Google would crawl it). As we already provide a sitemap.xml for Google I want to make sure this change would not adversely affect our SEO. As of October this year the Webmaster AJAX crawling doc. suggestions has been depreciated. While the new version does say that its crawlers are smart enough to render AJAX content, something I've tested, I'm not sure if that only applies to content injected on page load as opposed to in click like I'm planning to do.
Technical SEO | | znotes0 -
301ing 404's
Hey guys, I am currently in the process of redirecting some of my 404 pages to pages like my home page. Before I do that, I am assessing the link value of the 404 pages. My question is what do you do with the 404 pages which appear to have low quality links, do you really want to redirect them to an important page on your site? What should I do with these 404 pages? CheersAdam
Technical SEO | | Adamshowbiz0 -
Unused url 'A' contains frameset - can it damage the other site B?
Client has an old unused site 'A' which I've discovered during my backlink research. It contains this source code below which frames the client's 'proper' site B inside the old unused url A in the browser address. Quick question - will google penalise the website B which is the one I'm optimising? Should the client be using a redirect instead? <frameset <span class="webkit-html-attribute-name">border='0' frameborder='0' framespacing='0'></frameset <span> <frame src="http: www.clientwebsite.co.ukb" frameborder="0" noresize="noresize" scrolling="yes"></frame src="http:> Please go to http://www.clientwebsite.co.ukB <noframes></noframes> Thanks, Lu.
Technical SEO | | Webrevolve0 -
Internet Explorer and Chrome showing different SERP's
Well the title says it all really. Same query, different browsers, same computer and different search results. I thought at first it may have differed because I was logged into my google profile on chrome but I logged out and tested and still different results. Is this normal ?
Technical SEO | | blinkybill0 -
Moz Reporting Incorrect 404's
Hi Guys SEOMoz is telling me that we have 191 404 errors f. I have checked this with several other crawlers and this not the case. For example, http://www.opticalexpress.co.uk/eyecare/corporate-savings.html%0D%0A2027 But correct links its http://www.opticalexpress.co.uk/eyecare/corporate-savings.html which is fine... We have no record of these links so why is it appending these characters at the end of the URL which is causing the 404's....
Technical SEO | | EwanFisher0 -
301'ing googlebot
I have a client that has been 301’ing googlebot to the canonical page. This is because they have a cart_id and session parameters in urls. This is mainly from when googlebot comes in on a link that has these parameters in the URL, as they don’t serve these parameters up to googlebot at all once it starts to crawl the site.
Technical SEO | | AlanMosley
I am worried about cloaking; I wanted to know if anyone has any info on this.
I know that Google have said that doing anything where you detect goolgebots useragent and treat them different is a problem.
Anybody had any experience on this, I would be glad to hear.0 -
Does 'framing' a website create duplicate content?
Something I have not come across before, but hope others here are able offer advice based on experience: A client has independently created a series of mini-sites, aimed at targeting specific locations. The tactic has worked very well and they have achieved a large amount of well targeted traffic as a result. Each mini-site is different but then in the nav, if you want to view prices or go to the booking page, that then links to what at first appears to be their main site. However, you then notice that the URL is actually situated on the mini-site. What they have done is 'framed' the main site so that it appears exactly the same even when navigating through this exact replica site. Checking the code, there is almost nothing there - in fact there is actually no content at all. Below the head, there is a piece of code: <frameset rows="*" framespacing=0 frameborder=0> <frame src="[http://www.example.com](view-source:http://www.yellowskips.com/)" frameborder=0 marginwidth=0 marginheight=0> <noframes>Your browser does not support frames. Click [here](http://www.example.com) to view.noframes> frameset> Given that main site content does not appear to show in the source code, do we have an issue with duplicate content? This issue is that these 'referrals' are showing in Analytics, despite the fact that the code does not appear in the source, which is slightly confusing for me. They have done this without consultation and I'm very concerned that this could potentially be creating duplicate content of their ENTIRE main site on dozens of mini-sites. I should also add that there are no links to the mini-sites from the main site, so if you guys advise that this is creating duplicate content, I would not be worried about creating a link-wheel if I advise them to link directly to the main site rather than the framed pages. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | RiceMedia0