Sitemap Question - Should I exclude or make a separate sitemap for Old URL's
-
So basically, my website is very old... 1995 Old. Extremely old content still shows up when people search for things that are outdated by 10-15+ years , I decided not to drop redirects on some of the irrelevant pages. People still hit the pages, but bounce...
I have about 400 pages that I don't want to delete or redirect. Many of them have old backlinks and hold some value but do interfere with my new relevant content.
If I dropped these pages into a sitemap, set the priority to zero would that possibly help? No redirects, content is still valid for people looking for it, but maybe these old pages don't show up above my new content?
Currently the old stuff is excluded from all sitemaps.. I don't want to make one and have it make the problem worse. Any advise is appreciated.
Thx
-
Sending you a PM
-
You are welcome!
Still get that traffic in the move It's free traffic, try to make the most out of it. Find the best way to point them in the direction you need them to go always keeping an eye in being as friendly and natural as possible.
-
Good plan actually, I appreciate it. I dev'd my own sitemap script but agree xml-sitemaps works great. I suggest that to friends & clients needing an easy solution.
Giving the analytics... I did't want to update roughly 400 pages. However, you handed me my resolution... I'll wrap the old pages with my up to date header/footer & just make some banners that direct traffic to the updated website.
Note: Making a basketball/shoe analogy... Just assume I'm selling Nike Shoes & traffic lands on my 1995,1996,1997 etc Charles Barkley pages. I don't sell shoes, and my query reports & analytics show people arent searching for Barkley but because of the age and trust of my page, engines still point them there.
Anyway, I appreciate it a lot. Over complicated things this time !
-
I don't think messing with your sitemap will work. Google serves what they think is better to the user, even if it is old content.
You have several options here to go for:
- Make a full sitemap automatically that will assign priority automatically like the one provided by xml-sitemaps.com (incredible software in my personal opinion and well worth the money).
- Update the content on those pages you say it's outdated. I think Google prefers serving pages that have huge value instead of "new", therefore, updating the content of those pages may decrease your bounce rate.
- While on the old pages, link to the new posts that include the new info. You can even put something like "This content is outdated, for the up-to-date version, click here" and link to the most appropriate new page, you keep the page, no 301s and pass some juice to the new page.
I think the best would be to use the 1st and 2nd options in conjunction. Or 1st and 3rd if the content of the "old" pages have something that updating them will loose their value.
In any case, I wouldn't leave pages out of the sitemap. The software I mentioned automatically assigns priority as to "how deep the page is in your site" (links it needed to follow to reach that page, older pages will surely need more clicks to reach to them).
Hope that helps.
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's Better Ads Chrome update: will it affect email pop-ups?
Chrome will be blocking ads on websites that are not compliant with the Better Ads standards as of Feb 15. Could not find any clues whether a pop-up (not an ad) asking for your email is included in this? We currently have a pop-up that appears on exit intent only (which is not penalized). Any ideas?
Algorithm Updates | | ati10 -
Why do some URLs display in the SERPS with > seperators between subfolders, and others display with a /
Why do some URLs display like this: cargurus.com › Used Cars › Jeep Wrangler and others display like https://www.carmax.com/cars/jeep/wrangler Is there a significance to having the sub folders separated with an arrow vs a backslash?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Owens_10 -
How is this possible? #2 ranking with NO on-page keywords, no backlinks, no sitemap...
Hi everybody. I have a question ... I'm totally stumped. This question is being asked today (November 16th, 2015) just after Google updated something in their algorithm. Nobody seems to know what they did. and it has something to do with the new "Rank Brain" system they're now using. My niche is Logo Design Software (https://www.thelogocreator.com). I had the keywords "logo creator" on the page roughly 7 times. After Google updated, I lost about 10 spots and as of this writing, I've dropped to #15. So, maybe I over optimized. fine. Noticing that for the keyword "logo creator" ... NONE of the top 14 spots actually have "logo creator" in their page title and NONE of them have more that 2 instances (if any) of the keyword "logo creator" on the actual page. So I removed ALL instances of my keyword "logo creator" from my home page - used the Webmaster's Fetch Tool and moved up a few spots instantly. So what the heck? And the #2 spot for that keyword is www.logomakr.com - they have NO words at all on their pages, no blog, no sitemap and far fewer links than anybody in the top 10. Can anybody reading this shed some light? Marc Marc Sylvester
Algorithm Updates | | Laughingbird
Laughingbird Software0 -
Does Bing Support same sitemap for full site, mobile, and images?
We have 1 sitemap for our desktop site, mobile site, and images. This works for Google, but I'm not sure if it's supported by Bing or if they require separate sitemaps. Anyone know?
Algorithm Updates | | YairSpolter0 -
Are you still seeing success with EMD's?
I am curious if any other SEO's are still seeing success with exact matching domains. I am not seeing ANY changes to any of my clients rankings since the "Exact Match Domain" filter came about in September. Also while I have conducted SERP audits in my neck of the woods I am noticing EMD's are still doing very well. What are you seeing?
Algorithm Updates | | clarktbell0 -
How long does it take for a new website to start showing in the SERP'S
I launched my website about 6 weeks ago. It was indexed fairly quickly. But it is not showing up in the Google SERP. I did do the on page SEO and followed the best practise's for my website. I have also been checking webmaster tools and it tells me that there is no errors with my site. I also ran it through the seomoz on page seo analyzer and again no real big issues. According to seomoz I had 1 duplicate content issue with my blog posts, which i corrected. I understand it takes some time, but any ideas of how much time? And f.y.i it's a Canadian website. So it should be a lot easier to rank as well. Could my site be caught in the Google 'sandbox effect' ? Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated.
Algorithm Updates | | CurtCarroll0 -
Why some results in SERP have a www. and some don't
Hello all, If this is posted twice, I didn't mean for it to be - but it looks like last time I tried to post this question it didn't post. This is my question: How come some results on Google's SERP page are shown with a "www" and some are not? Does this effect SEO at all? I am including a screen shot so you can see what I mean. The Geary Interactive result has a "www" in front of while ingenexdigital doesn't. R6GLL.png
Algorithm Updates | | digitalops0 -
Google changing case of URLs in SERPs?
Noticed some strange behavior over the last week or so regarding our SERPs and I haven't been able to find anything on the web about what might be happening. Over the past two weeks, I've been seeing our URLs slowly change from upper case to lower case in the SERPs. Our URLs are usually /Blue-Fuzzy-Widgets.htm but Google has slowly been switching them to /blue-fuzzy-widgets.htm. There has been no change in our actual rankings nor has it happened to anyone else in the space. We're quite dumbfounded as to why Google would choose to serve the lower case URL. To be clear, we do not build links to these lower case URLs, only the upper. Any ideas what might be happening here?
Algorithm Updates | | Natitude0