High Temporary Redirects: Login required pages
-
Noticed something interesting, a high temporary redirect report from Moz. Reviewing the pages they are caused by the user having to login and getting redirected.
I can see the returnto query in the URL too. My thoughts:
- Since a login is required and the user is being redirected, these should remain 302 and not 301.
- I tested my Google Analytics account to **Exclude URL Query Parameter **returnto, just to see if it affected traffic. It didn't, I mean I don't see urls duplicated with the parameter anymore, just grouped together, so traffic is still being counted.
I'm going to wait 1 more day and see what impact the GA traffic is before applying the exclusion to my true Google Analytics profile.
This got me thinking, I should probably exclude this parameter from Google and Bing Webmaster Tools, that way Google/bing won't read those urls.
Now does Moz's crawler follow that? Do you think that would change my moz crawl diagnostic report because I told Google/Bing crawlers to exclude that parameter.
What do you think of my approach to reduce these high temporary redirects reported by Moz? Will it work? Has it plagued you?
-
It isn't defined in robots.txt, just google webmaster tools, bing, and Google Analytic settings.
I guess mentioning it in the robots.txt should allow ANY bot to ignore it.
Thanks Don
-
Hi Cyto,
Do you have the parameter blocked using robots.txt?
user-agent: * disallow: /*returnto That would seem like the easiest fix to me
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
-
SEO Effect of inserting No indexed Contents in normal Pages (Nextgen Gallery)
Hello Dear Community, I'm running a photography website and have a question about the indexability of "No indexed Content" inserted on indexable pages. Background : I read everywhere that best practice is to "no index" all useless pages with few content, what I did with Yoast plugin : I no indexed all my nextgen galleries and "ngg_tags" since they create single pages for every photo, tags or slideshow. I did the same for all my porfolio-posts, price lists, testimonials and so on... Nevertheless, I inserted these galleries and portfolios on SEO optimized page for my target keywords. + Nextgen plugin automatically adds these images in the page sitemap. My idea is to have only my Seo optimized page showing in Google and not the others. Problem: I've been checking the results in Google Search Console, filtering by images : I discovered that most of the images featured in these Masonry galleries are not showing in google, and actually almost all the images indexed are the Wordpress from media gallery. I double checked with Screaming Frog, and the software doesn"t see images on these pages. My question is: Is the low indexablilty of these contents are related to the No indexation of the original contents ??? Does somebody has experienced the same issue that these contents doesn't show on Google ? in advance many thanks for your help
Reporting & Analytics | | TristanAventure0 -
UTM Links Showing Up as Separate Pages in Google Analytics
Hey everyone, I was just looking at landing pages in Google Analytics, and in addition to just the URL of the landing page, the UTM links are being listed as separate pages. Is this normal? I anticipated seeing the landing page URL and then using the secondary dimension to see source/medium. If this isn't normal, what would I check next?
Reporting & Analytics | | rachelmeyer0 -
High Bounce Rate on traffic generating area of our site
Hi, Our eCommerce site currently includes a blog section known as Igloo which we have filled with unique and helpful content that is useful to a fair few people, not just customers of ours. It currently attracts a large number of visitors (more than the actual eCommerce side of the site in actual fact) organically who aren't currently customers of ours. Very few of these turn in to paying clients so it's not really a money spinner but it has worked quite well from a linkbait perspective / traffic generation perspective and undoubtedly a few of these people do end up making a purchase on the actual shopping end of our site. We're look at ways to encourage these people finding help on this free resource to take a look at our homepage and hopefully make an order but in the meantime I am worried that there may be a few downsides to us creating this content: Google may see us more as a help site than a shopping site. Since selling products is where we make our money this could ultimately be a bad thing. Our bounce rate is REALLY high (I'm talking around 94%) on the help site versus around 20% on the eCommerce site. I guess people land on the article they want, read it and then disappear. Would this bounce rate skew our entire site stats and ultimately result in decreased performance in the SERPS. I would appreciate your opinions and, in the event you do feel it may be hurting us overall perhaps some suggestions on how to mitigate the effects? Many thanks!
Reporting & Analytics | | ChrisHolgate0 -
How to not track mobile redirects in Google Analytics
If a user is on a mobile device and comes to our home page, http://www.darden.virginia.edu/web/Home/ they are redirected to http://m.darden.virginia.edu/web/Home/. We want a way to remove all the redirects from our Google analytics reports. More specifically we do not want to include the the page view of http://www.darden.virginia.edu/web/Home/ in our page view count when the user is on a mobile device. How do we do that?
Reporting & Analytics | | Darden0 -
404 errors on page urls that don't even exist
I am getting a lot of errors on pages with urls that aren't even legit. Like for example: /videos/support/index.asp No such path even exists like this on the site. I have a /videos and /support off root but no place on the site is there any reference or file at location /videos/support/index.asp so I get a lot of 404 duplicate page errors. This is just one example of several. How do I stop this?
Reporting & Analytics | | GKLWL0 -
Calculating page visit duration for bounced visits?
IS there any way on Google Analytics to calculate page visit duration for bounced visits? if so, what would need to be done?
Reporting & Analytics | | offthemaptravels0 -
Correlation between google and yahoo indexed pages
My blog ocpatentlawyer.com has about 130 pages or so. Google has indexed most if not all of the posts and pages. In contrast, yahoo has only indexed about 1/4 of the pages and posts. Are there any actions that can be taken based on this information? For example, if i prepare a blog post should I prepare it so that it will most likely be indexed into yahoo knowing that google will also index it. If so, how can i prepare blog posts that will most likely be indexed into yahoo's index?
Reporting & Analytics | | jamesjd70 -
301 redirects reduce traffic considerably
I recently identified an issue with our site whereby we had three different URL types for each article. As an example, we might have something like: /articles/my-article-name /articles/my-article-name.aspx /articles/My-Article-Name We've since taken action to address this by implement 301 redirects from the second and third formats to the first (so everything is without the .aspx extension and is in lower case). But the results have been disconcerting. Before the change, one of our articles receives 150 or so hits per day via the .aspx version. The other two existed but had very low traffic (1-3 per day). We decided the non .aspx and lowercase version was the version we wanted. Sure enough, when we introduced the 301 redirects on September 25th the traffic for the .aspx version just stopped (after a day) and the traffic for the non-.aspx version climbed. But not enough. After the change, the non-.aspx version is receiving about 60-70% of the traffic that we used to have on the .aspx version. So, instead of receiving 150 per day (to the .aspx version) we are receiving around 100 or so to the non-.aspx version. This pattern has occured across all our articles and, as a result, our site-wide traffic has dropped by about 40% or so. Since we are using 301 redirects I had assumed that the search engines would just update to reflect the non-.aspx version. I am sure I am missing something here. Any help would be most appreciated. Thanks. Mark
Reporting & Analytics | | MarkWill0