I have consolidated my subdomains into subfolders; should i remove the subdomains also?
-
Hi,
I have consolidated my website's many sub-domains into sub-folders. We had ~20 sub-domains. The sub-domains and the root domain shared the same code-base and sub-domain specific features were controlled using Apache's SetEnv directive in the httpd.conf includes.
Now they are consolidated. I have redirected all of the sub-domains to the relevant sub-folder; so http://sub1.mysite.com now 301 redirects to http://www.mysite.com/sub1.The redirects happen in the htaccess file and all sub-domains and the root are still pointing to the same code-base.
However, the Moz campaign tracker still occasionally tells me that i have optimisation opportunities at http://sub1.mysite.com and in both Bing and Google webmaster tools traffic to those sub-domains is mentioned.
Should i delete the subdomains?
Cheers
-
Robots.txt! That makes sense. I'll do that.
Thanks for your response.
-
If everything is redirecting properly, you shouldn't have an issue, and the subdomain still being present will actually be helpful to any folks with an outdated link or bookmark.
You may want to add noindex to the pages on those subdomains, or block them with robots.txt. Over time, that would get them out of the search results in favor of the new, up-to-date subfolders. Removing them, though, isn't necessary.
-
Hi Jimmy,
Thanks for responding and for the advice. When i hit the old sub-domain with Screaming Frog i get 301 moved permanently and nothing further is crawled. I Frog-crawled a number of the old URLs and they are all redirecting correctly with 301s. It looks like there is no duplicate content but i am still a bit uneasy that the old sub-domain shows up in Moz and the webmaster tools..
-
Hi,
To avoid any duplicate content, not having the subdomains is the safest way to do so.
Check the subdomains with something like the screaming frog, for what is returned, if there is content then you will need to redirect that content.
Kind Regards
Jimmy
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
-
Moving E-Commerce Store to Subdomain?
Hi all, We have a customer who currently uses Square for their in-store point-of-sale system as well as for their e-commerce website. From my understanding, a Square site is a watered-down version of Weebly, and is proving to be highly restrictive from an SEO and content structuring standpoint. It's been an uphill battle to try and get traction for their site in SERPs. Would it be a bad idea to move the entire Square online store to a subdomain, and install WordPress on the root domain? This way their online store would remain as-is, but the primary pages on the site would be on WordPress which would give us a lot more control over the content. I just want to make sure this doesn't negatively impact their SEO. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | suarezventures0 -
Client suffered a malware attack. Removed links not being crawled by Google!
Hi all, My client suffered a malware attack a few weeks ago where an external site somehow created 700 plus links on my clients site with their content. I removed all of the content and redirected the pages to the home page. I then created a new temporary xml sitemap with those 700 links and submitted the sitemap to Google 9 days ago. Google has crawled the sitemap a few times but not the individual links. When I click on the crawl report for the sitemap in GSC, I see that the individual links still have the last crawled date from before they were removed. So in Googles eyes, that old malicioud content still exists. What do I do to ensure Google knows the contnt is gone and redirected? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | sk19900 -
Rich Snippet Date Removal
Hey Mozzers, I'm having a real problem getting some rich snippet data to go away! Normally i'm all for it, but in this case it's giving our department page a video rich snippet and also a really super old date (i'm not sure if this is connected with the video rich snippet, but it showed up at the same time). The SERP is here: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pool+table&pws=0&hl=en&num=10 We are 3rd for our page http://www.libertygames.co.uk/store/pool_tables/ I can't find the date Google is using anywhere on the page, in the headers or file dates or anything. I've even removed the video markup and removed the page from the video sitemap, the rich snippet testing tool confirms this : http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.libertygames.co.uk%2Fstore%2Fpool_tables%2F Does anyone have any ideas why this might be showing up or if there is a way to speed up getting it off there and our old meta description back? I'm pretty sure it's killing our click-throughs. Thanks in advance, Stuart
Technical SEO | | stukerr0 -
Should I consider webmaster tools links and linked pages ratio to remove unnatural links?
I don't know this is a suitable place for post this question. Anyway I have done it. According to the Google webmaster tools, Links to your site page. My blog has considerable amount of links, from linked pages (from certain domain names). For an instance please refer following screenshot. When I am removing unnatural links, should I consider these, links from linked pages ratio? Almost all of these sites are social bookmarking sites. When I publish a new bookmark on those sites, they automatically add a homepage link. As a result of that, I got a huge number of home page links from linked pages. What is your recommendation? Thanks! webmaster.png web_master_tools.png
Technical SEO | | Godad0 -
I am cleaning up a clients link profile and am coming across a lot of directories (no surprise) My question is if an obvious fre for all generic directory doesn't look to have been hit by any updates is it a wise move recommending tit for removal?
I am cleaning up a clients link profile and am coming across a lot of directories (no surprise) My question is, if an obvious free for all generic directory doesn't look to have been hit by any updates is it a wise move recommending it for removal on the basis that it is a free for all directory and could be hit in teh future?
Technical SEO | | fazza470 -
Can SEOMoz crawl a single page as oppose to an entire subfolder?
I would like the following page to be crawled: http://www.ob.org/_programs/water/water_index.asp Instead, SEOMoz changes the page to the following subfolder which is an invalid url: http://www.ob.org/_programs/water/
Technical SEO | | OBIAnalytics0 -
Having trouble removing homepage from google
For various reasons my client wants their homepage removed from google, no just the content of the page off but the page not to be indexed (yep strange request but we are mere service providers) today I requested in webmaster tool that default.asp was removed. Wht says done but the sites homepage is still listed. The page also has a no index tag on but 24 hours and 18k Google bot hits later it still remains. Anyone got any other suggestions to deindex just the homepage asap please
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Redirected Subdomain Development URLs Showing In SERPs?
I develop client websites within a subdomain of another website (with noindex, nofollow so that incomplete websites on the wrong domains aren't ever seen by web users). Then, when we launch a client's site on their own domain, we redirect all of the development URLS to the appropriate page on the new live site. (meaning at site launch, all pages on http://client-site.developersite.com would be set to 301 redirect to identical pages pages on http://www.client-site.com). This system has always seemed to work fine, but today I discovered 94,700 pages indexed by Google on my root domain and found that these were mostly old URLs of sites in development that redirect to the actual client sites. Many are several years old. Any idea why Google would be indexing these pages? Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | VTDesignWorks0