Can I redirect a link even if the link is still on the site
-
Hi Folks,
I've got a client who has a duplicate content because they actually create duplicate content and store the same piece of content in 2 different places.
When they generate this duplicate content, it creates a 2nd link on the site going to the duplicate content. Now they want the 2nd link to always redirect to the first link, but for architecture reasons, they can't remove the 2nd link from the site navigation.
We can't use rel-canonical because they don't want visitors going to that 2nd page.
Here is my question: Are there any adverse SEO implications to maintaining a link on a site that always redirects to a different page?
I've already gone down the road of "don't deliberately create duplicate content" with the client. They've heard me, but won't change.
So, what are your thoughts?
Thanks!
-
Are you using a CMS, or some inhouse solution? If it is a CMS, in many cases you should be able to update that CMS so that the 2 links are generated but the page itself isn't generated twice.
Another option if 2 pages must exist, would be to set a canonical on both pages to the 1 main location for the content, while using a pushstate on the url to manipulate the browser into the main pathing. Although the more I think about that one, it may not be a 100% viable option.
-
I agree - but as with many things, there's politics involved. . . . . I'll leave it at that.
-
Although, depending on Craig's site structure, it could be a simple, one-time set up of the htaccess so all Link 2's 301 to the Link 1's.
For example, if when creating website.com/category1/product1, it also creates a duplicate page on /category2/product1, he could use regex so that all products under /category2/ redirect to the /category1/ product URL.
You're right that it's still not the most elegant of solutions, but it's a simple enough way to make sure users are where you want them to be without requiring any effort every time you create a new page - and it shouldn't upset Googlebot.
-
Yes, you absolutely can redirect this link. However I think your time would be better spent focusing on a solution that prevents this from happening long term. You will continually have to redirect new content as long as this continues to work as is.
-
Redirecting the 2nd link would probably be the best option, in my opinion. If the 2nd link has an integral part of the site structure and navigation, but you don't want users (or Google) to access that duplicate page, I don't see how you could do it any other way if your client insists that the 2nd page has to be created.
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
-
Can you keep you old HTTP xml sitemape when moving to HTTPS site wide?
Hi Mozers, I want to keep the HTTP xml sitemape live on my http site to keep track of indexation during the HTTPS migration. I'm not sure if this is doable since once our tech. team forces the redirects every http page will become https. Any ideas? Thanks
Technical SEO | | znotes0 -
Are sidewide badge links can harm your website?
Hey all, I wanted to check if links that have built naturally over the past years, linking from a badge (image) sitewide, can harm the linked website? Here is some more information: 1. It's from a competition that the winners were able to add the badge with the link to their site (the link to our website was to a subpage, not homepage). 2. There are around 15 websites with the badge as a link. The website has around 200 root domain links. There will not be any more websites with the badge, just these 15. 3. The sitewide links percentage are 5% of the overall number of pages linked to our website. Based on the last penguin update (4th of October, 2013), can our website be harmed from the badge link building?
Technical SEO | | stevanl0 -
Can the Hosting location of image files have a negative effect if 'off-site' such as on the devs own media server ?
Hi Can the Hosting location of image files have a negative effect if 'off-site' such as if they are on the developers own media server ? As opposed to on the actual websites server or file structure ? In the case i'm looking at the image files are hosted on a totally separate server (a media subdomain of the developers site server) from the subject sites dedicated server. Will engines still attribute the properties of files hosted in this manner to the main website (such as file name, alt attributes, etc etc) ? Or should they really be on the subject sites server own media folder ? Cheers Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Why are the bots still picking up so many links on our page despite us adding nofollow?
We have been working to reduce our on-page links issue. On a particular type of page the problem arose because we automatically link out to relevant content. When we added nofollows to this content it resolved the issue for some but not all and we can't figure out why is was not successful for every one. Can you see any issues? Example of a page where nofollow did not work for... http://www.andor.com/learning-academy/4-5d-microscopy-an-overview-of-andor's-solutions-for-4-5d-microscopy
Technical SEO | | tonykelly0 -
Moving articles to new site, can't 301 redirect because of panda
I have a site that is high quality, but was hit by penguin and perhaps panda. I want to remove some of the articles from my old site and put them on my new site. I know I can't 301 redirect them because I will be passing on the bad google vibes. So instead, I was thinking of redirecting the old articles to a page on the old site which explains that the article is moved over to the new site. I assume that's okay? I'm wondering how long I should wait between the time I take them down from the old site to the time I repost them on the new site. Do I need to wait for Google to de-index them in order to not be considered duplicate content/syndication? We'll probably reword them a bit, too - we really want to avoid panda. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | philray
Phil0 -
Getting 404 error when open the cache link of my site
My site is hazanstadservice.se and when I am trying to open this to check the cache date i got a 404 error from google. I don't know why ? The cache page url is http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:j99uW96RuToJ:www.hazanstadservice.se/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk.
Technical SEO | | Softlogique0 -
Site 'filtered' by Google in early July.... and still filtered!
Hi, Our site got demoted by Google all of a sudden back in early July. You can view the site here: http://alturl.com/4pfrj and you may read the discussions I posted in Google's forums here: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=6e8f9aab7e384d88&hl=en http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=276dc6687317641b&hl=en Those discussions chronicle what happened, and what we've done since. I don't want to make this a long post by retyping it all here, hence the links. However, we've made various changes (as detailed), such as getting rid of duplicate content (use of noindex on various pages etc), and ensuring there is no hidden text (we made an unintentional blunder there through use of a 3rd party control which used CSS hidden text to store certain data). We have also filed reconsideration requests with Google and been told that no manual penalty has been applied. So the problem is down to algorithmic filters which are being applied. So... my reason for posting here is simply to see if anyone here can help us discover if there is anything we have missed? I'd hope that we've addressed the main issues and that eventually our Google ranking will recover (ie. filter removed.... it isn't that we 'rank' poorly, but that a filter is bumping us down, to, for example, page 50).... but after three months it sure is taking a while! It appears that a 30 day penalty was originally applied, as our ranking recovered in early August. But a few days later it dived down again (so presumably Google analysed the site again, found a problem and applied another penalty/filter). I'd hope that might have been 30 or 60 days, but 60 days have now passed.... so perhaps we have a 90 day penalty now. OR.... perhaps there is no time frame this time, simply the need to 'fix' whatever is constantly triggering the filter (that said, I 'feel' like a time frame is there, especially given what happened after 30 days). Of course the other aspect that can always be worked on (and oft-mentioned) is the need for more and more original content. However, we've done a lot to increase this and think our Guide pages are pretty useful now. I've looked at many competitive sites which list in Google and they really don't offer anything more than we do..... so if that is the issue it sure is puzzling if we're filtered and they aren't. Anyway, I'm getting wordy now, so I'll pause. I'm just asking if anyone would like to have a quick look at the site and see what they can deduce? We have of course run it through SEOMoz's tools and made use of the suggestions. Our target pages generally rate as an A for SEO in the reports. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Go2Holidays0 -
Redirect links add seo value?
Does anyone know if urls on the 'Websites' part of a LinkedIn public profile create any SEO value (meaning, does page rank flow)? The links looks like this: <a href="/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Espeechpad%2Ecom%2Fpage%2Fspeech-to-text&urlhash=Xk3F" target="_blank" title="New window will open" name="overviewsite">speech to texta>
Technical SEO | | scanlin0