Redirects
-
Hello,
My question is: how important is it to wait for the a redirect to get seen and cached before you take down the old page?
More in depth: my old platform has seriously limited my ability to add sitemaps and make edits to htacces. I just want to change nameservers (which will delete everything on there) and upload the htaccess is that alright?
Another way of saying it: when redirecting a page, is it necessary for google to see the old page before it is deleted?
Thanks
Tyler
-
Hi Tyler.
Both the links you offer are to Dr Pete's profile page. I am presuming this response was shared with you for your private Q&A?
As a follow up to you or Dr Pete I would ask the following questions:
Would you agree the best method of redirect would be at the server level?
If so, would you agree that once a redirect is implemented at the server level there is no reason to keep the old page on the server, and that even if the old page was kept it would never be seen or crawled as long as the server redirect was in place?
If the answer to both of the above questions is yes, then it is in perfect alignment with the information I shared. If the answer is "no", then I would have further questions based on the response.
What method are you using for the redirection?
The first response I shared specifically clarified it was for a server (htaccess) redirect. I use that example since it is the most common form in my experience, but there are other ways to do it.
Thank you for sharing the reply. So far it sounds like it affirms the response I offered.
-
by http://www.seomoz.org/users/profile/22897
It depends a bit on how the redirect is implemented. People sometimes rush to remove an old page from links, XML sitemaps, etc. and then run into a bit of irony - if Google doesn't recrawl the old page, they don't see the redirect and may not process it (or they'll have to find the new page by themselves and kill the old page, which can take a lot longer).
If your redirect is at the server level, like an Apache htaccess directive, you may not need the old page to actually exist. The redirect will happen without it. Typically, though, I'd leave a reference to the old page, like a line in the XML sitemap, at least for a few weeks.
Of course, if the old page is frequently crawled (it has a lot of outside links, etc.), you may be just fine. It's typically deeper pages that dont' get crawled often that run into trouble.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying about changing nameservers (or how that ties to htaccess) though. What method are you using for the redirection?
-
I'm thinking that google may go back to the actual old page in some way.
To the best of my knowledge, that is simply not possible.
Google can choose to ignore the robots.txt. Google can choose to ignore a meta tag. Google can choose to do just about anything it wants with respect to page rankings and SERPs. What Google cannot do is access a page on a web server to which it does not have access.
Google cannot tell the web server "hey, I know you are showing a 301 here but I don't want to be redirected. Show me the original page instead". At least, they can't based on my understanding of how the web works. If I am mistaken, I would love to learn about it so I can improve.
-
interesting. the source was very reliable and actually I am agreeing with what you are saying. I'm thinking that google may (during this discussion in early 2010) go back to the actual old page in some way. Otherwise what would be the point of leaving it up? There may be a caviat in the googel algo that likes it when you seem transparent. This is the old page and this is the new page. Showing that you still have control over the old page. I understand that the googlebot wont even get to the page if it sees a redirect in the htaccess. So this is the reason for the question. I asked a private and question and we'll see what comes back.
-
In a normal web page request, the requested page is provided by the host server with a 200 header code.
In a 301 situation, the new page is returned with a 301 header code. This would happen whether the old page is present or not. Even if the old page was present, the hosting web server would not look at nor offer the old page.
If there is no additional information or context, I would stand by my original statement. My question to the person who is the source of the statement would be, what exactly is Google supposed to see on the page before it is redirected? What has changed from the last time Google saw the page?
-
Ryan,
No I'm not referring to a link.
There's nothing wrong with that statement and it was not taken out of context.
There's no additional information that I am concealing.The 301 can go up immediately. The question is can the old url be deleted before it has been cached as a new url. After it gets cached it will show as the new url in the serps. Then it's safe to be taken down.
-
The fine people at bruce clay said it's important to let the page be seen before deleting it.
Do you have a specific link? Something is wrong with that statement and I feel it must be taken out of context.
Or possibly there is additional details you have not shared? Has the page changed in some way? Let's say your page is crawled by Google every 2 weeks. So it was crawled last week and you decide today you wish to 301 the page. You are suggesting to wait a week to let Google re-crawl the page before 301'ing it. My question is, what has changed on the page since the last crawl? What do you wish Google to see?
-
The fine people at bruce clay said it's important to let the page be seen before deleting it.
-
when redirecting a page, is it necessary for google to see the old page before it is deleted?
If you are performing the redirect via htaccess, then no. A 301 redirect is simply a header code. It lets Google know the page which is being displayed is not the page requested, but a different URL. Google then understands the need to replace the old URL with the new one.
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
-
301 redirecting a previously abused URL
A client previously had their most important landing page at domain.com/example.htm They carried out the sort of link building that was commonplace a few years back (exact match anchors, paid blog links etc) targeting this URL, but they also got a bunch of legitimate decent quality links here. I believe they may have had a number of issues when link quality algo updates were rolled out, so rather than try and get links removed and go through the disavow process they instead decided to abandon this URL, let it 404 and start afresh at domain.com/example.html - updating all internal navigation, XML sitemaps etc. So fast forward to today. What is the best practice for this URL these days do we think? Is it now possible to 301 domain.com/example.htm > domain.com/example.html and recover whatever value may be left here? The argument for not doing so may be that you could pass over the negative metrics associated with the old URL, but would this not be handled by the real-time penguin update and the poor links just devalued rather than actually harming? And could this just be tested - i.e. add in the 301, monitor the impact and if things don't go the way we'd want then just remove the 301 again? Would be keen to get a few opinions on this. TIA
Technical SEO | | Salience_Search_Marketing0 -
Why does my Google Web Cache Redirects to My Homepage?
Why does my Google Webcache appears in a short period of time and then automatically redirects to my homepage? Is there something wrong with my robots.txt? The only files that I have blocked is below: User-agent: * Disallow: /bin/ Disallow: /common/ Disallow: /css/ Disallow: /download/ Disallow: /images/ Disallow: /medias/ Disallow: /ClientInfo.aspx Disallow: /*affiliateId* Disallow: /*referral*
Technical SEO | | Francis.Magos0 -
.htaccess Redirect 301 issues
I have completely rewritten my web site, adding structure to the file directories. Subsequently added was Redirect information within the .htaccess file. The following example ...
Technical SEO | | Cyberace
Redirect 301 /armaflex.html http://www.just-insulation.com/002-brands/armaflex.html
Returns this response in the URL bar of ...
http://www.just-insulation.com/002-brands/armaflex.html?file=armaflex
I am at a loss to understand why the suffix "?file=armaflex" is added The following code is inserted at the top of the file ...
RewriteEngine On redirect html pages to the root domain RewriteRule ^index.html$ / [NC,R,L] Force www. prefix in URLs and redirect non-www to www RewriteCond %{http_host} ^just-insulation.com [NC]
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.just-insulation.com/ [R=301,NC] Any advice would be most welcome.0 -
301 redirects
Hi, I am a working on a new web site, and I want to redirect all the urls of another site (on a different host) to this one. According to both hosts it is "impossible" to do this for all urls. I don't believe that to be the case, but how do I do this? And, should both sites be hosted on the same server first?
Technical SEO | | vibelingo0 -
Will a 303 redirect hurt us?
Our membership based website is using a 303 redirect to handle the redirection of users back to the login page when those users try to access a page behind the logged in firewall. Said another way, if a user is not yet logged in, we redirect them to the login page using a 303 redirection. Unfortunately, Googlebot get this redirection too and after a recent audit, we're thinking this isn't the best way to handle this. For pages which require a user to login first, should we: A) index and 303 redirect to the login page (what we are currently doing) B) index and 302 redirect to the login page C) noindex those pages D) Remove any special treatment and let Google figure it out. Thanks in advance for your help! David
Technical SEO | | voicesdotcom0 -
Htaccess redirect with question mark
Hi I have a problem setting up my htaccess for a specific page that has a question mark in the link, and one that has a space in the link and also a question mark. So I would like 2 redirects in my htaccess like that: www.olddomain.com/page.php?page=pagename1 to www.newdomain.com/newpage1.html www.olddomain.com/page.php?page=page name2 to www.newdomain.com/newpage2.html I have tried with something like this but doesn't work: RewriteEngine on RewriteRule ^page.php?page=pagename1 "http://www.newdomain.com/newpage1.html" [R=301,L] RewriteRule ^page.php?page=page name2 "http://www.newdomain.com/newpage2.html" [R=301,L] Could someone tell me what exactly I have to change? Thanks
Technical SEO | | darkanweb0 -
301 Redirect Questions
I have a site I built on a wisiwig editing platform that will not allow a 301 redirect. The site has already been remade and I need to point it to another domain. To do the redirect, can I change it to another domain host that will allow a 301 or will that make me loose the authority of the site? I may not be able to move the content of the site. Please help.
Technical SEO | | photoseo10 -
Is a 302 redirect the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page?
Hi guys The widely followed SEO best practice is that 301 redirects should be used instead of 302 redirects when it is a permanent redirect that is required. Matt Cutts said last year that 302 redirects should "only" be used for temporary redirects. http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-interview-googles-matt-cutts-on-redirects-trust-more For a site that I am looking at the SEO Moz Crawll Diagnostics tool lists as an issue that the URL / redirects to www.abc.com/Pages/default.aspx with a 302 redirect. On further searching I found that on a Google Support forum (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=276539078ba67f48&hl=en) that a Google Employee had said "For what it's worth, a 302 redirect is the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page (such as from "/" to "/sites/bursa/"). This is one of the few situations where a 302 redirect is preferred over a 301 redirect." Can anyone confirm if it is the case that "a 302 redirect is the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page"? And if so why as I haven't found an explanation. If it is the correct best practice then should redirects of this nature be removed from displaying as issues in the SEO Moz Crawll Diagnostics tool Thanks for your help
Technical SEO | | CPU0