404-like content
-
A site that I look after is having lots of soft 404 responses for pages that are not 404 at all but unique content pages.
the following page is an example:
http://www.professionalindemnitynow.com/medical-malpractice-insurance-clinics
This page returns a 200 response code, has unique content, but is not getting indexed. Any ideas?
To add further information that may well impact your answer, let me explain how this "classic ASP" website performs the SEO Friendly url mapping:
All pages within the custom CMS have a unique ID which are referenced with an ?intID=xx parameter.
The custom 404.asp file receives a request, looks up the ID to find matching content in the CMS, and then server.transfers the visitor to the correct page.
Like I said, the response codes are setup correctly, as far as Firebug can tell me.
any thoughts would be most appreciated.
-
Scott, if you fix the problem by using the global.ax fiile, remeber to the make sure that the 404 page does then retuurn a 404.
-
i think how google does detects a soft 404 is like this.
http://www.professionalindemnitynow.com/gobblygook should return a 404, but returns a 200, so they now know that you site is prone to soft 404's
but how do they then decide what pages on the site are and what are not s404's is not clear. From reading, my best understanding is that they then look for simularities, to the know s404, such as timings, and other criteria. -
This is the point. it should return a 404, but instead returns a 200, this is what is called a soft 404.
See my other comment on how to fix. -
The page we are discussing is not listed in the image you shared.
I checked one link which is listed: http://www.professionalindemnitynow.com/business-consultants-quote
The top of the page says "Error - The page you have tried to access cannot be found"
While the page returns a 200 header code, Google is likely seeing the page header text and recognizing it as a "404-like" page as they shared.
-
You could try using either the global.asx file or a http model to do the rewiring, global.asx would be the easiest.
from memory the begin_request event would be the one to use.
the thing is you need to do the rewriting earlier in the event cycle.
-
Thanks Yannick. Completely agree with the content of the page using the keywords too frequently. This is the site owner claiming to "understand" SEO! I will advise him that he needs to calm down the keyword stuffing.
I'm going to add the page, and other similar landing pages that are used for Adwords, to the public sitemap
-
The reason I refer to it as a soft 404, is the listing within webmaster tools. See attached image for more examples.
You're right - it is not on the sitemap which I need to address, but still dont see why Google detect this as a 404 when it clearly 200's.
Thanks for your response.
-
Hi Scott.
I am confused why you refer to the link you shared as a soft-404. http://www.professionalindemnitynow.com/medical-malpractice-insurance-clinics. The page title is "Medical Malpractice Insurance for Clinics" which is a perfect match for the URL. The page returns a 200 response header code. By all counts this appears as the proper page which should be returned and not a 404 in any way.
If you have a 404 error log file which shows this page as a 404 error, that issue is completely internal to your site. From the perspective of Google and the rest of the world your site is working perfectly. If the only place the page shows as a 404 is your log file, you want to check with a developer to determine exactly what is triggering the file entry.
With respect to indexing, I support Yannick's findings.
-
I'd say: the URL isn't accessible via the menu? Can't find it anywhere? I tried looking under http://www.professionalindemnitynow.com/Medical-malpractice-insurance but couldn't find a link to the page. Is the page only located in your sitemap? That might be why it isn't indexed. Link to it (more!)
The other thing is o/c: high keyword density/spammy usage of the keywords you are targetting
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
-
What should I do with all these 404 pages?
I have a website that Im currently working on that has been fairly dormant for a while and has just been given a face lift and brought back to life. I have some questions below about dealing with 404 pages. In Google WMT/search console there are reports of thousands of 404 pages going back some years. It says there are over 5k in total but I am only able to download 1k or so from WMT it seems. I ran a crawl test with Moz and the report it sent back only had a few hundred 404s in, why is that? Im not sure what to do with all the 404 pages also, I know that both Google and Moz recommend a mixture of leaving some as 404s and redirect others and Id like to know what the community here suggests. The 404s are a mix of the following: Blog posts and articles that have disappeared (some of these have good back-links too) Urls that look like they used to belong to users (the site used to have a forum) which where deleted when the forum was removed, some of them look like they were removed for spam reasons too eg /user/buy-cheap-meds-online and others like that Other urls like this /node/4455 (or some other random number) Im thinking I should permanently redirect the blog posts to the homepage or the blog but Im not sure what to do about all the others? Surely having so many 404s like this is hurting my crawl rate?
Technical SEO | | linklander0 -
Devaluing certain content to push better content forward
Hi all, I'm new to Moz, but hoping to learn a lot from it in hopes of growing my business. I have a pretty specific question and hope to get some feedback on how to proceed with some changes to my website. First off, I'm a landscape and travel photographer. My website is at http://www.mickeyshannon.com - you can see that the navigation quickly spreads out to different photo galleries based on location. So if a user was looking for photos from California, they would find galleries for Lake Tahoe, Big Sur, the Redwoods and San Francisco. At this point, there are probably 600-800 photos on my website. At last half of these are either older or just not quite up to par with the quality I'm starting to feel like I should produce. I've been contemplating dumbing down the galleries, and not having it break down so far. So instead of four sub-galleries of California, there would just be one California gallery. In some cases, where there are lots of good images in a location, I would probably keep the sub-galleries, but only if there were dozens of images to work with. In the description of each photo, the exact location is already mentioned, so I'm not sure there's a huge need for these sub-galleries except where there's still tons of good photos to work with. I've been contemplating building a sort of search archive. Where the best of my photos would live in the main galleries, and if a user didn't find what they were looking for, they could go and search the archives for older photos. That way they're still around for licensing purposes, etc. while the best of the best are pushed to the front for those buying fine art prints, etc. These pages for these search archives would probably need to be de-valued somehow, so that the main galleries would be more important SEO-wise. So for the California galleries, four sub-galleries of perhaps 10 images each would become one main California gallery with perhaps 15 images. The other 25 images would be thrown in the search archive and could be searched by keyword. The question I have - does this sound like a good plan, or will I really be killing my site when it comes to SEO by making such a large change? My end goal would be to push my better content to the front, while scaling back a lot of the excess. Hopefully I explained this question well. If not, I can try to elaborate further! Thanks, Mickey
Technical SEO | | msphotography0 -
Duplicate content on job sites
Hi, I have a question regarding job boards. Many job advertisers will upload the same job description to multiple websites e.g. monster, gumtree, etc. This would therefore be viewed as duplicate content. What is the best way to handle this if we want to ensure our particular site ranks well? Thanks in advance for the help. H
Technical SEO | | HiteshP0 -
Moving content
I have www.SiteA.com which contains a number of sections of content, a section of which (i.e. www.SiteA.com/sectionA), we would like to move to a new domain www.SiteB.com Definitely we will ensure that a redirect strategy is in place and that we submit a sitemap for SiteB Three Questions 1. Anything else I am missing from the migration plan? 2. Since we are only moving part of SiteA to SiteB, is there another way of telling Google that we changed address for that section or are the 301s enough? 3. Currently, Section A (under SiteA) contains a subsection where we were posting an article a day. In the new site (SiteB), we decided to drop this subsection and write content (but not "exactly" the same content) under a new section. During migration, how should we handle the subsection that we have decided to stop writing? Should we: A. Import the content into SiteB and call it archives and then redirect all the urls from subsection under SiteA to the archives under SiteB? OR B. Do not move the content but redirect all the pages (365 in total) to where we think the user would be more interested in going to on SiteB? Note: A colleague of mine is worried that since the subsection has good content he thinks its necessary to actually move the content to SiteB. But again, looking at the views for the archives it caters for 1% of the the total views of this section. In other words, people only view the article on the day it is written. I hope I was clear 🙂 Your help is appreciated Thank you
Technical SEO | | seo12120 -
Dealing with duplicate content
Manufacturer product website (product.com) has an associated direct online store (buyproduct.com). the online store has much duplicate content such as product detail pages and key article pages such as technical/scientific data is duplicated on both sites. What are some ways to lessen the duplicate content here? product.com ranks #1 for several key keywords so penalties can't be too bad and buyproduct.com is moving its way up the SERPS for similar terms. Ideally I'd like to combine the sites into one, but not in the budget right away. Any thoughts?
Technical SEO | | Timmmmy0 -
Crawl Errors and Duplicate Content
SEOmoz's crawl tool is telling me that I have duplicate content at "www.mydomain.com/pricing" and at "www.mydomain.com/pricing.aspx". Do you think this is just a glitch in the crawl tool (because obviously these two URL's are the same page rather than two separate ones) or do you think this is actually an error I need to worry about? Is so, how do I fix it?
Technical SEO | | MyNet0 -
Duplicate content
I am getting flagged for duplicate content, SEOmoz is flagging the following as duplicate: www.adgenerator.co.uk/ www.adgenerator.co.uk/index.asp These are obviously meant to be the same path so what measures do I take to let the SE's know that these are to be considered the same page. I have used the canonical meta tag on the Index.asp page.
Technical SEO | | IPIM0 -
Duplicate content question with PDF
Hi, I manage a property listing website which was recently revamped, but which has some on-site optimization weaknesses and issues. For each property listing like http://www.selectcaribbean.com/property/147.html there is an equivalent PDF version spidered by google. The page looks like this http://www.selectcaribbean.com/pdf1.php?pid=147 my question is: Can this create a duplicate content penalty? If yes, should I ban these pages from being spidered by google in the robots.txt or should I make these link nofollow?
Technical SEO | | multilang0