Duplicate Content / 301 redirect Ariticle issue
-
Hello,
We've got some articles floating around on our site
nlpca(dot)com
like this article:
http://www.nlpca.com/what-is-dynamic-spin-release.html
that's is not linked to from anywhere else. The article exists how it's supposed to be here:
http://www.dynamicspinrelease.com/what-is-dsr/
(our other website)
Would it be safe in eyes of both google's algorithm (as much as you know) and with Panda to just 301 redirect from
http://www.nlpca.com/what-is-dynamic-spin-release.html
to
http://www.dynamicspinrelease.com/what-is-dsr/
or would no-indexing be better?
Thank you!
-
I don't think it will "weaken" the domain but if it might provide a better experience for users if instead of clicking a link and being 301d they could click a link straight through to the target page.
You can 301 the duplicate pages as well if you like.
-
Thanks Peter and Ben,
I don't know that we have access to the code in the tag for separate pages in our version of Joomla, but I don't want to leave this duplicate content floating out there. What is your suggestion?
Will a 301 redirect from nlpca to the site with the original articles weaken nlpca(dot)com
-
When you say that it's "not linked to from anywhere else," does that include internal links or just inbound? If it has no internal OR inbound links, then it hardly matters either way. If it gets traffic but has no inbound links, then I'm inclined to agree with Ben - use the canonical tag. That way, the page can "live" on both sites/domains, but only one of them will have search value.
I'm actually looking to take two blogs and consolidate them into one brand new domain, and I think I may use the canonical tag for a couple of months first and then 301-redirect them. In that case, though, it's because I'll eventually shut off the other domains. If there's value to having the page exist (for users) both places, then the canonical is a solid, long-term solution.
-
If I remove it won't that cause a 404 error?
Shouldn't I 301 redirect it to the nlpca.com home page?
I can't use rel="canonical" because we are in Joomla
-
If there's a valid reason to have the article on Nipca (as in it adds a benefit to users) then you could use a rel=canonical.
If it's not adding any value for users and is generally a dead page then why bother no-indexing when you could just remove it all together and not have it wasting crawl allowance.
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
-
Mass 301 redirect in htaccess
I use ScreamingFrog to generate sitemaps for my Magento 2 multistore, but I recently noticed two issues. Each category/page has two URLs. One with / and the end and one without. Every product has two URLs. One with /product-name and the other /shop/product-name. The URLs are canonicalised, but this is still a problem and I'm not sure exactly how to execute this in the htaccess file. So I need to: Remove all URLs without the / at the end and redirect them all to the URL with / at the end. Or vice versa. 301 redirect every single product (there are over 400) from shop/product-name to /product-name. How do I do this en mass in the htaccess file?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moon-boots0 -
Ogranization Schema/Microformat for a content/brand website | Travel
Hi, One of our clients have a website specific to a place, for eg. California Tourism in which they publish local information related to tourism, blogs & other useful content. I want to understand how useful is to publish Organization Schema on such website mentioning the actual Organization, which in this case is a Travel Agency? Or any other schema would fit in for such websites?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ds9.tech0 -
Setting up 301 Redirects after acquisition?
Hello! The company that I work for has recently acquired two other companies. I was wondering what the best strategy would be as it relates to redirects / authority. Please help! Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Colin.Accela0 -
Redirect issue launching duplicate product categories on another TLD
Dear Mozzerz We run this e-commerce website (superstar.dk) where we are selling all different kinds of wristwatches from different brand names (Casio, Garmin, Suunto etc). We just bought another website selling watches (xxx.com) and therefore we would like to move some of the content from superstar.dk to the new website xxx.com, making superstar.dk into a more niche website. So we are basically taking a brand with all the products in it and shutting it down on superstar.dk and instead launching it on xxx.com. Superstar.dk will still be running, just with a more niche product- and brand selection. So my question is, should we redirect all the old product categories that we are shutting down to the new website on another TLD where we are opening them again and the same for the products (e.g. superstar.dk/garmin -> xxx.com/garmin)? Or would it be better to keep the redirects within the same website/TLD (e.g. superstar.dk/garmin -> superstar.dk)? A few examples:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | superstardenmark
superstar.dk/garmin -> xxx.com/garmin
superstar.dk/suunto -> xxx.com/suunto
etc..
superstar.dk/product1 -> xxx.com/product1
superstar.dk/product2 -> xxx.com/product2
etc.0 -
Big 301 Redirect Help!
Hey guys I need a little help with setting up a big 301. Background: It's a bit of a mess as the old site is a total mess after being online for 10 years plus. It has html and php pages, and a mod rewrite to redirect old html links to the newer php version of those pages. It's now moving to a new site and as the domain name and URL structure has changed we can't use any fancy regex and have to do a page to page redirect. There are 1500 pages to redirect. However, the old site has thousands of linking root domains, and some of these are to the old html pages (which currently redirect to the php pages) and some to the newer php pages. Question: My initial plan was to leave the mod rewrite and only redirect the php pages. That means 1500 individual redirects instead of 3000 if I individually redirect both the php and html pages. I'm not sure what's best to be honest. We don't really want multiple hops in the redirect (html>php>new site), but surely 1500 redirects is better than 3000! Does anyone have any advice on which option may be best, or even a better option? Thanks 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HarveyP0 -
Canonical / 301 Redundancy
Suppose I have two dynamic URLs that lead to the identical page: www.example.com/product.php?x=1&y=1 and www.example.com/product.php?y=1 The x=1 parameter had some historical meaning, but is now unused. All references to the x=1 parameter have been removed from internal links and sitemaps. I have implemented two solutions: First, the header of www.example.com/product.php?x=1&y=1 includes: Second, the .htaccess file includes the following: Redirect permanent /product.php?x=1&y=1 http://www.example.com/product.php?y=1 Questions: 1. I assume that since canonical is still relatively new, it's best to play it safe and implement both solutions. Is this correct? 2. When I point my browser to www.example.com/product.php?x=1&y=1, it does NOT redirect to www.example.com/product.php?y=1. The address bar continues to show the non-canonical URL. Is this because the canonical tag somehow takes precedence over the 301 redirect? 3. How long will Google Webmaster Tools continue to show these as duplicates, even though I've implemeted BOTH canonical and 301? It's been a few weeks and I thought it would have rolled off by now. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ahirai0 -
Duplicate content even with 301 redirects
I know this isn't a developer forum but I figure someone will know the answer to this. My site is http://www.stadriemblems.com and I have a 301 redirect in my .htaccess file to redirect all non-www to www and it works great. But SEOmoz seems to think this doesn't apply to my blog, which is located at http://www.stadriemblems.com/blog It doesn't seem to make sense that I'd need to place code in every .htaccess file of every sub-folder. If I do, what code can I use? The weirdest part about this is that the redirecting works just fine; it's just SEOmoz's crawler that doesn't seem to be with the program here. Does this happen to you?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | UnderRugSwept0 -
301 Redirect or Canonical Tag or Leave Them Alone? Different Pages - Similar Content
We currently have 3 different versions of our State Business-for-Sale listings pages - the versions are: **Version 1 -- Preferred Version: ** http://www.businessbroker.net/State/California-Businesses_For_Sale.aspx Title = California Business for Sale Ads - California Businesses for Sale & Business Brokers - Sell a Business on Business Broker Version 2: http://www.businessbroker.net/Businesses_For_Sale-State-California.aspx Title = California Business for Sale | 3124 California Businesses for Sale | BusinessBroker.net Version 3: http://www.businessbroker.net/listings/business_for_sale_california.ihtml Title = California Businesses for Sale at BusinessBroker.net - California Business for Sale While the page titles and meta data are a bit different, the bulk of the page content (which is the listings rendered) are identical. We were wondering if it would make good sense to either (A) 301 redirect Versions 2 and 3 to the preferred Version 1 page or (B) put Canonical Tags on Versions 2 and 3 labeling Version 1 as the preferred version. We have this issue for all 50 U.S. States -- I've mentioned California here but the same applies for Alabama through Wyoming - same issue. Given that there are 3 different flavors and all are showing up in the Search Results -- some on the same 1st page of results -- which probably is a good thing for now -- should we do a 301 redirect or a Canonical Tag on Versions 2 and 3? Seems like with Google cracking down on duplicate content, it might be wise to be proactive. Any thoughts or suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks. Matt M
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MWM37720