301 redirects tanked our site on google - what now?
-
We had several hundred old pages on the site with duplicate content and new pages with fresh info on the same topics.
So I redirected the old pages to the new pages. Next day, plop, we're dumped off google for almost every keyword.
Dang I thought they didn't want duplicate content and old funky pages.
What did I do wrong and what can I do to fix it?
Thanks so much for anyone who can share their expertise.
Jean
-
Thanks so much for your response - and for reminding me to be patient.
I've tried leaving the pages intact with a link to the new url and found that the five or six pages of old vintages all pointing to the new page resulted in hundreds of almost empty pages.
I thought that it was effecting my SEO, having so many pages with almost nothing on them.
I have to put the info about all the older vintages on the current product so the customer can get the full story. So I can't put the info about each past vintage on its one page and then put all of the content on the current page.
Google counts that as duplicate content.
I'm not sure what you mean by "archive them"?
Thanks again,
Jean
-
Thanks so much for your words of wisdom.
Re the url with 2008 in the title - the "2008" is an unfortunate consequence of the way we named the pages originally. It is the most relevant page and lists the 2010 wine. This is not a page that was incorrectly redirected, the url's name was poorly designed.
Should I rename the pages to leave off the vintage? Ideally I'd think the url would be something like "shea-wine-cellar-homer-pinot-noir.html and not have the vintage in it at all. But, renaming all of those differently dated pages would require 301's, wouldn't it? That's a lot of 301s - a lot of the pages have the wrong vintage in the url.
Re why google is liking the blog post link that seems less on target versus the wine's own page - this has been happening since 1)I started posting good fresh content on the blog everyday; and 2) especially since the redirects - it's been more in the last few days than ever before.
I'll check, but the 301's were put i place by a very very good IT guy.
Again, thank you so much.
Jean
-
Yes, that is the information desired, thank you.
I do notice the 2009 review is more then double the length of the 2010 review, which is thin by comparison. Otherwise the page seems fine.
I tried navigating to other pages such as Oregon > Oregon Pinot Noir > Highest Rated Pinots and selected the first link "Shea Wine Cellars Homer Pinot noir 2010" but notice the URL is http://www.northwest-wine.com/Shea-Wine-Cellars-Homer-Pinot-noir-2008.html.
The link still shows 2008. Not a big deal per se, but it leads to questions about the redirects. Are you sure they were performed properly?
More importantly, it seems there is at least some keyword cannibalization on your site. I tried searching Google.com for "Shea Wine Cellars Homer Pinot noir 2010" which is an exact title match to the above page. Your site ranks 11th for the term but a different page appears: http://www.northwest-wine.com/wine/2012/05/the-shea-vineyard-2010-homer-estate-block-31-block-7/
Further analysis is required to determine the root cause of the issue. I would suggest first checking the 301s to ensure they were performed properly. I would also check your site for similar keywords to the redirected pages. When I search your site using your search box for "Shea Wine Cellars Homer Pinot noir 2010" the only page that comes up is the 2008.html page. Clearly Google.com feels the other page is more relevant.
-
Hold tight and give yourself at least a week before evaluating the result of your change.
I wouldn't redirect those myself. I'd just archive them, tack on a sold out notice, tweak the copy and offer a link to the new url.
-
http://www.northwest-wine.com is the site.
Here's an example of an old page that has not yet been redirected:
http://www.northwest-wine.com/Beaux-Freres-Willamette-Valley-Pinot-noir-2009.html
Here's the new page we'll redirect it to when it is sold out:
http://www.northwest-wine.com/Beaux-Freres-Pinot-noir-WV-2010.html
You can see why we are redirecting - the older page has the same content as the newer one, except the newer one has the additional content for the new vintage. I'm consolidating all of the older vintage tasting notes onto one page with the newer ones.
Is this the info you need? Thanks SO much for the quick response.
Jean
-
In order to offer any tangible advice, we would need to examine your site along with an example of an old article along with the new page which replaced it.
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
-
Redirects, 301's & 404's
I have tons of links that I have had added a redirect to after creating my companies new website. Is it bad to have all these 301s? How do I permanently redirect those links? Also, on Google Search Console it's telling me I have 1,000+ excluded links. Is this bad? Will it negatively affect me? Is this something to do with my sitemap? Any help would be greatly appreciated 🙂
Technical SEO | | sammecooper0 -
What is the difference between 301 redirects and backlinks?
i have seen some 301 redirects on my site billsonline, can anyone please explain the difference between backlinks and 301 redirects, i have read some articles where the writer was stating that 301 are not good for website.
Technical SEO | | aliho0 -
Virtual inlcude v.s. Redirect 301
Hi there, I manage a website which use a lot virtual includes ( SSI) because it caused a lot of duplicate content i introduced the Canonical url tag. But i still see bad rankings on some pages who are the leading of the virtual includes. Now i'am wondering is it better to remove all the virtual include pages ( url's) and make a redirect 301 of it. Does anybody know that is better for ranking the head page?
Technical SEO | | JoostBruining0 -
301 redirect of a subdirectory
Hello! I am working on a website with the following structure: example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3. The page "example.com/sub1" does not exist (I know this is not the optimal architecture to have this be a nonexistent page). But someone might type that address, so I would like it to redirect it to example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3. I tried the following redirect: redirect 301 /sub1 http://example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3. But with this redirect in place, if I go to example.com/sub1, I get redirected to example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3/sub2/sub3 (the redirect just inserts extra subdirectories). If someone types "example.com/sub1" into a browser, I would "example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3" to come up. Is this possible? Thank you!
Technical SEO | | nyc-seo0 -
Should I change a 301 redirect?
I recently moved all the content from an old site to a new site on a new domain. I lost a significant amount of traffic as a result. There are 301 redirects for every page on the old site. Generally, these point to the same content as was on the relevant page of the old site. However, the 301 redirect for the homepage on the old site points to the homepage on the new site, not to the content from the old site homepage. I'm wondering whether to change the 301 to point at the content from the old site homepage. Any advice would be much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | seqal0 -
Difference between URL Rewrites and 301 Redirects for Rankings
What is the difference between URL rewriting and 301 redirects? Specifically if my home page is rewriting the www. version and the /index.html version rather than 301 redirecting them is this equivalent? Does it still pass the link juice on those alternate variations the same way a 301 redirect will?
Technical SEO | | rcarll0 -
Google Confusion: Two Sites and a 301 Redirect.
Hi, We have a client who just sprang a new project on us. As always, they went ahead and did some stuff before bringing us into the loop! (oh the joy of providing SEO services!) Anyway, i'm pretty swamped right now and need some extra brains on this. Basically the client had www.examplesiteA.com online for many years (an affiliate site which had built up a strong brand in the industry). They have now decided to turn this affiliate site into a full blown service platform and so with the new site being built they 301'd the whole thing over to www.examplesiteB.com - this is where they want all the old affiliate content to be hosted. So essentially examplesiteA.com is now examplesiteB.com and a new site is being placed on examplesiteA.com - still with me? So this has all happened and a brand new website is on examplesiteA.com and the old examplesiteA is now sitting exactly as it used to, but on the examplesiteB domain. The 301 redirect has been removed and the new examplesiteA seems to have been crawled, but the homepage is not indexed. When you search for examplesiteA, examplesiteB is the top result. Now they are similar domain names and to be fair I have very little data at this point i.e. I don't know when the 301 redirect was removed and it maybe that this all fixes itself with time. How is link equity effected now that examplesiteA.com was 301 redirected to examplesiteB.com and cached in this way, but now the 301 redirect has been removed and does not exist? Would link juice have been diluted throughout the process? Obviously if we had been in on all this before anything was implemented we would have done things differently. Interested to hear what others would do coming in at this point. Thanks and look forward to the advice!
Technical SEO | | MarcLevy0 -
How can I get Google to crawl my site daily?
I was wndering if there was a trick to getting google to crawl my website daily?
Technical SEO | | labradoodlelocator0