Transitioning to responsive design--should we re-direct m.?
-
We are moving to responsive design--should we 301 re-direct all of the old m.domain URLs to the corresponding domain.com
-
Very well elaborated, maybe I should have done so myself in my original response.
Always try 301 to relevant pages in this situation but if the redirect rules prove a headache (and the site has little to no inbound links) to create then I would simply remove the subdomain and 301 to main domain homepage. Somewhat of a Time vs Overall Benefit issue, or in some cases a Cost vs Benefit issue.
If the m.domain variant has links pointing to it then it's always beneficial to 301 the links the refering sites are pointing to - I'd try to do this as an absolute minimum in this situation.
It is common for mobile versions of sites have no links pointing to them apart from redirects from the main site so in that situation a 301would likely have zero affect whatsoever.
-
I would 2nd William's response here. If there are any links/bookmarks pointing to your mobile pages, you'll want those 301s in the long term. And short term, any pages Googlebot mobile has indexed that are getting mobile search referrals will pass those users along accordingly (and signal to Google to update their index).
In short, yes - 301s would be the way to go.
One caveat: if it's a big undertaking to do this (if you can't match all subdomain requests with a .htaccess redirect pattern and you have a ton of pages, for example) I'd first take a look at the mobile search traffic, referral traffic and inbound links to your m. subdomain. This way you can determine how much you'll be losing out on if you don't set up the 301s. If your mobile site is new enough, not getting a tremendous amount of traffic and has no direct referral sources or inbound links, you may be able to get away without 301ing. I'd probably still push for them though.
-
Redirecting the old mobile version of your site to the new responsive design with 301 redirects would pass on any page authority to the corresponding page on domain.com and a responsive design is generally superior in terms of UX.
In my opinion it would be good practice to forward from an exiting mobile version to a new responsive version as per the serve one page to all devices guideline. Using a 301 redirect would be the correct way to do this.
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
-
For responsive site what should be lowest Screen Resolution for Desktop?
Hello Guys, Can you please share in details screen resolution I have to define for my responsive site for desktop, tablet & mobile. Your inputs are very valuable to me. Thanks! Micey
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | micey0 -
Is it bad I have a cluster of canonical urls that 301 re-direct?
Just went through a migration. We have a group of canonical URLs that are NOT the preferred url, but 301 re-direct to the preferred URL. Does this essentially "break even" and the incorrect canonical URL becomes obsolete? And/or would this be considered potentially bad and confusing for bots?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lunavista-comm0 -
What strategies can you use when you're optimizing for 10 locations x 20+ services?
We have a client site (a dentist) that has 10 locations and 20+ services (braces, teeth whitening, cosmetic dentistry, etc, etc.). We're trying to figure out the ideal approach to optimally cover all their locations and services, but each option we consider has drawbacks: Optimize service pages for service name + each location name (or at least the biggest location names), with service name and location names in the title tag. That results in a too long title tag, plus possible user confusion, since they are searching for "braces richmond" but the title tag lists other cities, some of which are in a different state. Optimize service pages for service name + each location name, but don't include the locations in the page title. This is the current option being used, but it appears to be hurting the rankings at least a bit not having the location name in the page title. Create a page for each service + location combo. That will be 200+ pages, which will mean the pages will be deeper in the site, with less link juice. Create new domains for each location/state covered. But then we have to start over building link juice. How have other sites dealt with this? What has worked best and what hasn't worked?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AdamThompson2 -
301 Directs
We have found a lot of 404 error pages that we have transferred with 301 directs. My questions is, should these 301 directs be marked as a NF (nofollow)?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Essential-Pest0 -
Does Google Read URL's if they include a # tag? Re: SEO Value of Clean Url's
An ECWID rep stated in regards to an inquiry about how the ECWID url's are not customizable, that "an important thing is that it doesn't matter what these URLs look like, because search engines don't read anything after that # in URLs. " Example http://www.runningboards4less.com/general-motors#!/Classic-Pro-Series-Extruded-2/p/28043025/category=6593891 Basically all of this: #!/Classic-Pro-Series-Extruded-2/p/28043025/category=6593891 That is a snippet out of a conversation where ECWID said that dirty urls don't matter beyond a hashtag... Is that true? I haven't found any rule that Google or other search engines (Google is really the most important) don't index, read, or place value on the part of the url after a # tag.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Atlanta-SMO0 -
Site re-design, full site domain A/B test, will we drop in rankings while leaking traffic
We are re-launching a client site that does very well in Google. The new site is on a www2 domain which we are going to send a controlled amount of traffic to, 10%, 25%, 50%, 75% to 100% over a 5 week period. This will lead to a reduction in traffic to the original domain. As I don't want to launch a competing domain the www2 site will not be indexed until 100% is reached. If Google sees the traffic numbers reducing over this period will we drop? This is the only part I am unsure of as the urls and site structure are the same apart from some new lower level pages which we will introduce in a controlled manner later? Any thoughts or experience of this type of re-launch would be much appreciated. Thanks Pete
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | leshonk0 -
If I had an issue with a friendly URL module and I lost all my rankings. Will they return now that issue is resolved next time I'm crawled by google?
I have 'magic seo urls' installed on my zencart site. Except for some reason no one can explain why or how the files were disabled. So my static links went back to dynamic (index.php?**********) etc. The issue was resolved with the module except in that time google must have crawled my site and I lost all my rankings. I'm nowher to be found in the top 50. Did this really cause such an extravagant SEO issue as my web developers told me? Can I expect my rankings to return next time my site is crawled by google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Pete790 -
Is Google just taking long time to re-index or did I make a boo boo?...
Couple weeks ago I changed a url on my site from using underscores to using hyphens I setup a 301 redirect and added appropriate canonical to the new page. My site is crawled daily and I've done this on several other pages with good results but this page is just not being indexed right… I see my page #8 with some random title Is there some "interim index" that Google has? It's just bazaar to me, any thoughts? Thanks! - Cliff
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CliffAuerswald0