Best method to update navigation structure
-
Hey guys,
We're doing a total revamp of our site and will be completely changing our navigation structure. Similar pages will exist on the new site, but the URLs will be totally changed. Most incoming links just point to our root domain, so I'm not worried about those, but the rest of the site does concern me.
I am setting up 1:1 301 redirects for the new navigation structure to handle getting incoming links where they need to go, but what I'm wondering is what is the best way to make sure the SERPs are updated quickly without trashing my domain quality, and ensuring my page and domain authority are maintained.
The old links won't be anywhere on the new site. We're swapping the DNS record to the new site so the only way for the old URLs to be hit will be incoming links from other sites.
I was thinking about creating a sitemap with the old URLs listed and leaving that active for a few weeks, then swapping it out for an updated one. Currently we don't have one (kind of starting from the bottom with SEO)
Also, we could use the old URLs for a few weeks on the new site to ensure they all get updated as well. It'd be a bit of work, but may be worth it.
I read this article and most of that seems to be covered, but just wanted to get the opinions of those who may have done this before. It's a pretty big deal for us.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/uncrawled-301s-a-quick-fix-for-when-relaunches-go-too-well
Am I getting into trouble if I do any of the above, or is this the way to go?
PS: I should also add that we are not changing our domain. The site will remain on the same domain. Just with a completely new navigation structure.
-
It all depends on what you're trying to achieve. If you want people to see a 404 page then serve them a useful 404 page.
If you're trying to redirect link value then you should 301 to the most relevant page to what that URL used to have on it.
For me a 404 error is a great opportunity to catch the visitor and give them something of use.
If you redirect 404s you'll also reduce your site's general server errors, which can only be a positive thing, right?
-
Thanks for the RE.
About redirecting pages that don't exist anymore, I thought of doing that, however isn't that what the 404 page is for? I was going to redirect all other pages to the root, but that would likely mean we'd never get a 404 response.
Maybe I'm not understanding the programming logic involved in something like that.
-
We changed our domain a few months back so here's a few observations
- Where possible ensure effective 301's are in place
- If a page URL does not have to change don't change it. It is possible to create a better website structure/navigation without altering URLs.
- Ensure a full sitemap is submitted when you roll out the new design
- Be patient, you may see a drop for a short while, as the 301's take time to attribute value from old->new URLs.
- Get any sites linking to old URLs (the non-home ones) updated to the new URLs when you know them.
- In a few months, if you have any old URLs in Google (do a site:www.website.com) search then use the URL removal tool in GWT to get rid of old URLs.
- You may want to consider redirecting any pages that don't exist at all any more, to your home page or the next nearest match in terms of content.
Hope this helps to get you started!
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
-
URL Structure & Best Practice when Facing 4+ Sub-levels
Hi. I've spent the last day fiddling with the setup of a new URL structure for a site, and I can't "pull the trigger" on it. Example: - domain.com/games/type-of-game/provider-name/name-of-game/ Specific example: - arcade.com/games/pinball/deckerballs/starshooter2k/ The example is a good description of the content that I have to organize. The aim is to a) define url structure, b) facilitate good ux, **c) **create a good starting point for content marketing and SEO, avoiding multiple / stuffing keywords in urls'. The problem? Not all providers have the same type of game. Meaning, that once I get past the /type-of-game/, I must write a new category / page / content for /provider-name/. No matter how I switch the different "sub-levels" around in the url, at one point, the provider-name doesn't fit as its in need of new content, multiple times. The solution? I can skip "provider-name". The caveat though is that I lose out on ranking for provider keywords as I don't have a cornerstone content page for them. Question: Using the URL structure as outlined above in WordPress, would you A) go with "Pages", or B) use "Posts"
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Dan-Louis0 -
Which is the best option for these pages?
Hi Guys, We have product pages on our site which have duplicate content, the search volume for people searching for these products is very, very small. Also if we add unique content, we could face keyword cannibalisation issues with category/sub-category pages. Now based on proper SEO best practice we should add rel canonical tags from these product pages to the next relevant page. Pros Can rank for product oriented keywords but search volume is very small. Any link equity to these pages passed due to the rel canonical tag would be very small, as these pages barely get any links. Cons Time and effort involved in adding rel canonical tags. Even if we do add rel canonical tags, if Google doesn't deem them relevant then they might ignore causing duplicate content issues. Time and effort involved in making all the content unique - not really worth it - again very minimal searchers. Plus if we do make it unique, then we face keyword cannibalisation issues. -- What do you think would be the optimal solution to this? I'm thinking just implementing a: Across all these product based pages. Keen to hear thoughts? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seowork2140 -
URL Rewriting Best Practices
Hey Moz! I’m getting ready to implement URL rewrites on my website to improve site structure/URL readability. More specifically I want to: Improve our website structure by removing redundant directories. Replace underscores with dashes and remove file extensions for our URLs. Please see my example below: Old structure: http://www.widgets.com/widgets/commercial-widgets/small_blue_widget.htm New structure: https://www.widgets.com/commercial-widgets/small-blue-widget I've read several URL rewriting guides online, all of which seem to provide similar but overall different methods to do this. I'm looking for what's considered best practices to implement these rewrites. From what I understand, the most common method is to implement rewrites in our .htaccess file using mod_rewrite (which will find the old URLs and rewrite them according to the rewrites I implement). One question I can't seem to find a definitive answer to is when I implement the rewrite to remove file extensions/replace underscores with dashes in our URLs, do the webpage file names need to be edited to the new format? From what I understand the webpage file names must remain the same for the rewrites in the .htaccess to work. However, our internal links (including canonical links) must be changed to the new URL format. Can anyone shed light on this? Also, I'm aware that implementing URL rewriting improperly could negatively affect our SERP rankings. If I redirect our old website directory structure to our new structure using this rewrite, are my bases covered in regards to having the proper 301 redirects in place to not affect our rankings negatively? Please offer any advice/reliable guides to handle this properly. Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheDude0 -
I'm updating content that is out of date. What is the best way to handle if I want to keep old content as well?
So here is the situation. I'm working on a site that offers "Best Of" Top 10 list type content. They have a list that ranks very well but is out of date. They'd like to create a new list for 2014, but have the old list exist. Ideally the new list would replace the old list in search results. Here's what I'm thinking, but let me know if you think theres a better way to handle this: Put a "View New List" banner on the old page Make sure all internal links point to the new page Rel=canonical tag on the old list pointing to the new list Does this seem like a reasonable way to handle this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jim_shook0 -
Best set up for mobile site for SEO
Hello Does anyone have any input into what is the best way to have a mobile website URL structure for not responsive display sites. mobile.site.com www.site.com/m/ or neither have it just display on the same URL. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | christaylorconsulting0 -
Page A Best for Users, but B Ranks
This is real estate MLS listings related. I have a page "B" with lots of unique content (MLS thumbnails mixed with guide overview writing, pictures etc) which outranks "A" which is a page simply showing MLS thumbnails with map feature included. I am linking from "B" to "A" with anchor "KEYWORD for sale" to indicate to search engines that "A" is the page I want to rank, even though "B" has more unique content. It hasn't worked so far.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi5
Questions: Should I avoid linking from "B" to "A" as that could impact how well "B" ranks? Should I leave this setup and over time hope search engines will give "A" a chance to rank? Include some unique content on "A" mostly not viewable without clicking "Read more" link? I don't foresee many users will click "Read more" as they are really just looking for the properties for sale and do rarely care about written material when searching for "KEYWORD for sale". Should I "no index, follow" A as there are limited to none unique content and this could enhance chance of ranking better for B? When I write blog posts and it includes "KEYWORD for sale" should I link to "A" (best for users) or link to "B" since that page has more potential to rank really well and still is fairly good for users? Ranking for "B" is not creating a large bounce rate, just that "A" is even better. Thank you,
Kristian0 -
Is it best to condense 2 similar category pages?
After reading Rand's great article about building Seo focused pages to serve topics, not keywords (http://moz.com/blog/topics-people-over-keywords-rankings-whiteboard-friday ) I started looking at my site. Question: I have 2 very similar category pages, orginally built to go after similar but different keyword terms. For example, one is: domain.com/blue-rings.html and the other is domain.com/blue-bands.com. (bridal jewelry) "Blue" is just a hypothetical type. At one time I could rank for "blue-rings" and "blue-bands". But with google changes, I think it's better to focus on a general term, right? Not set up similar pages, with same product, for very similar keywords. I'm thinking that having these 2 pages could be actually hurting, as they are competing with each other. Any recommendations? Thanks folks! Ron
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yatesandcojewelers0 -
Optimal site structure for travel site
Hi there, I am seo-managing a travel website where we are going to make a new site structure next year. We have about 4000 pages on the site at the moment. The structure is only 2-levels at the moment: Level 1: Homepage Level 2: All other pages (4000 individual pages - (all with different urls)) We are adding another 2-3 levels, but we have a challenge: We have potentially 2 roads to the same product (e.g. "phuket diving product") domain.com/thailand/activities/diving/phuket-diving-product.asp domain.com/activities/diving/thailand/phuket-diving-product.asp I would very much appreciate your view on the problem: How do I solve this dilemma/challenge from a SEO standpoint? I want to avoid DC if possible, I also only want one landing page - for many reasons. And usability is of course also very important. Best regards, Chris
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sembseo0