New Site Structure and 404s. Should I redirect everything?
-
Hi fellow Mozzers,
I've recently re-released a site and also took the opportunity to change/clean up the URL structure. As a result of this Google is starting to report many 404s such as below;
blog/tag/get-fit/
blog/tag/top-presents/
Most of these 404 errors are from tag or category pages which simply don't exist any more (because they were unnecessary, crap or irrelevant). Although there's also a few posts I've removed.
My question is whether it's worth redirecting all these tags and pages to the root directory of the site's new blog (as there isn't really a new page which is similar or appropriate) or just to leave them as 404 errors. Bearing in mind;
-
They don't really rank for anything
-
There's little if any links pointing to these pages
Thanks.
-
-
The 410 Gone essentially means "I'm aware that page used to be here, but it has been taken away on purpose and it won't be coming back". Whereas 404 Not Found means "I don't know anything about that page - as far as I know it never existed".
You can see how the first scenario applies to your pages much more specifically than the second.
But as Tom points out, if you don't have the URLs in your sitemap or xml sitemap and nobody's linking to them, the 404s will eventually cause the Search engines to drop the URLs from their index.
Frankly I'd just let the URLs drop and spend the time on something more valuable. Go earn a few more links
Paul
-
ok, I'll probably seek out any pages with the chance of link juice and get those re-directed to the root.
Anything which is utterly pointless or too rubbish to care about, I think I'll let die.
Thanks again
-
Hi Paul,
Yes, that's where my thoughts were heading - it's nice to get confirmation
A 410 code?... interesting. I hadn't considered that
Thanks
-
Your mileage may vary, but I've redirected a lot more than 100 before to a root domain and everything has gone OK. If you could split it up, it might ease your worries - but as you said earlier, there isn't a relevant page to point these URLs to, so the root domain should suffice.
I would definitely consider what Paul has to say below, which is what I was trying to get at in my second point. There's also a point that if 404s are a perfectly normal occurrence for websites. Again, provided that there isn't a gregarious amount (which ~100 definitely isn't), it won't be an issue to return a few 404s. It only would be if it interrupted a user journey, which I can't imagine /tag/ subfolders would.
Either way mate, I think you'll be fine how you pursue.
-
You've pretty much answered all the standard questions that would lead to a decision, Alex - and the answer is "no".
- Do the existing pages have any rank? Nope
- Any valuable incoming links? Nope
- Does the new site have equivalent or equally relevant content to point to? No again
So you knew exactly the questions to ask, and your instincts were right on. Perfect scenario where the urls should just be left to die.
Technically, this sort of url should return a 410 Gone server response, but that would take some extra coding. Returning 404 Not Found in this instance is pretty common and will do the job.
Hope that helps;
Paul
-
Hi Tom,
thanks for the reply.
Do you think it's fine to re-direct them all to the blog's root page?
The concern I have is that, there's probably about 100 pages and I won't be re-directing to a page which is really relevant to the original. I don't want it to appear manipulative in anyway.
-
Provided that there aren't an absolute ton of them (like thousands/tens of thousands), then I would 301 redirect them. If there was a massive ammount, too many redirects in your .htaccess can slow your site, but that's only in extreme cases.
Having said that, if there are no links pointing to the page and the URLs aren't in the sitemap, then eventually Google will stop trying to crawl them (as there's nothing pointing to the URL). I'd just 301 redirect anyway - any little bit of "strength/juice" that they did have could help another page.
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 is the best structure for paginating comment structures on pages to preserve the maximum SEO juice?
You have a full webpage with a great amount of content, images & media. This is a social blogging site where other members can leave their comments and reactions to the article. Over time there are say 1000 comments on this page. So we set the canonical URL, and use Rel (Prev & Next) to tell the bots that the next subsequent block of 100 comments is attributed to the primary URL. Or... We allow the newest 10 comments to exist on the primary URL, with a "see all" comments link that refers to a new URL, and that is where the rest of the comments are paginated. Which option does the community feel would be most appropriate and would adhere to the best practices for managing this type of dynamic comment growth? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HoloGuy0 -
What's the best way to A/B test new version of your website having different URL structure?
Hi Mozzers, Hope you're doing good. Well, we have a website, up and running for a decent tenure with millions of pages indexed in search engines. We're planning to go live with a new version of it i.e a new experience for our users, some changes in site architecture which includes change in URL structure for existing URLs and introduction of some new URLs as well. Now, my question is, what's the best way to do a A/B test with the new version? We can't launch it for a part of users (say, we'll make it live for 50% of the users, an remaining 50% of the users will see old/existing site only) because the URL structure is changed now and bots will get confused if they start landing on different versions. Will this work if I reduce crawl rate to ZERO during this A/B tenure? How will this impact us from SEO perspective? How will those old to new 301 URL redirects will affect our users? Have you ever faced/handled this kind of scenario? If yes, please share how you handled this along with the impact. If this is something new to you, would love to know your recommendations before taking the final call on this. Note: We're taking care of all existing URLs, properly 301 redirecting them to their newer versions but there are some new URLs which are supported only on newer version (architectural changes I mentioned above), and these URLs aren't backward compatible, can't redirect them to a valid URL on old version.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | _nitman0 -
To Redirect or Not
I have a strange situation and looking for advice on how well a permanent redirect of url will work. I have an eCommerce site called twpstain.com. This site sells TWP Deck stain and the URL/Content is fully owned by me. We do not however own the TWP brand and have always operated with permission from the manufacturer as an Authorized dealer. Circumstance have come up where they now want to be in control of all URLS that have the name "TWP" in them. Not sure if they legally can do this but they can cut me off with product if I do not comply. My options are: 1. A permanent redirect of entire site to new URL that does not have the word "TWP" in the url. 2. Give them the URL but they are willing to have me use the URL as I have in the past. A contract for this would be drawn up to cover me for years to come and possibly offer compensation if they decide not to renew. My concerns are numerous but the question for the Moz community is to how well the 301 redirect will work and will I lose my rankings? I currently dominate the rankings for my site and I very concerned that there will be major loss of sales and traffic. Any help or opinions on this would be much appreciated.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dogtopiamichigan0 -
Redirecting non www site
Hello Ladies and Gentlemen. I 100% agree with the redirecting of the non www domain name. After all we see so many times, especially in MOZ how the two different domains contain different links, different DA and of course different PA. So I have posed the question to our IT company, "How would we go about redirecting our non www domain to the www version?", "Where would we do that?", " we cant do the redirect on our webserver because the website is listed as an IP address, not a domain name, so would we do the redirect somewhere at GoDaddy?" who is currently maintain our DNS record So here is the response from IT: " I would setup a CNAME record in DNS (GoDaddy), such that no matter if you go to the bare domain, or the www, you end up in the same place. As for SEO, having a 301 redirect for your bare domain isn't necessary, because both the bare domain and the www are the same domain. 301 is a redirect for "permanently moved" and is common when you change domain names. Using the bare domain or the www are NOT DIFFERENT DOMAINS, so the 301 would not be accurate, and you'd be telling engines you've moved, when you haven't - which may negatively impact your rank. It sounds to me that IT is NOT recommending the redirect. How can this be? Or are we talking about two different things? Will the redirect cause the melt down as the IT company suggests? Or do they nut understand SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Davenport-Tractor0 -
Mobile Site Outranking Main Site
Hi, We have recently been hit with a problem regarding our mobile site, where it is outranking our main site. This is causing a drop in orders and ranknings for our main site. It would appear that google has indexed our mobile site and so the two are now competing against each other. Our main site is on a .co.uk and our mobile site on a .mobi, but we have now taken down the mobile site until we get this sorted. Does anyone else have any experience of this happening and how to stop it happening again? Thanks Steve
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Steve251 -
Internal Site Structure Question (URL Formation and Internal Link Design)
Hi, I have an e-commerce website that has an articles section: There is an articles.aspx file that can be reached from the top menu and it holds links to all of the articles as follows: xxx.com/articles/article1.aspx
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeytzNet
xxx.com/articles/article2.aspx I want to add several new articles under a new sections, for example a complete set of articles under the title of "buying guide" and the question is what would be the best way? I was thinking of adding a "computers-buying-guides.aspx" accessible from the top menu / footer and from it linking to: xxx.com/computer-buying-ghudes/what-to-check-prior-to-buying-a-laptop.aspx
xxx.com/computer-buying-ghudes/weight-vs-performance.aspx
etc. Any thoughts / recommendations? Thanks0 -
Site #2 beats site #1 in every aspect?
Hey guys, loving SEOMoz so far and will definitely continue my subscription after the free trial. I have a question however, which I am really confused about. When researching my primary keyword, I have found that the second ranked site beats the top site in every single aspect, apart from domain age, which is almost 6 years for the top one and 6 months for the second. When I say every single aspect, I mean everything. More authority for the page and domain, more links, more anchor text links, more authoritive links, more social signals, more relevant links, better domain (although second ranked site is a .net), better MozRank, better MozTrust etc.... I have noticed though, that in the UK SERPs, those sites are switched, so #2 is actually #1. Could it be that the US SERPs just haven't updated yet, or am I missing something completely different.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | darrenspeed1 -
One site or five sites for geo targeted industry
OK I'm looking to try and generate traffic for people looking for accommodation. I'm a big believer in the quality of the domain being used for SEO both in terms of the direct benefit of it having KW in it but also the effect on CTR a good domain can have. So I'm considering these options: Build a single site using the best, broad KW-rich domain I can get within my budget. This might be something like CheapestHotelsOnline.com Advantages: Just one site to manage/design One site to SEO/market Better potential to resell the site for a few million bucks Build 5 sites, each catering to a different region using 5 matching domains within my budget. These might be domains like CheapHotelsEurope.com, CheapHotelsAsia.com etc Advantages: Can use domains that are many times 'better' by adding a geo-qualifier. This should help with CTR and search Can be more targeted with SEO & Marketing So hopefully you see the point. Is it worth the dilution of SEO & marketing activities to get the better domain names? I'm chasing the longtail searchs whetever I do. So I'll be creating 5K+ pages each targeting a specific area. These would be pages like CheapestHotelsOnline.com/Europe/France/Paris or CheapHoteslEurope.com/France/Paris to target search terms targeting hotels in Paris So with that thought, is SEO even 100% diluted? Say, a link to the homepage of the first option would end up passing 1/5000th of value through to the Paris page. However a link to the second option would pass 1/1000th of the link juice through to the Paris page. So by thet logic, one only needs to do 1/5th of the work for each of the 5 sites ... that implies total SEO work would be the same? Thanks as always for any help! David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OzDave0