Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Tool to search relative vs absolute internal links
-
I'm preparing for a site migration from a .co.uk to a .com and I want to ensure all internal links are updated to point to the new primary domain.
What tool can I use to check internal links as some are relative and others are absolute so I need to update them all to relative.
-
Thanks for the replies, I ended up getting a techie to run a script through the site for me which gave me all the info I needed. None of the tools mentioned did exactly what I was looking for.
-
That tool that Matt mentioned looked interesting, but it would have been painful to have to go through your site one page at a time.
As usual for crawling tasks like this, the paid version of Screaming Frog will do what you want. You can tell it to crawl your site looking for **href="yoursite.com **to find all occurrences of absolute internal links. You'd have to do a bit of regex magic to get it to find the relative links, but since by their nature a relative link will work even with the domain change, not sure why you'd be looking for those.
Or you could just do a find and replace of the URL string using something like phpMyAdmin directly in your database. That would be fastest as it would find & replace in one go, instead of having to manually edit each page.
Is this a WordPress site, there's a plugin specifically for finding and automatically updating these links. (It basically automates and puts a UI on the phpMyAdmin process mentioned above.)
Any of those ideas help?
Paul
-
Any chance anyone knows any other tools I can use to crawl a site and give me a report of absolute and relative internal links?
-
Thanks for the reply although I've checked that add-on and it's not available for download anymore. Any chance you can send me the local files? I've mailed the admin but haven't got a reply yet.
Unless anyone knows of any other tools?
-
I'll give you the best answer I can but at least consider the possibility that absolute URLs are actually better long term. Other than moving a site around as you're doing now, absolute URLs win on every factor.
That said, you're looking for FireLinkReport.
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/firelinkreport-research-on-page-links-firefox/17714/
It's a FFox add on that does internal vs. external, absolute vs. relative, etc. and this should create a report that helps you do what you need.
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
-
Abnormally high internal link reported in Google Search Console not matching Moz reports
If I'm looking at our internal link count and structure on Google Search Console, some pages are listed as having over a thousand internal links within our site. I've read that having too many internal links on a page devalues that page's PageRank, because the value is divided amongst the pages it links out to. Likewise, I've heard having too many internal links is just bad in general for SEO. Is that true? The problem I'm facing is determining how Google is "discovering" these internal links. If I'm just looking at one single page reported with, say, 1,350 links and I'm just looking at the code, it may only have 80 or 90 actual links. Moz will confirm this, as well. So why would Google Search Console report different? Should I be concerned about this?
Technical SEO | | Closetstogo0 -
Image Search
Hello Community, I have been reading and researching about image search and trying to find patterns within the results but unfortunately I could not get to a conclusion on 2 matters. Hopefully this community would have the answers I am searching for. 1) Watermarked Images (To remove or not to remove watermark from photos) I see a lot of confusion on this subject and am pretty much confused myself. Although it might be true that watermarked photos do not cause a punishment, it sure does not seem to help. At least in my industry and on a bunch of different random queries I have made, watermarked images are hard to come by on Google's images results. Usually the first results do not have any watermarks. I have read online that Google takes into account user behavior and most users prefer images with no watermark. But again, it is something "I have read online" so I don't have any proof. I would love to have further clarification and, if possible, a definite guide on how to improve my image results. 2) Multiple nested folders (Folder depth) Due to speed concerns our tech guys are using 1 image per folder and created a convoluted folder structure where the photos are actually 9 levels deep. Most of our competition and many small Wordpress blogs outrank us on Google images and on ALL INSTANCES I have checked, their photos are 3, 4 or 5 levels deep. Never inside 9 nested folders.
Technical SEO | | Koki.Mourao
So... A) Should I consider removing the watermark - which is not that intrusive but is visible?
B) Should I try to simplify the folder structure for my photos? Thank you0 -
Will Google Recrawl an Indexed URL Which is No Longer Internally Linked?
We accidentally introduced Google to our incomplete site. The end result: thousands of pages indexed which return nothing but a "Sorry, no results" page. I know there are many ways to go about this, but the sheer number of pages makes it frustrating. Ideally, in the interim, I'd love to 404 the offending pages and allow Google to recrawl them, realize they're dead, and begin removing them from the index. Unfortunately, we've removed the initial internal links that lead to this premature indexation from our site. So my question is, will Google revisit these pages based on their own records (as in, this page is indexed, let's go check it out again!), or will they only revisit them by following along a current site structure? We are signed up with WMT if that helps.
Technical SEO | | kirmeliux0 -
How to fix broken links?
Hi, I use WordPress CMS with Yoast SEO plugin. I have just found out that my 403 errors increased dramatically. It seems that all my tags below of each post are being broken for some reason. When i click on the tags i get the following massage: **403 Forbidden Request forbidden by administrative rules. ** I assume it has something to do with the configuration within Yoast SEO plugin. Dose anyone know how should i fix that? Thanks, Raviv evsGujA
Technical SEO | | Indiatravelz0 -
Self-referencing links
I personally think that self-referencing links are silly. It's blatantly easy for Google to tell and my instinct says that the link juice for this would simply evaporate rather than passing back to itself. Does anyone have information backing me up from an authoritative source? I can't find any info about this linked to Matt Cutts, Rand or any of those I look up to.
Technical SEO | | IPROdigital0 -
Advice on Linking to an Adult Related Website
I have a question regarding whether or not Google would penalize my main website for linking to a website that has adult content. The site I am linking to is not a porn site, rather it is a site that sells web site templates for adult related stores selling sexy toys, videos, etc. For example my site that is linking to the adult related website is here: http://www.websitetemplatedesign.com/ and the link to the site is in the footer at the bottom left which is an icon. And it links to http://www.adultsextemplates.com/ Im just looking for advice as to whether or not this could be a penalty or not. I did suffer major SERP loss in the last month and Im trying to find what I am doing that may have caused this. Any advice would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | jmccommas0 -
Add to Cart Link
We have shopping cart links (<a href's,="" not="" input="" buttons)="" that="" link="" to="" a="" url="" along="" the="" lines="" of="" cart="" add="" 123&return="/product/123. </p"></a> <a href's,="" not="" input="" buttons)="" that="" link="" to="" a="" url="" along="" the="" lines="" of="" cart="" add="" 123&return="/product/123. </p">The SEOMoz site crawls are flagging these as a massive number of 302 redirects and I also wonder what sort of effect this is having on linkjuice flowing around the site. </a> <a href's,="" not="" input="" buttons)="" that="" link="" to="" a="" url="" along="" the="" lines="" of="" cart="" add="" 123&return="/product/123. </p">I can see several possible solutions: Make the links nofollow Make the links input buttons Block /cart/add with robots.txt Make the links 301 instead of 302 Make the links javascript (probably worst care) All of these would result in an identical outcome for the UX, but are very different solutions. What would you suggest?</a>
Technical SEO | | Aspedia0