Renamed a page and created a 301, page lost its rankings.
-
We changed a page name to fall under the root of our site from domain.com/page1/page301d/ to domain.com/page301d/ and after 2 weeks it still is not back to its #3 position. Now it is on the bottom of page 3. I cant figure out what im doing wrong here.
The original .com/page1/ that this page fell under was removed totally and redirected to antoher page that was more relevant. I went ahead and re-enabled this page and its contnent, because the page was linking out to the page we 301d. This page we re-enabled had about 150 links poitning to it and therefore i was thinking that maybe the link juice from this page (or relevancy) via an internal link was helping it rank. This was updated about 6 days ago and the internal link is back
Any other ideas why this might not be working. Ive checked all the 301s, content has not changed on the page.
We have updated the strcuture for many pages. Instead of having the pages in question fall under anotehr page, they all fall under the root and its sub content is now only 2 levels deep , instead of being 3.
hope that makese sense.
-
Thanks fellas for the replies. After a week and a half the rankigns came back and we actually moved up one spot. Essentially i removed 301's that were very old and were giving google 3 jumps to the new page (meaning there were mulitple old pages that redirected in order of history to the newest one). I also 301d all the old pages to the new page. We also re-enabled a page that was the parent directory of this page (this page linked to the page in question)and had about 150 links (orignally 301d to another page).
Thanks
-
Just as Matt says not all 301 are equal.
And you need to check your sitemap about changing URL. Maybe sitemap holds also old URL?
You need to check your content about old URL too and change it to new one.
You need to check your canonical about old URL and to replace with new one.For me this is technical SEO/onpage SEO issue and you forget something with 301 redirect.
-
301 redirects do not pass 100% of the link "juice" you have earned for the original page. There's a longer discussion about it here: https://moz.com/community/q/how-much-juice-do-you-lose-in-a-301-redirect
Most SEOs I know say it generally passes about 90% of the value. But what I've found is that it passes more as each link is rediscovered by Google as well. So if you had an eBay homepage link and it's scraped every 10 minutes, you'd get the juice from that link back much quicker than a blog post from 2011 that Google may never visit again.
I would say just keep working on the site & move forward. You'll either always be around 90% of the previous juice so keep working or you'll gain most of it back over time as those links are re-checked, so ... keep working.
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
-
When making content pages to a specific page; should you index it straight away in GSC or let Google crawl it naturally?
When making content pages to a specific page; should you index it straight away in GSC or let Google crawl it naturally?
On-Page Optimization | | Jacksons_Fencing0 -
Duplication in landing page
This is driving me mad, I have a site that for some reason google and moz pick up the landing page as a duplicate. They see "mysite/" and "mysite/index.html" as two different pages and giving me warnings for duplication. I have no 301 included at this time and I am using foundation as the base. This is occurring both on a localhost test bed and live....... anyone got an idea how to correct.
On-Page Optimization | | AndyBirtles0 -
Sub-pages have no pa
I took over a website a few months ago which is not performing well at all for chosen keywords. When I first inspected it, I found a rel canonical tag pointing to the homepage on every page. This was quickly deleted and all the pages were fetched in webmaster tools. 3 months later and the website is still performing badly. When I use the mozbar, it shows that all of the sub-pages have a pa of 1. It is only a small site and all of the pages are linked to on the navbar in a simple way. The links are not made using javascript and all the pages are on the sitemap which is submitted to wmt. I have checked that all of the changes that have been made have been indexed as well. Could it be possible that google still sees the canonical tag even though its not there? I can't think of any other reason why the pages have no pa or why it is so far behind the competitors despite having better content and links. Also, the site is appropriate for adults, but I found (among the mess left for me) a meta ratings tag set to "general". This has now been deleted, could it negatively affect rankings?
On-Page Optimization | | maxweb0 -
Too many on page links
Hello, I have a page that isn't ranking very well. http://nicontrols.com/uk/drives-motors/variable-speed-drives According to the MOZ research tools I have too many on page links. I believe most of these are a result of the advanced filtration options on the left hand side of the page. I don't want to remove the filters as they are extremely useful for customers but I am also worried about the number of links Anyone get any ideas about the number of links? Should I care?
On-Page Optimization | | DavidLenehan0 -
Would I be safe canonicalizing comments pages on the first page?
We are building comment pages for an article site that live on a separate URL from the article (I know this is not ideal, but it is necessary). Each comments page will have a summary of the article at the top. Would I be safe using the first page of comments as the canonical URL for all subsequent comment pages? Or could I get away with using the actual article page as the canonical URL for all comment pages?
On-Page Optimization | | BostonWright0 -
Is there a SEO penalty for multi links on same page going to same destination page?
Hi, Just a quick note. I hope you are able to assist. To cut a long story short, on the page below http://www.bookbluemountains.com.au/ -> Features Specials & Packages (middle column) we have 3 links per special going to the same page.
On-Page Optimization | | daveupton
1. Header is linked
2. Click on image link - currently with a no follow
3. 'More info' under the description paragraph is linked too - currently with a no follow Two arguments are as follows:
1. The reason we do not follow all 3 links is to reduce too many links which may appear spammy to Google. 2. Counter argument:
The point above has some validity, However, using no follow is basically telling the search engines that the webmaster “does not trust or doesn’t take responsibility” for what is behind the link, something you don’t want to do within your own website. There is no penalty as such for having too many links, the search engines will generally not worry after a certain number.. nothing that would concern this business though. I would suggest changing the no follow links a.s.a.p. Could you please advise thoughts. Many thanks Dave Upton [long signature removed by staff]0 -
301 redirect OK for a newer version of a page that is a different url?
I have about 500 products with multiple urls for the same product, but different versions. I sell wine and have a different page for each vintage. I've decided that is not the best way to go, and want to point the older vintage pages to the latest version page, and make that the only page for the product as time goes on. Do I have to put a link in the text from each older page to the newer, or can I use a 301 to redirect them to the new page? I don't want google to think I'm pulling something funny.
On-Page Optimization | | JeanYates0