422 vs 404 Status Codes
-
We work with an automotive industry platform provider and whenever a vehicle is removed from inventory, a 404 error is returned. Being that inventory moves so quickly, we have a host of 404 errors in search console.
The fix that the platform provider proposed was to return a 422 status code vs a 404. I'm not familiar with how a 422 may impact our optimization efforts. Is this a good approach, since there is no scalable way to 301 redirect all of those dead inventory pages.
-
Thanks Mike.
Your initial solution would be preferred, but its not scalable. We are talking about over 100 websites with varying levels of inventory.
I was thinking along the lines of the keeping the 404 or 410 status. It was just odd when the vendor proposed a 422 error, when its not a preferred option in Google's support pages. I was just wondering if anyone used the 422 response code before and if so, why.
-
Personally I think you should set up a process whereby every time a vehicle and/or part is removed, you have someone automatically 301 it to the previous step in the site navigation. So when "blue widget 3" is removed from the site, anyone landing on that page or who has it bookmarked winds up on the "Widget" category page. Now there may not be an easy way to do it right this second because of how many there are now, but if you get in the habit of doing it and slowly work toward fixing the others then you'll be in a good position in the future to keep this from being an issue again.
Now if you really don't want to attempt that... 404s aren't necessarily horrible (too many can be). If your site is properly serving 404s then you won't be penalized for it but in this case you might want to consider using 410 status codes. Its a stronger signal for removal than a 404 and you don't plan on the product ever coming back so marking it Gone should get it removed from the index faster while also helping to keep you from competing against yourself in the SERPs when a new but similar product comes into stock.
-
Do pages of vehicles that are in inventory for a short time actually deliver monetizable traffic?
If the answer is no, because they are up for such a short amount of time, you would have to weigh the value of having them indexable in the first place vs creating an ever-growing list of missing pages.
Having a lot of 404s or 422s is a bit of a negative. Is there really no way to add the step of 301ing to their removal?
Making the pages non-indexable via noindex once they are indexed will not remove them. You either have to 301 and/or request removal from the G's index. Is there a programmatic way to turn their removal into a 301 to the top inventory category page?
Good luck!
-
A 422 is an unprocessable error, which I think will have as much impact as a 404 (page not found error).
You could make pages non indexable once a vehicle has been removed from the inventory. This shouldn't impact you SEO efforts.
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
-
"nofollow" vs. "no follow"
Does anyone know if it is problematic to have a space between the "no" and the "follow"? I just discovered our CMS has been inserting a space and am trying to understand if it the reason why something that we were trying to keep from being indexed has become indexed.
Technical SEO | | LivDetrick0 -
Disallowing URL Parameters vs. Canonicalizing
Hi all, I have a client that has a unique search setup. So they have Region pages (/state/city). We want these indexed and are using self-referential canonicals. They also have a search function that emulates the look of the Region pages. When you search for, say, Los Angeles, the URL changes to _/search/los+angeles _and looks exactly like /ca/los-angeles. These search URLs can also have parameters (/search/los+angeles?age=over-2&time[]=part-time), which we obviously don't want indexed. Right now my concern is how best to ensure the /search pages don't get indexed and we don't get hit with duplicate content penalties. The options are this: Self-referential canonicals for the Region pages, and disallow everything after the second slash in /search/ (so the main search page is indexed) Self-referential canonicals for the Region pages, and write a rule that automatically canonicalizes all other search pages to /search. Potential Concern: /search/ URLs are created even with misspellings. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Alces1 -
Tags v a short code for city and town seo
My seo strategy is based around uk county geo and genre pages I want to optimise for cities and towns too and wanted to know your thoughts on tags v a nice little short code plug in that will punt out a random band order from that area and a genre. Then thinking of unique geo and genre target. What do you think? [loop type=bands-to-hire taxonomy=Genres term=blues-band count=3 orderby=random]
Technical SEO | | agentmorris1
[field thumbnail]
[field genres]
[field title-link]
[field excerpt] [/loop]0 -
301 vs 302
Hello everyone! I'm working with a site right now that is currently formatted as subdomain.domain.net. The old version of the site was formatted as domain.net, with domain.com and several other variants redirecting to the current format, subdomain.domain.net. All of these redirects are 302, and I'm wondering if I should have all these changed to 301. Many of our old backlinks go to the old format of domain.net and i know the juice isn't being passed through, but i was wondering if there is any reason why you may want a 302 over a 301 in this case? Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | KathleenDC0 -
Increase 404 errors or 301 redirects?
Hi all, I'm working on an e-commerce site that sells products that may only be available for a certain period of time. Eg. A product may only be selling for 1 year and then be permanently out of stock. When a product goes out of stock, the page is removed from the site regardless of any links it may have gotten over time. I am trying to figure out the best way to handle these permanently out of stock pages. At the moment, the site is set up to return a 404 page for each of these products. There are currently 600 (and increasing) instances of this appearing on Google Webmasters. I have read that too many 404 errors may have a negative impact on your site, and so thought I might 301 redirect these URLs to a more appropriate page. However I've also read that too many 301 redirects may have a negative impact on your site. I foresee this to be an issue several years down the road when the site has thousands of expired products which will result in thousands of 404 errors or 301 redirects depending on which route I take. Which would be the better route? Is there a better solution?
Technical SEO | | Oxfordcomma0 -
Noindex vs. page removal - Panda recovery
I'm wondering whether there is a consensus within the SEO community as to whether noindexing pages vs. actually removing pages is different from Google Pandas perspective?Does noindexing pages have less value when removing poor quality content than physically removing ie. either 301ing or 404ing the page being removed and removing the links to it from the site? I presume that removing pages has a positive impact on the amount of link juice that gets to some of the remaining pages deeper into the site, but I also presume this doesn't have any direct impact on the Panda algorithm? Thanks very much in advance for your thoughts, and corrections on my assumptions 🙂
Technical SEO | | agencycentral0 -
301s vs. rel=canonical for duplicate content across domains
Howdy mozzers, I just took on a telecommunications client who has spent the last few years acquiring smaller communications companies. When they took over these companies, they simply duplicated their site at all the old domains, resulting in a bunch of sites across the web with the exact same content. Obviously I'd like them all 301'd to their main site, but I'm getting push back. Am I OK to simply plug in rel=canonical tags across the duplicate sites? All the content is literally exactly the same. Thanks as always
Technical SEO | | jamesm5i0 -
Source code structure: Position of content within the tag
Within the section of the source code of a site I work on, there are a number of distinct sections. The 1st one, appearing first in the source code, contains the code for the primary site navigation tabs and links. The second contains the keyword-rich page content. My question is this: if i could fix the layout so that the page still visually displayed in the same way as it does now, would it be advantageous for me to stick the keyword-rich content section at the top of the , above the navigation? I want the search engines to be able to reach the keyword-rich content faster when they crawl pages on the site; however, I dont want to implement this fix if it wont have any appreciable benefit; nor if it will be harmful to the search-engine's accessibilty to my primary navigation links. Does anyone have any experience of this working, or thoughts on whether it will make a difference? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | Tinhat0