Can we ignore "broken links" without redirecting to "new pages"?
-
Let's say we have reaplced www.website.com/page1 with www.website.com/page2.
Do we need to redirect page1 to page2 even page1 doesn't have any back-links?
If it's not a replacement, can we ignore a "lost page"?
Many websites loose hundreds of pages periodically. What's Google's stand on this. If a website has replaced or lost hundreds of links without reclaiming old links by redirection, will that hurts?
-
I highly recommend putting a 301 redirect in place for any links like the one you mentioned above.
Google wants the ensure that users have a great experience when in your website, and if there's even a slight chance that their visit could be interrupted by a broken link, you could be dinger. To stay safe, I recommend redirects.
-
Hi Patrick,
Will there be any issue if we do redirection for hundreds of pages in the process of link reclamation?
-
It is recommended you redirect page1 to page 2, don't worry about if there is any back link or not, Google already crawled the page1 and now if it turns to 404 you'll loose google rank given to that page. Let's say you go to your favorite restaurant and when you get there you found that the store is closed permanently, what you'll do you'll start looking for new restaurant, same issue with SEO here.
Hope this helps.
Antulio
-
Hi there
I would redirect the page to it's new URL because if this page ranked for any keywords or queries, the new page can stand to gain that visibility. I would also do it from a user experience standpoint. If a customer or user bookmarked that page, then they will be able to be redirected to the correct URL. So, my two cents, go ahead and redirect, especially if it's a few pages, and also make sure your internal links / sitemap XML are updated to the new URL.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
Patrick -
But how come we retain the reputation at Google? Page1 is familiar for Google. Page2 is new and cannot rank in Google for weeks and months. In this case, if we redirect page1 to page2....it must help somewhere right; even without back-links. We have noticed our new page was not ranking in Google for "same keyword" for weeks, but it would've made if we redirected it.
-
Hi,
We do use 301 redirect to pass link juice from one page to another page. If your webpage not ranking in top 10 or 20 and there is no backlink then you can ignore.
Thanks
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
-
Is "Author Rank," User Comments Driving Losses for YMYL Sites?
Hi, folks! So, our company publishes 50+ active, disease-specific news and perspectives websites -- mostly for rare diseases. We are also tenacious content creators: between news, columns, resource pages, and other content, we produce 1K+ pieces of original content across our network. Authors are either PhD scientists or patients/caregivers. All of our sites use the same design. We were big winners with the August Medic update in 2018 and subsequent update in September/October. However, the Medic update in March and de-indexing bug in April were huge losers for us across our monetized sites (about 10 in total). We've seen some recovery with this early June update, but also some further losses. It's a mixed bag. Take a look at this attached MOZ chart, which shows the jumps and falls around the various Medic updates. The pattern is very similar on many of our sites. As per JT Williamson's stellar article on EAT, I feel like we've done a good job in meeting those criteria, which has left we wondering what isn't jiving with the new core updates. I have two theories I wanted to run past you all: 1. Are user comments on YMYL sites problematic for Google now? I was thinking that maybe user comments underneath health news and perspectives articles might be concerning on YMYL sites now. On one hand, a healthy commenting community indicates an engaged user base and speaks to the trust and authority of the content. On the other hand, while the AUTHOR of the article might be a PhD researcher or a patient advocate, the people commenting -- how qualified are they? What if they are spouting off crazy ideas? Could Google's new update see user comments such as these as degrading the trust/authority/expertise of the page? The examples I linked to above have a good number of user comments. Could these now be problematic? 2. Is Google "Author Rank" finally happening, sort of? From what I've read about EAT -- particularly for YMYL sites -- it's important that authors have “formal expertise” and, according to Williamson, "an expert in the field or topic." He continues that the author's expertise and authority, "is informed by relevant credentials, reviews, testimonials, etc. " Well -- how is Google substantiating this? We no longer have the authorship markup, but is the algorithm doing its due diligence on authors in some more sophisticated way? It makes me wonder if we're doing enough to present our author's credentials on our articles, for example. Take a look -- Magdalena is a PhD researcher, but her user profile doesn't appear at the bottom of the article, and if you click on her name, it just takes you to her author category page (how WordPress'ish). Even worse -- our resource pages don't even list the author. Anyhow, I'd love to get some feedback from the community on these ideas. I know that Google has said there's nothing to do to "fix" these downturns, but it'd sure be nice to get some of this traffic back! Thanks! 243rn10.png
Algorithm Updates | | Michael_Nace1 -
Should one end URLs with or without a slash?
Moz, I am noticing that I need to go back and update my outbound links to your site. There are a lot of them because your content is so great and we love you guys. Could you explain your logic for making the change? Example on my Valid JSON-LD image sizes page: [https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed/](https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed/) redirected to: [https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed](https://moz.com/blog/state-of-searcher-behavior-revealed)
Algorithm Updates | | jessential0 -
Should I create a menu link for sitemap?
Hi guys, I am new to SEO and I have a question for you guys. We created a sitemap for our website. I was thinking of creating a sitemap link on our homepage. Do you think it's a good idea? Would this help us in terms of ranking improvements? Or would help with anything at all? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | ahmetkul0 -
Its the 21st April, and my non responsive page is still ranking the same ?
Hi, As you know the new algorithm is due today, can anybody confirm why my site wouldn't appear to be affected as yet? Cheers
Algorithm Updates | | CFCU0 -
How do I control the "link-tree" part of the SERP results?
Hey Mozanarians 🙂 Is there a way to change the pages that are shown on the "link tree"? (e.g. see bellow picture)
Algorithm Updates | | DanielBernhardt
Lets say that I dont want the "career" page to show on the "link tree" can I do that? Thanks and lots of love!
Daniel Bernhardt BLo9KSr.jpg0 -
Page details in Google Search
I noticed this morning a drop in the SERPs for a couple of my main keywords. And even though this is a little annoying the more pressing matter is that Google is not displaying the meta title I have specified for the majority of my sites pages, despite one being specified and knowing my site has them in place. Could this sudden change to not using my specified title be the cause of the drop, and why would they be being displayed by Google in the first place, when they are there to be used. The title currently being displayed inthe SERPs is not anything that has been specified in the past or from the previous latest crawl etc. Any insight would be appreciated. Tim
Algorithm Updates | | TimHolmes0 -
Double Listings On Page One
I've been noticing a trend over the past month and a half. My sites that use to get more than one page listed in certain SERPs are now being adjusted. It almost looks manual but I know it is most likely a change in the algorithm. Let's say I had a SERP where my site was showing two different sub-pages in a single SERP at #4 and #6 are now having one page being pushed up to #3 but the other page is being pushed back past the first page. I'm not worried about penalizations or loss of value. I have been seeing this accross many of my client's sites. I just wanted to confirm that others were seeing it as well (so I'm not going crazy) and/or if Google has made any announcements or leaks regarding this shift. Maybe it's just my sites coming of age or something but I would love to be able to explain it more knowledgeably than with a "Google might be doing this". BTW - This is not effecting any of my Brand SERPs.
Algorithm Updates | | BenRWoodard0
