What's the best way to switch over to a new site with a different CMS?
-
Is it better to 301 or to closely duplicate each page URL when switching over to a new website from an established site with good ranking and a different CMS ( Drupal switching to Wordpress)?
-
I would base this on the number of pages and your ability to get into the database of the CMS environments. Depending on how deep your link structure is, this may be a quick process. If you are able to map the fields correctly, you can duplicate the aliases with a little elbow grease. Simply export the main drupal content table and reconstruct it as a wordpress table, then upload.
If you don't feel like handling the MySQL for this, I would still recommend duplicating the aliases... 301's are very useful, but it does seem like their is a small bit of decline as the SE's reset your info.
Do keep in mind the your page code will also need attention. Drupal vs Wordpress in its rendering will produce different code. Your SEO capabilities are also going to be effected by the plugins that you are using in WP
-
Is it better to 301 or to closely duplicate each page URL when switching over to a new website
You will either duplicate the URL or you wont. There is not any "closeness" factor.
If you can duplicate the URL, you will retain 100% of your backlink value. Otherwise using a 301 is the next best option.
If you do need to change URLs, I would highly recommend taking some time to ensure your new URLs will be stable. Plan to keep your new URL for the next 10+ years even if you change CMS.
-
use tech free URLs (i.e. don't end your pages with .html or .php)
-
take some time to really think out your URL structure. The deepest pages should ideally be within 4 clicks maximum of your landing page. If your URL is /cars/ford/sports/mustang/gt/2011 and if each folder represents a click users need to make, then your URL should be adjusted. Perhaps /ford-mustang-gt/2011 would work.
-
avoid adding anything which may change in your URL. Your company name, a department name, etc. Mergers and other changes are frequent in today's world.
-
-
I believe they say you lose some link juice through a 301 redirect so ideally make the URL's the same. WordPress has a lot of easy to handle options with it's permalink structure to mimic most URL set ups. If your old URL's weren't very "seo friendly" then you should make better URL's on your new WP site and 301 the old to the new.
-
We recently had to do this too. URL's changed completely and it was a bit of a pain. It wasn't wordpress/drupal but 301's are the best way. Took a little while to clean up the stragglers too. But if you ensure you point all you can to the new pages your SERPs should carry over fine without penalty I've found. Get those new site maps submitted asap too.
-
Are you going to be on the same host? If you have 1000's of URLs, then 301 and old URLs you don't want to use to category pages. If you have a small site, just make the same URLs and don't 301.
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
-
Cross domain canonical for different branded sites
Hi everyone, We are working on 5 websites that offer the same products but are of different brands and locations. They are owned by the same company, but each run independently. On the sites, they have content such as privacy policies, terms and conditions and guides that are the same across all brands. Will publishing these be flagged as duplicate content by Google? If yes, is it recommended to add rel=canonical to all duplicate pages across all sites pointing to one of the five? We are just concerned that the 4 sites with duplicate content would be valued less than the canonical as a result of passed link equity. We are doing SEO optimisations for all and are trying to rank them well in SERPs. If a canonical is not the best solution here, what would be the best to do apart from completely rewriting content? Is it noindex tag or turning the texts into images and adding to PDFs? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | nhhernandez1 -
Will multiple internal links with the same anchor text hurt a site's ranking?
Hello, I just watched this video from the Google Webmasters channel at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ybpXU0ckKQ My question: If a site is built up on subdomains, will linking the different subdomains with exact anchor text hurt the site's ranking? Thanks
Technical SEO | | arnoldwender0 -
Is it good practice to still pay for Best of the Web Directory (BOTW) and other similar one's you have to pay for?
I know that paid for links are hit by Google, but in the past these directories were okay. What about now? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | RoxBrock0 -
Redirect old URL's from referring sites?
Hi I have just came across some URL's from the previous web designer and the site structure has now changed. There are some links on the web however that are still pointing at the old deep weblinks. Without having to contact each site it there a way to automatically sort the links from the old structure www.mydomain.com/show/english/index.aspx to just www.mydomain.com Many Thanks
Technical SEO | | ocelot0 -
Structuring URL's for better SEO
Hello, We were rolling our fresh urls for our new service website. Currently we have our structure as www.practo.com/health/dental/clinic/bangalore We like to have it as www.practo.com/health/dental-clinic-bangalore Can someone advice us better which one of the above structure would work out better and why? Should this be a focus of attention while going ahead since this is like a search engine platform for patients looking out for actual doctors. Thanks, Aditya
Technical SEO | | shanky10 -
Does a CMS inhibit a site's crawlability?
I smell baloney but I could use a little backup from the community! My client was recently told by an SEO that search engines have a hard time getting to their site because using a CMS (like WordPress) doesn't allow "direct access to the html". Here is what they emailed my client: "Word Press (like your site is built with) and other similar “do it yourself” web builder programs and websites are not good for search engine optimization since they do not allow direct access to the HTML. Direct HTML access is needed to input important items to enhance your websites search engine visibility, performance and creditability in order to gain higher search engine rankings." Bots are blind to CMSs and html is html, correct? What do you think about the information given by the other SEO?
Technical SEO | | Adpearance0 -
New Site Search Critique
Hi I am a huge fan of the SEOMOZ site and this great community which has helped me learn the current SEO skills I have now which are still very basic compared to the pros on the forum. I have tried to follow best practice regarding onsite and technical seo when developing my new site www.cheapfindergames.com and I would really appreciate it if experts on the forum could spare a minute to critique the site from a search perspective please This will give any elements of what onsite and technical SEO I done well and what aspects still need work. I am currently trying to build quality links and social mentions into the site which will take time, and the site has been designed around usability and conversions. Many Thanks Ian
Technical SEO | | ocelot0 -
Different version of site for "users" who don't accept cookies considered cloaking?
Hi I've got a client with lots of content that is hidden behind a registration form - if you don't fill it out you can not proceed to the content. As a result it is not being indexed. No surprises there. They are only doing this because they feel it is the best way of capturing email addresses, rather than the fact that they need to "protect" the content. Currently users arriving on the site will be redirected to the form if they have not had a "this user is registered" cookie set previously. If the cookie is set then they aren't redirected and get to see the content. I am considering changing this logic to only redirecting users to the form if they accept cookies but haven't got the "this user is registered cookie". The idea being that search engines would then not be redirected and would index the full site, not the dead end form. From the clients perspective this would mean only very free non-registered visitors would "avoid" the form, yet search engines are arguably not being treated as a special case. So my question is: would this be considered cloaking/put the site at risk in any way? (They would prefer to not go down the First Click Free route as this will lower their email sign-ups.) Thank you!
Technical SEO | | TimBarlow0