301 Not Allowed...Other Solutions?
-
A client's site where both the www. and non-www. versions are both being indexed. The non-www. version have has roughly 1000 or so links where the www. version has over twice as much pointing back to the site. In addition, the www. version has higher domain authority.
Their programmer has suggested that they can't implement 301's permanent redirects across their site for a few reasons.
My question is, what would be the best alternative to block/redirect the non-www. version from being indexed yet still pass link-juice?
-
Hey James - I am curious as to why you think a 'canonical tag' wouldn't be a "long term fix"?
-
Thanks for the responses everyone. Everyone seems to be in agreement that a '301' is the proper course of action and should be explained that way.
I just have never run into a developer opposing the idea. So, thanks again for the feedback!
-
1st of all if the developer says he won't use the 301 then he's one very strange developer it's the basic of frontend development. But that being as it is, 301 is the best and most viable option but you do have a few other:
- tell GWT your prefered domain.
- have the devloper make a dynamic rel canonical, something like this (in php)
' ?>
in the above situation he of cause would have to make a function called checkURL to test for if the url begins with http://www and returns the right formatted version. and tell GWT what domain you prefer.
But again the only right way is a 301 and it's ridiculously simple to make.
-
If you properly communicate why 301 Redirects are the only proper solution, and you continue to run up against a dev who makes up pie in the sky technical "reasons" why they can't, then the question is whether they respect you enough, put enough value in your view, recommendation.
Setting that aside, the canonical tag, coupled with going into Google Webmaster Tools and setting the www version as the preferred version will help, but as has been pointed out, not in anything close to resembling an ideal way.
For long term sanity, I highly recommend you explore why you're getting the resistence. Is it because the dev feels threatened, or doesn't want to do the work? Setting up server-wide 301 Redirects is NOT that difficult or time consuming for anyone who knows what they're doing. So you may want to provide them links to the "how-to" for their particular server configuration.
If they are lazy, you'll need to find a way to show the decision maker(s) that failing to implement them is costing the company revenue.
-
My Advice is to make a deck/ business case for the programmer show him the problems with having two versions of the website indexed. I have encountered a few developers who are not really in tune with the whole issues around duplicate content and SEO. I think the best idea is to act on the same page, show the developer some respect, show him the design is good but then also educate him about SEO.
If you do a cononical tag, sorry to say but it is not going to be a long term fix, it will just be a short term fix.
Try and push for the 301's.
-
I have never encountered a developer who resisted using a redirect for the non-www URLs to the www form. If you have access to the server, the change should be able to be made.
If you decide not to use a 301,use a canonical tag to identify the correct version of the page. I would also use both Google and Bing Webmaster Tools to indicate which URL format you wish to use.
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
-
Phasing in new website on www2 domain - 301 plan
Hi, I work for a large company and we're planning to phase in a new website. The idea is to develop key journeys on the new site and serve them on a www2 domain, removing them from the old website which is served on the www domain. The reason for this is because the old website is over 2,000 pages, and the management want to see new, improved journeys sooner rather than later. So, rather than launching all new pages and journeys at the same time, which will take a long time to design and develop, key journeys will move across to the new site / design sooner and made available to visitors. Whilst the overall journey might be a bit disjointed in parts (i.e. sending people from old to new site, and vice versa) I can't see a better way of doing it... Once all new content is complete, 301s will be implemented from old content on www. to new content www2. Once the phasing is complete, and all new content is in place on www2, 301s will be implemented to point everything back to www. Does anybody see any problems with this approach? Or any ideas on how to better handle this situation? Thanks Mozzers!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RWesley0 -
Sudden downfall of the results, intelligents can easily find the solution
Dear, previously my site got top rank results (first place in first page) for 1. "Vastu" (Landing page: https://www.subhavaastu.com/vastu.html) 2. "Vaastu" (Landing page: https://www.subhavaastu.com/vaastu.html) 3. "Vastu shastra" (Landing page: https://www.subhavaastu.com/about-vastu-shastra.html). 4. "Vastu Consultant", (Landing page: https://www.subhavaastu.com) Previously say about 4/5 years back, I got only 1/2 place in google for the above keywords. Now my site is not visible for the said above keywords. But for these below keywords I am getting very good rankings 5. "Vasthu" (Landing page: https://www.subhavaastu.com/vasthu.html) (3 rd position in first page) 6. "Vaasthu" (Landing page: https://www.subhavaastu.com/vaasthu.html) (2nd position in first page) I got good improvements with my attemps. Require to get again first page first rank for these keywords. Vastu, Vaastu, Vastu shastra, vastu consultant. Anybody can help please.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SubhaVaastu0 -
Inbound Affiliate Links: can this solution help?
Hello everyone, I have a pretty large e-commerce website and a bunch (about 1,000) affiliates using our in-house affiliate system we built several years ago (about 12 years ago?). All our affiliates link to us as follows: http://mywebsite.com/page/?aff=[aff_nickname] Then our site parses the request, stores a cookie to track the user, then 301 redirects to the clean page URL below: http://mywebsite.com/page/ Since 2013 we require all affiliates to link to us by using the rel="nofollow" tag to avoid any penalties, but I still see a lot of affiliate links not using the nofollow or old affiliates that have not updated their pages. So... I was reading on this page from Google, that any possible "scheme" penalization can be fixed by using either the nofollow tag or by using an intermediate page listed on the robots.txt file: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66356?hl=en Do you think that could really be a reliable solution to avoid any possible penalization coming from affiliate links not using the "nofollow" tag? I have searched and read around the web but I couldn't find any real answer to my question. Thanks in advance to anyone. Best, Fab.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Images Returning 404 Error Codes. 301 Redirects?
We're working with a site that has gone through a lot of changes over the years - ownership, complete site redesigns, different platforms, etc. - and we are finding that there are both a lot of pages and individual images that are returning 404 error codes in the Moz crawls. We're doing 301 redirects for the pages, but what would the best course of action be for the images? The images obviously don't exist on the site anymore and are therefore returning the 404 error codes. Should we do a 301 redirect to another similar image that is on the site now or redirect the images to an actual page? Or is there another solution that I'm not considering (besides doing nothing)? We'll go through the site to make sure that there aren't any pages within the site that are still linking to those images, which is probably where the 404 errors are coming from. Based on feedback below it sounds like once we do that, leaving them alone is a good option.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | garrettkite0 -
Does 301 vs 302 matter when dealing with "social signal"?
When looking at links and how search engines look at "social signal," does it matter if a link is 301 vs 302? In addition to that, if I build out my own short URL system that gets used for link redirects that include referral attributes, would/could I get penalized if I use 301 instead of 302?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JDatSB0 -
Buying existing domain: 301 or keep site?
I have the opportunity to buy a domain in the same vertical as my own (real estate) which has a decent link profile and good SERPs. What are the pros and cons of keeping the existing domain and tweaking the content versus 301ing the domain to my existing domain or a page on my domain?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Geordieromer0 -
How to stop Google crawling after 301 redirect?
I have removed all pages from my old website and set 301 redirect to new website. But, I have verified old website with Google webmaster tools' HTML verification file which enable me to track all data and existence of pages in Google search for my old website. I was assumed that, Google will stop crawling and DE-indexed all pages after 301 redirect. Because, I have set 301 redirect before 3 months. Now, I'm able to see Google bot activity on my website with help of Google webmaster tools. You can find out attachment to know more about it. How can it possible & How Google can crawl removed pages? You can see following image to know more about it. First & Second
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CommercePundit0 -
301 Redirect shenanigans.
So our website (www.FrontlineMobility.com) Has a canonical link redirect to the non www. version. However when I put in website.com it comes up with a small list of links and says this site links to www.website.com. So I'm curious if I used to wrong canonical linking method( that is the method I tried and I placed it in the Head Tags.) I greatly appreciate any assistance in this matter ^.^
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FrontlineMobility0