Site structure: Any issues with 404'd parent folders?
-
Is there any issue with a 404'd parent folder in a URL? There's no links to the parent folder and a parent folder page never existed. For example say I have the following pages w/ content:
/famous-dogs/lassie/
/famous-dogs/snoopy/
/famous-dogs/scooby-doo/But I never (and maybe never plan to) created a general **/famous-dogs/ **page. Sitemaps.xml does not link to it, nor does any page on my site.
Is there any concerns with doing this? Am I missing out on any sort of value that might pass to a parent folder?
-
Yeah - there is various speculation about how signals or authority traverse folder structures (see for example this whiteboard Friday ) but I haven't seen anything suggesting it's permanent - all of this may be an argument for adding /famous-dogs/ at some point, but I wouldn't personally stress about it not being there at launch.
-
Yeah. I'd just leave it as a 404 in that case
-
In my scenario, considering I might add a parent "famous dogs" page at some point, it'd probably best to leave robots.txt alone, right?
-
Thanks for the response. This is what I expected.
I swear I read somewhere that Google may pass some form of value from a child to a parent. i.e. "/famous-dogs/lassie/" could pass some value to "/famous-dogs/", absent any links. Can't find the source, but I suppose I'm a bit worried that I'd permanently lose out on some value if the parent does not exist initially. Considering I may add a "famous dogs" parent page at some point.
-
PS - if you're worried about the crawling, you could always block it in robots.txt if you really wanted (but unless it's a huge site I wouldn't bother). Note - if you do go this route, do it carefully so as not to block all contents of the folder at the same time!
-
The short answer is that there should be no harm going with your proposed approach.
Longer version: I believe there are cases where Google has tried to crawl a directory like "/famous-dogs/" in your example purely because it appears as a sub-folder in the paths of other pages even though there are not any direct links to it. But even if it does crawl it, if you don't have or intend to have a page there, a 404 is a perfectly valid response.
In general, while there could be a case that it's worth creating a "/famous-dogs/" page if there is search demand you can fulfil, until or unless you do, there is no harm in it returning a 404 response.
-
Seems odd that indexers would care if a parent directory page exists or not. Is there any proof that Google will attempt crawl parent folder pages that aren't in sitemaps.xml and aren't linked to anywhere else?
Perhaps I'm slowly building out my site. Depending on the material/approach, it might make sense to release a page talking about a sub-category (lassie) before releasing content about a parent category (famous dogs). Or maybe "famous dogs" is such low search volume that it doesn't make sense to spend time creating a parent "famous dogs" page.
If I'm understanding correctly, with the above you're effectively telling me to:
1. Build a parent category page. If I don't plan on investing much time/effort into the parent page, noindex it.
2. Reorganize my site folder structure.
Neither seem like a great option.
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
-
301ing one site's links to another
Hi, I have one site with a well-established link profile, but no actual reason to exist (site A). I have another site that could use a better link profile (site B). In your experience, would 301 forwarding all of site A's pages to site B do anything positive for the link profile/organic search of the site B? Site A is about boating at a specific lake. Site B is about travel destinations across the U.S. Thanks! Best... Michael
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Why isn't Google indexing this site?
Hello, Moz Community My client's site hasn't been indexed by Google, although it was launched a couple of months ago. I've ran down the check points in this article https://moz.com/ugc/8-reasons-why-your-site-might-not-get-indexed without finding a reason why. Any sharp SEO-eyes out there who can spot this quickly? The url is: http://www.oldermann.no/ Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Inevo
INEVO, digital agency0 -
Baffled by this site's inability to rank
Hi guys, I've been working on a site for quite a while and it has a really good link profile, excellent content, no errors or penalties (as far as I can tell) but for some reason it consistently ranks below a lot of thin poor quality websites with spammy EMDs and a few obviously paid links from old-skool business directories etc. It has a significantly higher DA and linking root domains that almost all of them. Also it just bounces around from #40 to #28 to#35 to #40 to #28 on a weekly basis for many of our primary keywords. There just seems to be no logic to this and it goes against everything I know and everything we're taught. (I should probably point out that I've been doing this quite a while and have a number of other sites ranking extremely well in quite a few different verticals), Has anyone ever experienced anything like this and what did you do? Before I throw in the towel it would be good to hear from others and try and understand why this happens and if there is anything else I can try to help my client and fix it. Many thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blaze-Communication0 -
Old site penalised, we moved: Shall we cut loose from the old site. It's curently 301 to new site.
Hi, We had a site with many bad links pointing to it (.co.uk). It was knocked from the SERPS. We tried to manually ask webmasters to remove links.Then submitted a Disavow and a recon request. We have since moved the site to a new URL (.com) about a year ago. As the company needed it's customer to find them still. We 301 redirected the .co.uk to the .com There are still lots of bad links pointing to the .co.uk. The questions are: #1 Do we stop the 301 redirect from .co.uk to .com now? The .co.uk is not showing in the rankings. We could have a basic holding page on the .co.uk with 'we have moved' (No link). Or just switch it off. #2 If we keep the .co.uk 301 to the .com, shall we upload disavow to .com webmasters tools or .co.uk webmasters tools. I ask this because someone else had uploaded the .co.uk's disavow list of spam links to the .com webmasters tools. Is this bad? Thanks in advance for any advise or insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SolveWebMedia0 -
Investigating Google's treatment of different pages on our site - canonicals, addresses, and more.
Hey all - I hesitate to ask this question, but have spent weeks trying to figure it out to no avail. We are a real estate company and many of our building pages do not show up for a given address. I first thought maybe google did not like us, but we show up well for certain keywords 3rd for Houston office space and dallas office space, etc. We have decent DA and inbound links, but for some reason we do not show up for addresses. An example, 44 Wall St or 44 Wall St office space, we are no where to be found. Our title and description should allow us to easily picked up, but after scrolling through 15 pages (with a ton of non relevant results), we do not show up. This happens quite a bit. I have checked we are being crawled by looking at 44 Wall St TheSquareFoot and checking the cause. We have individual listing pages (with the same titles and descriptions) inside the buildings, but use canonical tags to let google know that these are related and want the building pages to be dominant. I have worked though quite a few tests and can not come up with a reason. If we were just page 7 and never moved it would be one thing, but since we do not show up at all, it almost seems like google is punishing us. My hope is there is one thing that we are doing wrong that is easily fixed. I realize in an ideal world we would have shorter URLs and other nits and nats, but this feels like something that would help us go from page 3 to page 1, not prevent us from ranking at all. Any thoughts or helpful comments would be greatly appreciated. http://www.thesquarefoot.com/buildings/ny/new-york/10005/lower-manhattan/44-wall-st/44-wall-street We do show up one page 1 for this building - http://www.thesquarefoot.com/buildings/ny/new-york/10036/midtown/1501-broadway, but is the exception. I have tried investigating any differences, but am quite baffled.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AtticusBerg10 -
Site was moved, but still exists on the old server and is being outranked for it's own name
Recently, a client went through a split with a business partner, they both had websites on the same domain, but within their own sub directories. There is a main landing page, which links to both sites, the landing page sits on the root. Ie. example.com is a landing page with links to example.com/partner1, and example.com/partner2 Parter 2 will be my client for this example. After the split, partner 2 downloaded his website, and put it up on his own server, but no longer has any kind of access to the old servers ftp, and partner 1 is refusing to cooperate in any way to have the site removed from the old server. They did add a 301 redirect for the home page on the old server for partner 2, so, example.com/partner2/index.html is 301'ing to the new site on the new server, HOWEVER, every other page is still live on that old server, and is outranking the new site in every instance. The home page is also being outranked, even with the 301 redirect in place. What are some steps I can take to rectify this? The clients main concern is that this old website, containing the old partners name, is outranking him for his own name, and the name of his practice. So far, here's what i've been thinking: Since the site has poor on-page optimization, i'll start be cleaning all of that up. I'll then optimize the home page to better depict the clients name and practice through proper usage of heading tags, titles, alt, etc, as well as the meta title and description. The only other thing I can think of would be to start building some backlinks? Any help/suggestions would be greatly appreciated! Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RCDesign740 -
Better SEO Option, 1 Site 3 Subdomains or 4 Separate Sites?
Hey Mozzers, I'm working with a client who wants to redo their web presence. They have a a main website for the umbrella and then 3 divisions which have their own website as well. My question is: Is it better to have the main site on the main domain and then have the 3 separate sites be subdomains? Or 4 different domains with a linking structure to tie them all together? To my understanding option 1 would include high traffic for 1 domain and option 2 would be building Page Authority by having 4 different sites linking to each other? My guess would be option 2, only if all 4 sites start getting relevant authority to make the links of value. But right out of the gates option 1 might be more beneficial. A little advice/clarification would be great!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MonsterWeb280 -
No matter what I do, my website isn't showing up in search results. What's happening?
I've checked for meta-robots, all SEO tags are fixed, reindexed with google-- basically everything and it's not showing up. According to SEOMoz all looks fine, I am making a few fixes, but nothing terribly major. It's a new website, and i know it takes a while, but there is no movement here in a month. Any insights here?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Wabash0