Root domain registered in search engines, inbound links to www sub-domain. A problem?
-
I just discovered that our site is registered with the major search engines without the "www" sub domain. Both domains resolve directly to our site, which I need to get corrected. I had planned to have the root (honestabe.com) forwarded to the sub (www.honestabe.com). However, I then found that the sub-domain is not listed with the search engines.
Of course, naturally almost all of our inbound links include www. Does Google differentiate between links with and without the sub-domain? In other words, if I forward the www address to the root, will I still get the SEO benefit of those inbound links using www?
I'm trying to figure out how to approach this. I'm hoping someone is going to make me feel really stupid for asking this and say it's no big deal. However, I have a feeling this could be a mess.
-
I just recently realized Google was indexing both www and non-www. I changed the settings in Google WM Tools and put in the 301 redirect to www. That was a couple weeks ago. Google is still showing non-www even though www has a higher PR. About how long will it take for Google to switch over to www, or is there something else I may need to correct?
Best,
Christopher -
Thank you for taking the time to write this up Blenny. I think this will also help with my duplicate page content issue. Most appreciated sir.
-
Great feedback. Thank you Gianluca!
-
Hey Josh,
Goog does differentiate the two in terms of applying link juice, but unless for some reason they deliver different content, it's not a major problem. My website has had this issue for awhile due to issues with our CMS system. There is an easy fix though. Try incorporating the rel canonical tag into your pages. Lots of great write-ups on SEOMoz and elsewhere on the usefulness of this tag - essentially tells Google which version of the url to credit the link juice and to keep in its index.
Then, as you said, I would change the internal link structure to reflect the "www" or "non-www" dependent on which one has the most links (Keep the one most people have linked to determined by a OpenSiteExplorer report from SEOMoz) so as to maintain consistency from that point forward. Ideally, you'd be able to 301 the less-linked version to the other since you lose a fraction of link juice with a 301.
Done correctly, you may actually gain engine authority since both non-www and www versions would "funnel" all of their link juice together.
Good luck!
-
no its not, you do lose a little from 301 redirect but very little
-
Doing a search with www.honestbabe.com Google revolves with this serps: http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=www.honestabe.com&pws=0&pbx=1&oq=www.honestabe.com&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=1345l1345l0l1954l1l1l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.,cf.osb&fp=9441c9e3bb40875d&biw=1920&bih=955
As you can see from the sitelinks, Google has picked up some urls with www. and some without. This is surely caused by the fact that both versions are crawlable.
The best thing to do is to redirect 301 the root domain name to the subdomain www.honestbabe.com, if this is the version of the site that owns the highest % of backlinks
That way Google (and users) will be redirected always to the www. version and index just that one. Don't worry about the backlinks eventually existing and linking to the not www. site, because the link juice from those links will pass almost entirely to the www. linked page version.
Previously today I answered to a similar question: http://www.seomoz.org/q/duplicate-content-joomla
I suggest you to check it, also because there's the code you have to add to your .htacces file (if you are running on a apache linux enviroment).
-
Thanks for the quick reply Alan. The redirect to the root is what would work best in my situation, but I was concerned that I would loose the influence of inbound links to the www being redirected. I'm hoping this shouldn't be a concern?
-
I prefer the non www, as www is not nesasary, but that aside.
Yes they do differentiate
just 301 redirect one to the other, and you will be ok.
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
-
Link building - unique root domains
Hi there, I was wondering when asking for a link, does where on this page it is? For example will someone's high traffic website (e.g. example.com ) provide more page authority than another link on this site ( e.g. example.com/blog ). If this is the case, is it best to get links from multiple pages if possible or will this not effect SEO? Thanks
Link Building | | charliedavi0 -
Link building strategy - my weak link!
Please help me understand link building. I've read the articles on Moz, but they seem vague to me. Specific questions: 1. How do I get my webpage on good quality sites? 2. Guest blogging? Good or not? 3. What about when people pick up one of our blog stories and publish it on their site with a link back? Is that bad now because it is duplicate content??? 4. Forum posts with a link in the signature? Good or not? 5. Directories - I get it that these are no longer good... are they severely negative? Should I take them down. 6. PR - Looks like this is bad... right??? 7. Youtube - any value? 8. Pinterst, LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram? Any value to backlinks here? 9. What about sites like redit? 10. Anything else I should consider?
Link Building | | CalicoKitty20000 -
Lost inbound link from Huffington Post???
My website was featured on HuffPost's "7 Sites You Should Be Wasting Your Time On" in September of 2011 and somewhere along the way it no longer gets recognized as a linking domain? The site/page itself ('7 Sites' from Sept 2011) still exists through direct linking, and my site's link is still on there. I am looking at it right now (still knew the URL because I put it as a link in the 'About' section of my site). Any theories as to how/why this happened and if it is due to something on my end? Any way to get it back?
Link Building | | Pace0 -
Which is better - A) links from multiple IP addresses, or B) Links with more associated social signals?
If you had to choose: A) 100 links contained in posts on 100 PR2* blogs, all on separate IP addresses, where none of the posts had associated social signals, or B) 100 links contained in posts within a single PR2* blog (single IP address), where each of the posts had 20 associated social signals, Which would you choose to increase your SERP performance? *I chose PR2 so that PageRank would not be a factor in the decision.
Link Building | | JohnScottDixon0 -
Linking Root Domains V.s Total Links
When analysing a company's inbound links, what is more important to note: The number of linking root domains, or the total number of links? And why?
Link Building | | SEOrookie170 -
How might Google differentiate between an artificial link exchange and partners linking to each other?
Hi, All! Artificial link exchanges (contacting a vaguely connected site and requesting to exchange links to increase your PR) is, as far as I know, considered an outdated, not-so-smart technique, as Google might devalue them. Yet, for real business partners to exchange links seems to be an entirely accepted and encouraged technique. While that would be intuitive to a human who's viewing the pages. how might Google detect when two sites that link to each other are linking because they are trusted business associates (valuable) as opposed to when they are doing a link exchange (devalued)? Thanks! Aviva
Link Building | | debi_zyx0 -
Creating new url structure for inbound links
In an effort to make is easier for our clients to link to content on our site we intend on creating a simpler url structure for them: site.com/1234 will 301 to site.com/xyz/abc/1234-this-is-where-we-want-you Is there a danger of creating new 301's just for this purpose, the goal here is to make it easier for clients to link to content and thus garner more inbound links.
Link Building | | antiquesearcher0 -
How long for SEOMoz to reflect new inbound links?
I have carried out some minor link building for my new site (site A) and have some links back from several directories and 1 from ezine and one from squidoo as well as a few partner sites and such. I also have another site (site B) which was linking to site A several times from a footer link, this has now been amended to just one link. The problem is that SEOmoz still only shows 3 linking domains to site A (there are at least 12 if you perform a manual search) and it is still showing many links from site B even though there is now only one. All these changes where made at least 3 weeks ago, how long before Seomoz picks them up.
Link Building | | IPIM0