Dealing with 404 pages
-
I built a blog on my root domain while I worked on another part of the site at .....co.uk/alpha I was really careful not to have any links go to alpha - but it seems google found and indexed it. The problem is that part of alpha was a copy of the blog - so now soon we have a lot of duplicate content. The /alpha part is now ready to be taken over to the root domain, the initial plan was to then delete /alpha. But now that its indexed I'm worried that Ill have all these 404 pages. I'm not sure what to do.. I know I can just do a 301 redirect for all those pages to go to the other ones in case a link comes on but I need to delete those pages as the server is already very slow. Or does a 301 redirect mean that I don't need those pages anymore? Will those pages still get indexed by google as separate pages? Please assist.
-
after a 301 redirect can I delete the pages and the databases/folders associated with them?
Yes. Think of a 301 redirect like mail forwarding. If you have an address, 1000 main street and then move to a new address you would leave a forward order (e.g. 301 redirect) with the post office. Once that is done, you can bulldozer the house (e.g.. delete the webpage/database) and the mail should still be forwarded properly.
How does one create a 301 redirect?
The method of creating a 301 redirect varies based on your server setup. If you have a LAMP setup with cPanel, there is a Redirect tool. Otherwise I would suggest contacting your host and ask how to create a redirect based on your particular setup.
-
Ryan,
Two things.
First - after a 301 redirect can I delete the pages and the databases/folders associated with them?
Second - How does one create a 301 redirect?
-
Hi Ryan,
Agree with you, but I thought to provide alternate solution to the problem. I know it is difficult and not chosen one.
But as I said that if he can't get any traffic from it then and then only it can delete the pages for index. Plus as he told earlier in question that mistakenly alpha folder was indexed so lines as per you said in the comment "That tool was designed to remove content which is damaging to businesses such as when confidential or personal information is indexed by mistake." and Its contradictory statement too "The indexed content are pages you want in the index but simply have the wrong URL - The wrong URL means the different page.
Anyways will definitely go with your solution but sometimes two options helps you to choose better one.
Thanks
-
Semil, your answer is a working solution but I would like to share why it is not a best practice.
Once the /alpha pages were indexed you could have traffic on them. You cannot possibly know who has linked to those pages, e-mailed links, bookmarked them, etc. By providing a simple 301 the change will be completely seamless to users. All their links and bookmarks will still work. Additionally if any website did link to your /alpha pages, you will retain the link.
The site will also benefit because it is already indexed by Google. You will not have to wait for Google to index your pages. This means more traffic for the site.
The 301 is very quick and easy to implement. If you are simply moving from the /alpha directory to your main site then a single 301 redirect can cover your entire site.
I will offer a simple best practice of SEO (my belief which not everyone agrees with) which I do my best to follow. NEVER EVER EVER use the robots.txt file unless you have exhausted every other possibility. The robots.txt file is an inferior solution that many people latch on to because it is quick and easy. In your case, there is no need to adjust your robots.txt file at all. The original poster stated an intention to delete the /alpha pages. Those pages will no longer exist. Why block URLs which don't exist? It doesn't offer any benefit.
Also, it makes no sense to use the Google removal tool. That tool was designed to remove content which is damaging to businesses such as when confidential or personal information is indexed by mistake. The indexed content are pages you want in the index but simply have the wrong URL. The 301 redirect will allow your pages to remain in the index and for the URL to be properly updated. In order for the 301 to work correctly, you would need to NOT block the /alpha pages with robots.txt.
The solution you shared would work, but it is not as friendly all around.
-
Whoops! Thanks for correcting my answer...
-
The reason behind not using 301 is alpha is not a page or folder you want to create for your users so I don't want to put 301. Its indexed that's it. Are you getting any traffic from it ?
No, then why you need to redirect. Remove the page and ask search engine to remove that page from index. That is all.
-
Thanks Dan,
Is there a way of blocking an entire folder or do I have to add each link?
-
How can I ask them to remove it from webmaster? How can I ask everything on the /alpha folder not to be indexed - or do I have to write each link out?
Why do you think my case isn't good for 301 redirects?
-
You have to be very careful from the start, but now Google indexed your alpha. So dont worry about the thing.
Using 301 is something which I dont like to do on your case. Ask google to remove that urls from indexing from GWT, and put robots.txt to prevent alpha to be indexed.
Thanks,
-
You can perform the 301 redirect and you will not need those pages anymore. Using the redirect would be a superior SEO solution over using the robots.txt file. Since the content is already indexed, it will stay indexed and Google will update each page over the next 30 days as it crawls your site.
If you block /alpha with robots.txt, Google will still retain the pages in their index, users will experience 404s and your new pages wont start to be properly indexed until Google drops the existing pages which takes a while. The redirect is better for everyone.
-
Hi
If you do not want them in the index you should block them in your robots.txt file like so:
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
User-agent: *
Allow: /
Disallow: /alpha
-Dan
PS - Some documentation on robots.txt
-
-
-
-
- -
-
-
-
EDIT: I left my answer, but don't listen to it. Do what Ryan says
-
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
-
50,000 pages or a page with parameters
I have a site with about 12k pages on a topic... each of these pages could use another several pages to go into deeper detail about the topic. So, I am wondering, for SEO purposes would it be better to have something like 50,000 new pages for each sub topic or have one page that I would pass parameters to and the page would be built on the fly in code behind. The drawback to the one page with parameters is that the URL would be static but the effort to implement would be minimal. I am also not sure how google would index a single page with parameters. The drawback to the 50k pages model is the dev effort and possibly committed some faux pas by unleashing so many links to my internal pages. I might also have to mix aspx with html because my project can't be that large. Anyone here ever have this sort of choice to make? Is there a third way I am not considering?
Technical SEO | | Banknotes0 -
Duplicate page errors from pages don't even exist
Hi, I am having this issue within SEOmoz's Crawl Diagnosis report. There are a lot of crawl errors happening with pages don't even exist. My website has around 40-50 pages but SEO report shows that 375 pages have been crawled. My guess is that the errors have something to do with my recent htaccess configuration. I recently configured my htaccess to add trailing slash at the end of URLs. There is no internal linking issue such as infinite loop when navigating the website but the looping is reported in the SEOmoz's report. Here is an example of a reported link: http://www.mywebsite.com/Door/Doors/GlassNow-Services/GlassNow-Services/Glass-Compliance-Audit/GlassNow-Services/GlassNow-Services/Glass-Compliance-Audit/ btw there is no issue such as crawl error in my Google webmaster tool. Any help appreciated
Technical SEO | | mmoezzi0 -
Duplicate pages
Hi Can anyone tell me why SEO MOZ thinks these paes are duplicates when they're clearly not? Thanks very much Kate http://www.katetooncopywriter.com.au/how-to-be-a-freelance-copywriter/picture-1-58/ http://www.katetooncopywriter.com.au/portfolio/clients/other/ http://www.katetooncopywriter.com.au/portfolio/clients/travel/ http://www.katetooncopywriter.com.au/webservices/what-i-do/blog-copywriter/
Technical SEO | | ToonyWoony0 -
Too many on page links
Yes this question again. I know it get's asked a lot and I know of a few fixes, but this one I'm having a problem with. So we have a fan gallery on our site which is not only causing duplicate page titles, which I'm thinking we can fix with a canonical, but also too many on page links. The issue is this is on drupal which I have very little experience with and it seems to just be located within the fan galleries section of the site. After looking at a few things I know that no-follow wont be an option since from what I read it wont really work anyway so I was wondering if anyone else has an asnwer. I just read through a million articles trying to find a simular situation and can't seem to find anyone with the same thing. It might have something to do with the plugins the programmers used, but my inexperience with drupal is making this difficult. Thanks guys.
Technical SEO | | KateGMaker0 -
Handling 301s: Multiple pages to a single page (consolidation)
Been scouring the interwebs and haven't found much information on redirecting two serparate pages to a single new page. Here is what it boils down to: Let's say a website has two pages, both with good page authority of products that are becoming fazed out. The products, Widget A and Widget B, are still popular search terms, but they are being combined into ONE product, Widget C. While Widget A and Widget B STILL have plenty to do with Widget C, Widget C is now the new page, the main focus page, and the page you want everyone to see and Google to recognize. Now, do I 301 Widget A and Widget B pages to Widget C, ALTHOUGH Widgets A and B previously had nothing to do with one another? (Remember, we want to try and keep some of that authority the two page have had.) OR do we keep Widget A and Widget B pages "alive", take them off the main navigation, and then put a "disclaimer" on the pages announcing they are now part of Widget C and link to Widget C? OR Should Widgets A and B page be canonicalized to Widget C? Again, keep in mind, widgets A and B previously were not similar, but NOW they are and result in Widget C. (If you are confused, we can provide a REAL work example of what we are talkinga about, but decided to not be specific to our industry for this.) Appreciate any and all thoughts on this.
Technical SEO | | JU19850 -
Getting More Pages Indexed
We have a large E-commerce site (magento based) and have submitted sitemap files for several million pages within Webmaster tools. The number of indexed pages seems to fluctuate, but currently there is less than 300,000 pages indexed out of 4 million submitted. How can we get the number of indexed pages to be higher? Changing the settings on the crawl rate and resubmitting site maps doesn't seem to have an effect on the number of pages indexed. Am I correct in assuming that most individual product pages just don't carry enough link juice to be considered important enough yet by Google to be indexed? Let me know if there are any suggestions or tips for getting more pages indexed. syGtx.png
Technical SEO | | Mattchstick0 -
Are all duplicate pages bad?
I just got my first Crawl Report for my forum and it said I have almost 9,000 duplicate pages. When I looked at a sample of them though I saw that many of them were "reply" links. By this I mean the "reply" button was clicked for a topic yet since the crawler was not a member, it just brought them to the login/register screen. Since all the topics would bring you to the same login page I'm assuming it counted all these "reply" links as duplicates. Should I just ignore these or is there some way to fix it? Thanks in advance.
Technical SEO | | Xee0 -
Keywords Ranking Dropped from 1st Page to Above 5th Page
Hello, My site URL is http://bit.ly/161NeE and our site was ranked first page for over hundred keywords before March, 30. But all of a sudden, all the keywords on first page dropped to 5th or 6th page. When we search for our site name without ".com", the results appeared on first page are all from other sites. And our page can only be seen on 6th page. We think we have been penalized by Google. But we don't know the exact reason. Can anyone please help? Some extra info on our site: 1. We have been building links by posting blog, articles and PR. All the articles are unique, written by the writers we hire. It has been working fine all the time. We also varied the anchor text a lot. 2. We didn't make any change to the website. But one real problem with our site is that the server is very slow recently and when google crawl our website, many errors were found, mostly 503, 404 errors. And the total number of errors have reach to over 50,000. Do you think this might be a problem for Google not displaying us on first page? Our technicals are working hard to solve server problem. And if it is solved, shall our rankings be back? Please advise. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | Milanoocom0