Sitemap Question - Should I exclude or make a separate sitemap for Old URL's
-
So basically, my website is very old... 1995 Old. Extremely old content still shows up when people search for things that are outdated by 10-15+ years , I decided not to drop redirects on some of the irrelevant pages. People still hit the pages, but bounce...
I have about 400 pages that I don't want to delete or redirect. Many of them have old backlinks and hold some value but do interfere with my new relevant content.
If I dropped these pages into a sitemap, set the priority to zero would that possibly help? No redirects, content is still valid for people looking for it, but maybe these old pages don't show up above my new content?
Currently the old stuff is excluded from all sitemaps.. I don't want to make one and have it make the problem worse. Any advise is appreciated.
Thx
-
Sending you a PM
-
You are welcome!
Still get that traffic in the move
It's free traffic, try to make the most out of it. Find the best way to point them in the direction you need them to go always keeping an eye in being as friendly and natural as possible.
-
Good plan actually, I appreciate it. I dev'd my own sitemap script but agree xml-sitemaps works great. I suggest that to friends & clients needing an easy solution.
Giving the analytics... I did't want to update roughly 400 pages. However, you handed me my resolution... I'll wrap the old pages with my up to date header/footer & just make some banners that direct traffic to the updated website.
Note: Making a basketball/shoe analogy... Just assume I'm selling Nike Shoes & traffic lands on my 1995,1996,1997 etc Charles Barkley pages. I don't sell shoes, and my query reports & analytics show people arent searching for Barkley but because of the age and trust of my page, engines still point them there.
Anyway, I appreciate it a lot. Over complicated things this time !
-
I don't think messing with your sitemap will work. Google serves what they think is better to the user, even if it is old content.
You have several options here to go for:
- Make a full sitemap automatically that will assign priority automatically like the one provided by xml-sitemaps.com (incredible software in my personal opinion and well worth the money).
- Update the content on those pages you say it's outdated. I think Google prefers serving pages that have huge value instead of "new", therefore, updating the content of those pages may decrease your bounce rate.
- While on the old pages, link to the new posts that include the new info. You can even put something like "This content is outdated, for the up-to-date version, click here" and link to the most appropriate new page, you keep the page, no 301s and pass some juice to the new page.
I think the best would be to use the 1st and 2nd options in conjunction. Or 1st and 3rd if the content of the "old" pages have something that updating them will loose their value.
In any case, I wouldn't leave pages out of the sitemap. The software I mentioned automatically assigns priority as to "how deep the page is in your site" (links it needed to follow to reach that page, older pages will surely need more clicks to reach to them).
Hope that helps.
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
-
Question regarding very unique SERP -
Hi guys, I have been brainstorming regarding a very unique SERP that i figured out while navigating search, the serp looks some thing like this http://postimg.org/image/phkol0d97/. i checked the site in structured testing tool but the only thing that i found is some PMR meta tags nothing except that. Can any one help me understand this and i would be more helpful if some one can guide me for the same. #peace
Algorithm Updates | | prashanth1230 -
Sitemap Question
Hello, I have a website and my sitemap (generated by the Yoast plugin) is set up into three different sections. One thing I noticed was that my homepage isn't in my sitemap. Is this an issue? The homepage is indexed, but does it need to be added to the sitemap in order for it to be crawled? How would I go about adding the homepage to the sitemap?
Algorithm Updates | | WebServiceConsulting.com0 -
A few sitemap questions
1. When I do a sitemap through a generator, it lists some of my URLs twice, with and without the last slash. Ex: <url><loc>http://www.howlatthemoon.com/locations/location-hollywood</loc><lastmod>2013-11-25T16:12:50+00:00</lastmod><changefreq>daily</changefreq><priority>0.9</priority></url> <url><loc>http://www.howlatthemoon.com/locations/location-hollywood/</loc><lastmod>2013-11-25T16:14:27+00:00</lastmod><changefreq>daily</changefreq><priority>0.69</priority></url> Should I remove one of these or leave it? 2. What is the importance of lastmod? I've read that if you have a lastmod listed, Google won't recrawl until a new time/date is up? 3. This goes along with lastmod, but is changefreq important? Can it hurt me at all?
Algorithm Updates | | howlusa0 -
All keywords increasing rank except URL Keyword, whats going on?
Hello, Our website is a private equity firm database, privateequityfirms.com. We rank well for a number of private equity definitions and terms and have been increasing rank in those terms but unfortunately we have been losing ranking in our main keyword and url "private equity firms" .We have ranked as high as 3rd under wikipedia. The only real changes we have made are too the sitemap that is auto generated every time some thing is changed in the database. Does anyone have any ideas what is going on? I have included a Image to help show the problem. Thank you! MozAnalyticsPDF115_zpsddec64fa.png
Algorithm Updates | | Nicktaylor10 -
URL Names not so important in future?
I read somewhere (hard to say where with all the information about SEO and google!) that in the future, Google will put less importance on the URL name for ranking purposes. Any thoughts?
Algorithm Updates | | Llanero0 -
Rankings Gone? Have I been effected by the Panda/Penguin Update(s)?
Our site www.alphameasure.com has been online since 2005 and currently has a page rank of 4. The site has always ranked on page one or two of Google for our primary keywords (Employee Satisfaction Survey, Employee Engagement Survey, Employee Surveys). I'm not sure exactly when it happened, but now our site is nowhere to be found. I'm thinking our ranking dropped somewhere in mid to late January? We did use an SEO company in the spring of 2012 that went on a link building campaign for us. They added about 450 inbound links over a three month period. Other than that - nothing has really change on the site. We're getting ready to release a new version of our software that was being re-written during all of 2012, so the timing of losing our rankings is just awful. Any help or ideas is greatly appreciated? Thanks in advance,
Algorithm Updates | | EngagedMetrics
Josh0 -
Video SEO <video:uploader>sitemap optional tag for Google+</video:uploader>
Anyone know the specifics or using the video:uploaderoptional tag for Google+ for rel=”author” attribution. for video sitemap?</video:uploader> Related post has some info, but no specific example. http://www.distilled.net/blog/video/getting-video-results-in-google/ Quote from above link: "Good practice is to ensure that the
Algorithm Updates | | Packetman007
video:uploaderelement links to a Google+ profile or a blog profile
page with rel=”author” attribution. "</video:uploader> This is what it seems it should look like in the video sitemap: <video:uploader info="<a href=" https:="" plus.google.com="" 111123738944093379428"="" target="_blank">https://plus.google.com/111123738944093379428">Bill
Alderson</video:uploader> If you know this works and is worth editing video sitmaps to add the optional tag, let me know your experience. Alternately, my site (and each page, thanks to Yoast SEO for WP) does have the rel="author" linked to Google+ for every page, which may make the sitemap entry moot, but I have not yet seen this work in that manner. If you know it does or does not work, please let me know. Please let me know if you have any better information or specific experience. Also, if I elect to edit my sitemaps (provided by Wistia.com and BitsontheRun) to include this tag, what XML Sitemap Tool might work well to add these tags properly? Seems there is lots of XML Sitemap tools, but few really address Video Sitemap options specifically. Thanks, Bill@apalytics.com www.apalytics.com0 -
Local SEO url format & structure: ".com/albany-tummy-tuck" vs ".com/tummy-tuck" vs ".com/procedures/tummy-tuck-albany-ny" etc."
We have a relatively new site (re: August '10) for a plastic surgeon who opened his own solo practice after 25+ years with a large group. Our current url structure goes 3 folders deep to arrive at our tummy tuck procedure landing page. The site architecture is solid and each plastic surgery procedure page (e.g. rhinoplasty, liposuction, facelift, etc.) is no more than a couple clicks away. So far, so good - but given all that is known about local seo (which is a very different beast than national seo) quite a bit of on-page/architecture work can still be done to further improve our local rank. So here a a couple big questions facing us at present: First, regarding format, is it a given that using geo keywords within the url indispustibly and dramatically impacts a site's local rank for the better (e.g. the #2 result for "tummy tuck" and its SHENANIGANS level use of "NYC", "Manhattan", "newyorkcity" etc.)? Assuming that it is, would we be better off updating our cosmetic procedure landing page urls to "/albany-tummy-tuck" or "/albany-ny-tummy-tuck" or "/tummy-tuck-albany" etc.? Second, regarding structure, would we be better off locating every procedure page within the root directory (re: "/rhinoplasty-albany-ny/") or within each procedure's proper parent category (re: "/facial-rejuvenation/rhinoplasty-albany-ny/")? From what I've read within the SEOmoz Q&A, adding that parent category (e.g. "/breast-enhancement/breast-lift") is better than having every link in the root (i.e. completely flat). Third, how long before google updates their algorithm so that geo-optimized urls like http://www.kolkermd.com/newyorkplasticsurgeon/tummytucknewyorkcity.htm don't beat other sites who do not optimize so aggressively or local? Fourth, assuming that each cosmetic procedure page will eventually have strong link profiles (via diligent, long term link building efforts), is it possible that geo-targeted urls will negatively impact our ability to rank for regional or less geo-specific searches? Thanks!
Algorithm Updates | | WDeLuca0