Instead of a 301, my client uses a 302 to custom 404
-
I've found about 900 instances of decommissioned pages being redirected via 302 to a 404 custom page, even when there's a comparable page elsewhere on the site or on a new subdomain.
My recommendation would be to always do a 301 from the legacy page to the new page, but since they're are so many instances of this 302->404 it seems to be standard operating procedure by the dev team.
Given that at least one of these pages has links coming from 48 root domains, wouldn't it obviously be much better to 301 redirect it to pass along that equity? I don't get why the developers are doing this, and I have to build a strong case about what they're losing with this 302->404 protocol.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on WHY the dev team has settled on this solution, in addition to what suffers as a result. I think I know, but would love some more expert input.
-
Of course they aren't seeing a drop in traffic to comparable pages. Those pages are fighting under their own steam. If you send a customer/prospect to the right page, the first time, they'll likely see an increase in traffic.
It sounds like they're talking about 'what is' rather than 'what could be', which in our opinion is likely better. So I guess you could make the business case that incoming referrals are bouncing when they could be buying. Hopefully there's tracking code of some sort on the faux 404 page.
-
Travis, thanks - in addition to my comment to Wiqas, I think that the usability is a big point to make. See, the analysts will come back to me and say, "we're not seeing a drop in any traffic to comparable pages." I'm going to do an in-depth look into Page Authority for a related report, but I agree 100% on the usability point. We do have comparable pages...why the heck wouldn't we 301? Esp. when external sites are still occasionally use the legacy URL....
Thx.
-
Thanks - yea, and it's funny because most of the analysts and devs I talk to say, "oh, 302 is just as good as 301, these days." Everything else I read runs contrary to that. Thanks Wiqas.
-
Hey,
302 redirect is mostly used for temporary situations and it fits to very few situations. 302 redirect doesn't pass link juice to pointing URL.
Dev Team seems to be conservative in approach. This approach was widely used but it's not recommended now. I recommend 301 Redirect even I don't know exact situation.
You can get more guidance about redirects here: http://moz.com/learn/seo/redirection
I hope, this will help!
Regards
-
I would imagine they took that route because it's fast/easy. I would find using a site that cares that little about usability more than a little annoying. Imagine hitting page after page of 'whoops' pages. It's not something anyone wants to do.
There should be 301s put in place for relevant pages with good/clean links. Then they should 410 unwanted pages. Both the search engines and site visitors win.
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
-
404 errors
Hi I am getting these show up in WMT crawl error any help would be very much appreciated | ?escaped_fragment=Meditation-find-peace-within/csso/55991bd90cf2efdf74ec3f60 | 404 | 12/5/15 |
Technical SEO | | ReSEOlve
| | 2 | mobile/?escaped_fragment= | 404 | 10/26/15 |
| | 3 | ?escaped_fragment=Tips-for-a-balanced-lifestyle/csso/1 | 404 | 12/1/15 |
| | 4 | ?escaped_fragment=My-favorite-yoga-spot/csso/5598e2130cf2585ebcde3b9a | 404 | 12/1/15 |
| | 5 | ?escaped_fragment=blog/c19s6 | 404 | 11/29/15 |
| | 6 | ?escaped_fragment=blog/c19s6/Tag/yoga | 404 | 11/30/15 |
| | 7 | ?escaped_fragment=Inhale-exhale-and-once-again/csso/2 | 404 | 11/27/15 |
| | 8 | ?escaped_fragment=classes/covl | 404 | 10/29/15 |
| | 9 | m/?escaped_fragment= | 404 | 10/26/15 |
| | 10 | ?escaped_fragment=blog/c19s6/Page/1 | 404 | 11/30/15 | | |0 -
301 redirect homepage question
Hi If i have a homepage which is available at both www.homepage.com and www.homepage.com// should i 301 the // version to the first version. Im curious as to whether slashes are taking into consideration Thanks in advance
Technical SEO | | TheZenAgency0 -
Redirect URLS with 301 twice
Hello, I had asked my client to ask her web developer to move to a more simplified URL structure. There was a folder called "home" after the root which served no purpose. I asked for the URLs to be redirected using 301 to the new URLs which did not have this structure. However, the web developer didn't agree and decided to just rename the "home" folder "p". I don't know why he did this. We argued the case and he then created the URL structure we wanted. Initially he had 301 redirected the old URLS (the one with "Home") to his new version (the one with the "p"). When we asked for the more simplified URL after arguing, he just redirected all the "p" URLS to the PAGE NOT FOUND. However, remember, all the original URLs are now being redirected to the PAGE NOT FOUND as a result. The problems I see are these unless he redirects again: The new simplified URLS have to start from scratch to rank 2)We have duplicated content - two URLs with the same content Customers clicking products in the SERPs will currently find that they are being redirect to the 404 page. I understand that redirection has to occur but my questions are these: Is it ok to redirect twice with 301 - so old URL to the "p" version then to final simplified version. Will link juice be lost doing this twice? If he redirects from the original URLS to the final version missing out the "p" version, what should happen to the "p" version - they are currently indexed. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks
Technical SEO | | AL123al0 -
301 redirect of a subdirectory
Hello! I am working on a website with the following structure: example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3. The page "example.com/sub1" does not exist (I know this is not the optimal architecture to have this be a nonexistent page). But someone might type that address, so I would like it to redirect it to example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3. I tried the following redirect: redirect 301 /sub1 http://example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3. But with this redirect in place, if I go to example.com/sub1, I get redirected to example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3/sub2/sub3 (the redirect just inserts extra subdirectories). If someone types "example.com/sub1" into a browser, I would "example.com/sub1/sub2/sub3" to come up. Is this possible? Thank you!
Technical SEO | | nyc-seo0 -
Using rich snippets with a CMS?
My site uses the webEdition CMS that is split between templates and documents (pages). A template responsible for a number of documents. If I wish to use rich snippets, how and where can I add the microdata as I can't do it on a page per page basis? My CMS documentation and its developer forum doesn't give any information on this but I'm hoping its a common problem for open source CMS's and there is an easy fix. I live in hope! Iain
Technical SEO | | iain0 -
How long for a sitewide 301 to reindex?
Hey Gang, Finally joined the big boys here, excited to see what we all can do together. Here is my situation. I have been struggling since panda 1.0 on a particular site at www.burnworld.com. Over 2011 we figured out what the issues were with the content and went on a major cleanup. This seemed to help towards the end of the 2011. However further panda updates this year mainly April have again struck. This was after adding a wordpress blog to the site late 2011, so it was a mix of a traditional html site and a wordpress blog. Thinking that this could be an issue in May this year we transferred all the content over to wordpress only. We did keep the same linking strucutre using a permallink plugin to set specific url's. Forward to Panda 20. This wiped out all rankings and then we could not even rank for our own content. One site that syndicates our content is now ranking for our content instead of us, and many 'feed' sites that scrape out feeds also rank insead of us. Okay now to my original question. 2 weeks ago we pulled the plug and made the decision it may be best to start over on www.burnworld.net since the .net in the past was a blog on wordpress (which was shutdown earlier n 2012), but sat with about 5 pages of content until we did the 301. So today none of the pages are in the main index and I am wondering if doing the 301 might have been a mistake by pointing it to an existing site that never really ranked. Would it have been best to start on a new domain? How long have others seen before google puts the pages back in the main index? Would like to figure out the best action to take to get back into google's good graces. I'll keep this page updated so others with this issue can hopefully have a resource to turn to. BTW- nothing has chaned with Binghoo, rankings are all the same and they have updated the domain change properly.
Technical SEO | | robdawg0 -
Canonical and 301
Hi We have recently restructured our site and 301 redirected some pages. Unfortunately the new page which we 301 to, still had the canonical tags pointing to the old pages. Would this cause google not to index the new pages....?????
Technical SEO | | jj34340 -
How do I clean up this 301 disaster?
I launched my site, InternetCE.com, and blog, www.continuingeducationjournal.com, a few years ago. I then learned I should probably merge the content, and foolishly created a subdomain, http://blog.internetce.com, and 301 redirected the blog to it. As an aside, my site is on a microsoft server, thus cannot host my wordpress blog on it. After a bit more study, I realized that my blog wasn't helping me nearly as much as it could be, so I 301'd it again to http://internetce.com/blog. In just becoming a pro member (long overdue) I realize that my entire site needs to be 301'd to merge non-www and www versions. I read somewhere that mr. cutts says not to 301 more than twice for fear of mistakenly being construed as something a bit to spammy. So, here I sit..not sure what to do. Does anyone have any advice on how to most efficiently correct this spaghetti bowl? Many thanks!
Technical SEO | | adell500