Verify all versions of site in Bing Webmaster Tools
-
Hello,
We recently migrated our site to a new shopping cart, https, and from www to non-www, and it's been a rough transition. We've lost a lost of traffic particularly in Bing. All the versions of our site are verified Google WMT, sitemaps are submitted correctly, etc. Unfortunately, this was not done for Bing. Currently only the new version of our site (https, non-www) is verified in Bing WMT. Do we have to verify all versions of our site in Bing, the way they are in Google WMT? Also, now that it's been a few months since the switch, should we still submit a site move to Bing WMT or is it too late?
Thanks in advance!
-
We had the exact same issue! I had the developer fix the 302 redirect that I found, but I am sure there are more errors in the redirects, so we are in the process of getting a full technical audit done so that we can fix any other errors. After you fixed the 302 redirects, how long did it take for the search engines to correctly index your site? Was there anything that you did that helped speed up the process?
-
I had the same thing happen once, we had developers put in 302s instead of 301s it took awhile to get corrected.
-
We had a drop in Google as well, but the more drastic drop was in Bing and Yahoo. I know that part of the issue is that there are errors with our redirects, and we are working on fixing them, but I am trying to make sure we have all our bases covered and that everything else is done correctly.
-
Bing has dropped but Google has been ok?
-
Thank you! I wish there was a way to verify them all and do the site move, because the traffic has really declined and I can only think that it's because Bing hasn't recognized the full site move...
-
Thank you for your response!
All of the redirects are working and I am on top of the backlinks, but when I try to add the other versions of the site (www and http) to Bing nothing happens. It just loads, and takes me back to the version of the site that is already verified. Would you know why it's not allowing me to add more versions of the site?
-
When I was moving to https I ran into a similar problem and this was the response I got back from Bing
"I understand that you've switched your non SSL website example.com to a secured website https://www.example.com and you want to verify that version in order to use the Site Move feature.The reason you are being redirected to the dashboard is because Bing Webmaster Tools will identify your site thru the domain therefore the SSL and non-SSL version of the site is basically the same in Bing Webmaster Tool. If you already have 301 redirects set to your pages then there's no need to use the site move feature. The permanent redirect that you've placed should already be sufficient for Bing to change your site to http to https."
This explains https but not the www to non www. I just went to one of my sites in Bing Webmaster Tools that I currently have verified as www and tried to verify a version without www and it wouldn't let me, it exhibited the same behavior as when I tried to verify https.
As long as your current Bing Webmaster Tools is working I wouldn't worry about verifying all of your versions.
-
Hi there
I would submit the site move in Bing and make sure your sitemap has been submitted. I would all make sure the following is taken care of:
- Make sure all non www URLs 301 redirect to www URLs
- Make sure all http:// 301 redirect to https://
I would also check your internal links and sitemap to make sure that URLs are listed correctly there. Remember, traffic takes a little while to come back sometimes, so don't be completely discouraged. Make sure you covered all of your bases.
Another thing I would do - check your backlinks and make sure you update the valuable ones to the new URL structure and remove any spammy or irrelevant ones. This can help build back the equity.
Hope this helps a bit! Good luck!
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
-
Site was infected with spam webmaster tools still reporting it
I have recently been working with a site that was hacked. It suffered from a pharma injection into Joomla. The site has been cleaned for several months, but WMT is still reporting "pharmacy" as occuring 421 times. The url it gives reports a 500 error. I also removed it in Google. Can this still be hurting the site? How can I clean this up?
Technical SEO | | smcmark0 -
Google webmaster errors
**If you know what these google webmasters errors mean, and you can explain it to me in simple english and tell me how I can locate the problem, I would really appreciate it!. <colgroup><col width=""><col width=""><col width=""><col width=""><col width="*"><col width="124"><col width="54"></colgroup>
Technical SEO | | Joseph-Green-SEO
| | | | | Server error | | | | Soft 404 | | | | Access denied | | Not found | | | Not followed | | | |** I have many of these errors, is it harming SEO?Yoseph0 -
Webmaster Tools Server Error
We recently did a build to our site and after the build the build one of the softwares that we are using changed. This caused our server errors to go into the thousands. right now google webmaster tools gave us a list of top 1,000 pages with errors and we fixed them all is there a way to see the rest of the errors?
Technical SEO | | DoRM0 -
A site is not being indexed by Google Yahoo or Bing
This site - http://adoptionconnection.org/ is not being indexed by any of the search engines. I checked the easy stuff - robots text is: <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">all, index, follow</a>" /> <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">noodp</a>" /> <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">noydir</a>" /> I have checked what I can determine would cause the issue but have found nothing to prevent it from being indexed. I'm thinking it may be re-directs etc. Any answer would be great. Thanks in advance,
Technical SEO | | Intergen0 -
Site maintenance and crawling
Hey all, Rarely, but sometimes we require to take down our site for server maintenance, upgrades or various other system/network reasons. More often than not these downtimes are avoidable and we can redirect or eliminate the client side downtime. We have a 'down for maintenance - be back soon' page that is client facing. ANd outages are often no more than an hour tops. My question is, if the site is crawled by Bing/Google at the time of site being down, what is the best way of ensuring the indexed links are not refreshed with this maintenance content? (ie: this is what the pages look like now, so this is what the SE will index). I was thinking that add a no crawl to the robots.txt for the period of downtime and remove it once back up, but will this potentially affect results as well?
Technical SEO | | Daylan1 -
Webmaster tools question
Hello i have a doubt. in my webmaster tools my sitemap is showing like this | /sitemap.xml | OK | Images | Nov 27, 2011 | 2,545 | 1,985 | i am not sure why the type is showing like Images i have one blog attached to the same webmaster account and it is showing correctly.. | /blog/sitemap.xml | OK | Sitemap | Nov 28, 2011 | 695 | 449 |
Technical SEO | | idreams0 -
Different version of site for "users" who don't accept cookies considered cloaking?
Hi I've got a client with lots of content that is hidden behind a registration form - if you don't fill it out you can not proceed to the content. As a result it is not being indexed. No surprises there. They are only doing this because they feel it is the best way of capturing email addresses, rather than the fact that they need to "protect" the content. Currently users arriving on the site will be redirected to the form if they have not had a "this user is registered" cookie set previously. If the cookie is set then they aren't redirected and get to see the content. I am considering changing this logic to only redirecting users to the form if they accept cookies but haven't got the "this user is registered cookie". The idea being that search engines would then not be redirected and would index the full site, not the dead end form. From the clients perspective this would mean only very free non-registered visitors would "avoid" the form, yet search engines are arguably not being treated as a special case. So my question is: would this be considered cloaking/put the site at risk in any way? (They would prefer to not go down the First Click Free route as this will lower their email sign-ups.) Thank you!
Technical SEO | | TimBarlow0 -
Site Hosting Question
We are UK based web designers who have recently been asked to build a website for an Australian Charity. Normally we would host the website in the UK with our current hosting company, but as this is an Australian website with an .au domain I was wondering if it would be better to host it in Australia. If it is better to host it in Australia, I would appreciate if someone could give me the name of a reasonably priced hosting company. Thanks Fraser
Technical SEO | | fraserhannah0