Duplicate Pate Content - 404's or 301's?
-
I deleted about 100 pages of stale content 6 months ago and they are currently returning 404's. The crawl diagnostics have pointed out 77 duplicate pages because of this. Should I redirect these as 301's to get rid of the error or keep them as 404's? Most of the pages still have some page authority but I don't want to get penalized. Just looking for the best solution. Thanks!
-
Hi Braunna,
It sounds like you deleted pages, then remade them. It is great you're keeping up with the freshness of the site but for search engine purposes you should have simply updated the current page with fresh content, or remade the page then 301'd the old page to the new page.
In general you should try to avoid deleting pages or remaking the same page with a new url unless there is a reason greater than content driving the decision. Such as a new CMS (content management system, Joomla, WP, OSC etc..), switching server side scripting (php to asp), or overhauling navigation and architecture.
If there was a case of a the page simply being completely useless and you are removing it completely then 404 would be correct. If you are seeing any duplicate content issues in this case it is likely because the search engines have not de-indexed the old page or it is still in their cache. Google can help you with removing cached versions and forcing de-indexing.
I hope that hit the correct answer for you.
Happy New Year
-
I do not believe 404 pages will result in a penalty, and eventually they will be deindexed by search engines.
Like SanketPatel said, 301 redirects are best used on a one to one basis, where the old page is related to the page it is getting 301 redirected to.
If some of those pages have great links point to them, I would first make an effort to get those links changed to direct to the existing URLs. If that does not work, it might be worth considering creating a relevant page for a page with high page authority to be 301 redirected to.
-
Hi Braunna,
Do you have related pages for those 100 pages ? 301 redirect is the best solution in your case only when you redirect those pages to most relevant pages so that some authority get transfer to those pages.
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
-
Would there be any benefit to creating multiple pages of the same content to target different titles?
Obviously, the duplicated pages would be canonical, but would there be a way of anchoring a page land by search term entry? For example: If you have a site that sells cars you could use this method but have a page that has (brand) cars for sale, finance options, best car for a family, how far will the (brand) car go for on a full tank and so on? Then making all the information blocks h2's but using the same H2s for the duplicated page titles. Then it gets complicated, If someone searches "best car for a family" and the page title for the duplicated page is clicked how would you anchor this user to the section of the page with this information? Could there be a benefit to doing this or would it just not work?
Algorithm Updates | | Evosite10 -
Canonicals from sub-domain to main domain: How much content relevancy matters? Any back-links impact?
Hi Moz community, I have this different scenario of using canonicals to solve the duplicate content issue in our site. Our subdomain and main domain have similar landing pages of same topics with content relevancy about 50% to 70%. Both pages will be in SERP and confusing users; possibly search engine too. We would like solve this by using canonicals on subdomain pointing to main domain pages. Even our intention is to only to show main domain pages in SERP. I wonder how Google handles it? Will the canonicals will be respected with this content relevancy? What happens if they don't respect? Just ignore or penalise for trying to do this? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Is anyone else's ranking jumping?
Rankings have been jumping across 3 of our websites since about 24 October. Is anyone seeing similar? For example ... jumps from position 5 to 20 on one day, then back to 5 for 3 days and then back to 20 for a day I'm trying to figure out if it's algorithm based or if my rank checker has gone mad. I can't replicate the same results if I search incognito or in a new browser, everything always looks stable in the SERPs if I do the search myself
Algorithm Updates | | Marketing_Today0 -
Why isn't our structured markup showing in search results
Hi All, We installed Schema.org structured markup on our pages nearly 1.5 months ago at this point and we have yet to see the markup show in the search results. It also checks out in Webmaster tools and Google's structured markup language testing tool. So, I'm just confused why it's not even showing up site a "site" search in Google either. Here's an example of two such pages on our site: http://www.learningtree.com/htfu/usdc01/washington/java-perl-and-python-programming-training and http://www.learningtree.com/htfu/usat40/alpharetta/it-and-management-training Any advice is greatly appreciated! Thank you 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | CSawatzky0 -
Duplicate Content?
My client is a manufacturers representative for highly technical controls. The manufacturers do not sell their products directly, relying on manufacturers reps to sell and service them. Most but not all of them publish their specs on their sites, usually in PDF only. As a service to our customers and with permission of the manufacturers we publish the manufacturers specs on our site for our customers in HTML with images and downloadable PDF's — this constitutes our catalogue. The pages are lengthy and technical, and are pretty much the opposite of thin content. The URLS for these (technical) queries rank well, so Google doesn't seem to mind. Does this constitute duplicate content and can we be penalized for it?
Algorithm Updates | | waynekolenchuk0 -
I can't understand why I am not rank one on SERPS
Hi Guys, I really cannot understand why I am no longer rank 1 on SERPs? My link data shows great weight in comparison to competitors, my on page SEO is good, nice and diverse on the alt text. I know there are a lot of factors that effect SERPs but I believe I have done well but am still not ranking? Have I missed something?
Algorithm Updates | | TomLondon
I really appreciate any thoughts and ideas. Thanks,
Tom0 -
Content, for the sake of the search engines
So we all know the importance of quality content for SEO; providing content for the user as opposed to the search engines. It used to be that copyrighting for SEO was treading the line between readability and keyword density, which is obviously no longer the case. So, my question is this, for a website which doesn't require a great deal of content to be successful and to fullfil the needs of the user, should we still be creating relavent content for the sake of SEO? For example, should I be creating content which is crawlable but may not actually be needed / accessed by the user, to help improve rankings? Food for thought 🙂
Algorithm Updates | | underscorelive0 -
Phantom Indexed: 301 Redirected Old URL Shows in Google Search Result!
Today, I have read about Phantom Indexed in Google search result. Because, I was searching about 301 redirect due to indexing of 301 redirected old URLs in Google search result rather than new landing pages. I've added my comment on jennita's blog post about 301 redirect. I would like to paste similar question over here! I have 301 redirected following 3 domains to new website... http://www.lampslightingandmore.com/ To http://www.vistastores.com/table-lamps http://www.vistapatioumbrellas.com/ To http://www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas http://www.spiderofficechairs.com/ To http://www.vistastores.com/office-chairs I have done it before 3 months but, Google still shows me home page URL in search result rather than new landing page. You can check following search results to know more about it. For LampsLightingandMore ~ On second or third page::: For VistaPatioUmbrellas ~ On second or third page::: For SpiderOfficeChairs ~ On Second or third page::: I come to know about Phantom Indexed after raised my comment over there. So, why should not start discussion on it. Because, It's all about branding and who'll love to hang old address in front of new home.
Algorithm Updates | | CommercePundit0