Combining 2 blogs into one. What is quicker, easier and better - rel canonical or an htaccess/ 301?
-
The objective I have is to archive an entire blog (which I no longer have time to keep up) with multiple posts over 4years , into another blog as a a folder. My question: would it be quicker and easier to do a rel canonical, or separately list all pages in htaccess and do a 301 redirect.
-
Most blogs have some sort of export functionality. I would imagine that should expedite the process for you. As for fixing the internal links... I would take your export file and use something like Notepad++ to find and replace the old URLs.
-
Is there an easy way to copy all the post page archive /links properly into htaccess for 301? Thanks
-
Thanks eyepaq. I control the domain hosting so pages is only important in relation to time.
-
301 is all three at once. .htaccess makes it crazy easy to make all your blog posts 301 to their new home.
Canonical is only when you want to keep both URLs. It lets you suggest to Google which duplicate content will will the index race. 301 is always preferable since it removes the old location and points to the new.
-
Hi,
It's important to know the number of the pages - as for 301 you do have some limits as far as overall numbers per domain.
If the number is irrelevant (small) then 301 is the best solution for sure.
Hope it 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
-
301 Redirect Url Within a Canonical Tag
So this might sounds like a silly question... A client of mine has a duplicate content issue which will be fixed using canonical tags. We are also providing them with an updated URL structure meaning rwe will be having to do lots of 301 redirects. The URL structure is a much larger task that than the duplicate content so i planned to set up the canonicals first. Then it occurred to me id be updating the canonical tags with the urls from the old structure which brings me to my question. Will the canonical tags with the old urls redirect credit to the new urls with the 301? Or should i just wait until we have the new url structure in place and use these new urls in the canonicals? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | NickG-1230 -
Rel=canonical redirect form sign-up to homepage
hi guys, just an idea- in our product- TrackTest.eu we have couple of authoritative websites linking directly to our Sign-up page. Does it make sense to use rel=canonical on Sign-up page with pointing to the homepage so we will pass some link juice to homepage ? I understand that it is not a use how was canonical designed (it is not duplicated content) and don't want to screw anything. Thanks
Technical SEO | | tracktest.eu0 -
.htaccess yikes!
Hi guys, Having a bit of trouble getting a htaccess redirect working. It's very easy but I am making a small typo somewhere! I want to redirect about 400 product pages located at; http://domain.com/product/product-name to http://domain.com/product-name ..basically just dropping /product/ Any help would be appreciated as my errors in Moz are all over the place!
Technical SEO | | MrPenguin0 -
Better to Remove Toxic/Low Quality Links Before Building New High Quality Links?
Recently an SEO audit from a reputable SEO firm identified almost 50% of the incoming links to my site as toxic, 40% suspicious and 5% of good quality. The SEO firm believes it imperative to remove links from the toxic domains. Should I remove toxic links before building new one? Or should we first work on building new links before removing the toxic ones? My site only has 442 subdomains with links pointing to it. I am concerned that there may be a drop in ranking if links from the toxic domains are removed before new quality ones are in place. For a bit of background my site has a MOZ Domain authority of 27, a Moz page authority of 38. It receives about 4,000 unique visitors per month through organic search. About 150 subdomains that link to my site have a Majestic SEO citation flow of zero and a Majestic SEO trust flow of zero. They are pretty low quality. However I don't know if I am better off removing them first or building new quality links before I disavow more than a third of the links to the site. Any ideas? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | Kingalan1
Alan0 -
I need to know more clearance on rel=canonical usage than 301 redirects ?
Hi all SEOmozs, As we all know purposes of rel=canonical , I have a query to ask that If we don't have any possibility to use 301 redirects on a domain , can it be really right to use rel=canonical on an old domain to let search engine to treat those all pages should be not priority where the domain we are being promoted in the market to list up instead that. I found this interesting Matt Cutts video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJK5Uloy76g where he has told or cleared the point very nicely, yes we can use it if there is no possibility in your older domain or pages. So here i am asking the same to know more detailed clarity on this so that i can be more confidence on it. I have been seeing issues in my domains where old one domain comes than new domain why with new domain contents, and can it be really very good to bring new domain with **rel=canonical without using 301 redirect :
Technical SEO | | Futura
Old : kanin.com (leaving) New : kangarokanin.com (promoting) Where i might have not used yet the rel=canonical in old domain, will be going to use it soon , after finishing this discussion.** Regards,
Teginder Ravi tcSnN.jpg tcSnN.jpg dGd34.jpg0 -
Can you 301 redirect a page to an already existing/old page ?
If you delete a page (say a sub department/category page on an ecommerce store) should you 301 redirect its url to the nearest equivalent page still on the site or just delete and forget about it ? Generally should you try and 301 redirect any old pages your deleting if you can find suitable page with similar content to redirect to. Wont G consider it weird if you say a page has moved permenantly to such and such an address if that page/address existed before ? I presume its fine since say in the scenario of consolidating departments on your store you want to redirect the department page your going to delete to the existing pages/department you are consolidating old departments products into ?
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
Internal search : rel=canonical vs noindex vs robots.txt
Hi everyone, I have a website with a lot of internal search results pages indexed. I'm not asking if they should be indexed or not, I know they should not according to Google's guidelines. And they make a bunch of duplicated pages so I want to solve this problem. The thing is, if I noindex them, the site is gonna lose a non-negligible chunk of traffic : nearly 13% according to google analytics !!! I thought of blocking them in robots.txt. This solution would not keep them out of the index. But the pages appearing in GG SERPS would then look empty (no title, no description), thus their CTR would plummet and I would lose a bit of traffic too... The last idea I had was to use a rel=canonical tag pointing to the original search page (that is empty, without results), but it would probably have the same effect as noindexing them, wouldn't it ? (never tried so I'm not sure of this) Of course I did some research on the subject, but each of my finding recommanded one of the 3 methods only ! One even recommanded noindex+robots.txt block which is stupid because the noindex would then be useless... Is there somebody who can tell me which option is the best to keep this traffic ? Thanks a million
Technical SEO | | JohannCR0 -
Follow up from http://www.seomoz.org/qa/discuss/52837/google-analytics
Ben, I have a follow up question from our previous discussion at http://www.seomoz.org/qa/discuss/52837/google-analytics To summarize, to implement what we need, we need to do three things: add GA code to the Darden page _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-12345-1']);_gaq.push(['_setAllowLinker', true]);_gaq.push(['_setDomainName', '.darden.virginia.edu']);_gaq.push(['_setAllowHash', false]);_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); Change links on the Darden Page to look like http://www.darden.virginia.edu/web/MBA-for-Executives/ and [https://darden-admissions.symplicity.com/applicant](<a href=)">Apply Now and make into [https://darden-admissions.symplicity.com/applicant](<a href=)" > onclick="_gaq.push(['_link', 'https://darden-admissions.symplicity.com/applicant']); return false;">Apply Now Have symplicity add this code. _gaq.push(['_setAccount', 'UA-12345-1']);_gaq.push(['_setAllowLinker', true]);_gaq.push(['_setDomainName', '.symplicity.com']);_gaq.push(['_setAllowHash', false]);_gaq.push(['_trackPageview']); Due to our CMS system, it does not allow the user to add onClick to the link. So, we CANNOT add part 2) What will be the result if we have only 1) and 3) implemented? Will the data still be fed to GA account 'UA-12345-1'? If not, how can we get cross domain tracking if we cannot change the link code? Nick
Technical SEO | | Darden0