New Site Structure and 404s. Should I redirect everything?
-
Hi fellow Mozzers,
I've recently re-released a site and also took the opportunity to change/clean up the URL structure. As a result of this Google is starting to report many 404s such as below;
blog/tag/get-fit/
blog/tag/top-presents/
Most of these 404 errors are from tag or category pages which simply don't exist any more (because they were unnecessary, crap or irrelevant). Although there's also a few posts I've removed.
My question is whether it's worth redirecting all these tags and pages to the root directory of the site's new blog (as there isn't really a new page which is similar or appropriate) or just to leave them as 404 errors. Bearing in mind;
-
They don't really rank for anything
-
There's little if any links pointing to these pages
Thanks.
-
-
The 410 Gone essentially means "I'm aware that page used to be here, but it has been taken away on purpose and it won't be coming back". Whereas 404 Not Found means "I don't know anything about that page - as far as I know it never existed".
You can see how the first scenario applies to your pages much more specifically than the second.
But as Tom points out, if you don't have the URLs in your sitemap or xml sitemap and nobody's linking to them, the 404s will eventually cause the Search engines to drop the URLs from their index.
Frankly I'd just let the URLs drop and spend the time on something more valuable. Go earn a few more links
Paul
-
ok, I'll probably seek out any pages with the chance of link juice and get those re-directed to the root.
Anything which is utterly pointless or too rubbish to care about, I think I'll let die.
Thanks again
-
Hi Paul,
Yes, that's where my thoughts were heading - it's nice to get confirmation
A 410 code?... interesting. I hadn't considered that
Thanks
-
Your mileage may vary, but I've redirected a lot more than 100 before to a root domain and everything has gone OK. If you could split it up, it might ease your worries - but as you said earlier, there isn't a relevant page to point these URLs to, so the root domain should suffice.
I would definitely consider what Paul has to say below, which is what I was trying to get at in my second point. There's also a point that if 404s are a perfectly normal occurrence for websites. Again, provided that there isn't a gregarious amount (which ~100 definitely isn't), it won't be an issue to return a few 404s. It only would be if it interrupted a user journey, which I can't imagine /tag/ subfolders would.
Either way mate, I think you'll be fine how you pursue.
-
You've pretty much answered all the standard questions that would lead to a decision, Alex - and the answer is "no".
- Do the existing pages have any rank? Nope
- Any valuable incoming links? Nope
- Does the new site have equivalent or equally relevant content to point to? No again
So you knew exactly the questions to ask, and your instincts were right on. Perfect scenario where the urls should just be left to die.
Technically, this sort of url should return a 410 Gone server response, but that would take some extra coding. Returning 404 Not Found in this instance is pretty common and will do the job.
Hope that helps;
Paul
-
Hi Tom,
thanks for the reply.
Do you think it's fine to re-direct them all to the blog's root page?
The concern I have is that, there's probably about 100 pages and I won't be re-directing to a page which is really relevant to the original. I don't want it to appear manipulative in anyway.
-
Provided that there aren't an absolute ton of them (like thousands/tens of thousands), then I would 301 redirect them. If there was a massive ammount, too many redirects in your .htaccess can slow your site, but that's only in extreme cases.
Having said that, if there are no links pointing to the page and the URLs aren't in the sitemap, then eventually Google will stop trying to crawl them (as there's nothing pointing to the URL). I'd just 301 redirect anyway - any little bit of "strength/juice" that they did have could help another page.
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
-
Huge httaccess with old 301 redirects. Is it safe to delete all redirects with no traffic in last 2 months?
We have a huge httaccess file over several MB which seems to be the cause for slow server response time. There are lots of 301 redirects related to site migration from 9 months ago where all old URLs were redirected to new URL and also lots of 301 redirects from URL changes accumulated over the last 15 years. Is it safe to delete all 301 redirects which did not receive any traffic in last 2 months ? Or would you apply another criteria for identifying those 301 that can be safely deleted? Any way to get in google analytics or webmaster tools all 301 that received traffic in the last 2 months or any other easy way to identify those, apart from checking the apache log files ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse0 -
Links to my site still showing in Webmaster Tools from a non-existent site
We owned 2 sites, with the pages on Site A all linking over to similar pages on Site B. We wanted to remove the links from Site A to Site B, so we redirected all the links on Site A to the homepage on Site A, and took Site A down completely. Unfortunately we are still seeing the links from Site A coming through on Google Webmaster Tools for Site B. Does anybody know what else we can do to remove these links?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pedstores0 -
303 redirect
Hi, 303 redirect is a good thing or not ? I have a homepage in 2 languages FR and EN > mywebsite.com/fr/ and mywebsite.com/en/. A 303 redirect is on mywebsite.com to mywebsite.com/fr/. Thanks D.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | android_lyon0 -
Is it a problem to have too many 301 redirects within your site
my website is translated into 10+ languages, but our news articles are often only published in 1-2 languages. Currently, URLs are created in the unpublished news languages that then 301 redirect the user to main news page since the content doesnt exist in that language. Is this implementation okay or is there a preferred method we should be using so that we don't have a large number of pages on the site with redirects? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | theLotter0 -
URL structure + process for a large travel site
Hello, I am looking at the URL structure for a travel site that will want to optimise lots of locations to a wide variety of terms, so for example hotels in london
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | onefinestay
hotels in kensington (which is in london)
five star hotels in kensington
etc I am keen to see if my thought process is correct as you see so many different URL techniques out there. Or am i overthinking it too much? Lets assume we make the page /london/ as our homepage. we would then logically link to /london/hotels to optimise specifically for 'london hotels' We then have two options in my mind for optimising for 'kensington hotels': Link to a page that keeps /london/hotels/ in its URL to maintain consistency ie A. /london/hotels/kensington or should we be linking to: B. /london/kensington/hotels/ (as it allows us to maintain a logical geo-landing page hierarchy) I feel A is good as the URL matches the search phrase 'hotels in kensington' matches the order of the search phrase, but it loses value if any links find these pages with 'kensington' in the anchor text, as they would not really strengthen the 'kensington' hub page. /london/kensington Ie: i land on the 'kensington hotels' page and want to see more about kensington, then i could go from /london/kensington/hotels
to
/london/kensington quite easily and logically in the breadcrumb. I feel B. is the best option for now.. Happy to I am only musing as i see some good sites that use option A, which effectively pushes the location (/kensington/ to the end of the URL for each additional niche sub page, ie /london/hotels/five-star-hotels/kensington/) Some of the bigger travel sites dont even use folder, they just go:
example.com/five-star-hotels-in-kensington/ Comments welcome!!! Thanks0 -
Best way to migrate to a new URL structure
Hello everyone, We’re changing our URL structure from something like this: example.com/index.php?language=English To something like this: example.com**/english/**index.php The change is implemented with mod_rewrite so all the old URLs can still work We have hundreds of thousands of pages that are currently indexed with the old URL structure What’s the best way to get Google to rapidly update its index and to maintain as much ranking as possible? 301 redirect all the old URLs to the new equivalent format? If we detect that the URL is in an old format, render the page with a canonical tag pointing to the new equivalent format as well as adding a noindex, nofollow tag? Something else? Thanks for your input!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | anthematic0 -
New web site - 404 and 301
Hello, I have spent a lot of times on the forum trying to make sure how to deal with my client situation. I will tell you my understanding of the strategy to apply and I would appreciate if you could tell me if the strategy will be okay. CONTEXT I am working on a project where our client wants to replace its current web site with a new one. The current web site has at least 100 000 pages. The new web site will replace all the existing pages of the current site. What I have heard for the strategy the client wants to adopt is to 404 each pages and to 301 redirect each page. Every page would be redirect to a page that make sense in the new web site. But after reading other answers and reading the following comment, I am starting to be concerned: '(4) Be careful with a massive number of 301s. I would not 301 100s of pages at once. There's some evidence Google may view this as aggressive PR sculpting and devalue those 301s. In that case, I'd 301 selectively (based on page authority and back-links) and 404 the rest.' I have also read about performance issue ... QUESTION So, if we suppose that we can manage to map each of the old site pages to a page in the new web site, is a problem to do it? Do you see a performance issue or devaluation potential issue? If it is a problem, please comment the strategy I might considere to suggest: Identify the pages for which I gain links From that group, identify the pages, that gives me most of my juice 301 redirect them and for the other, create a real great 404 ... Thanks ! Nancy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EnigmaSolution0 -
What on-page/site optimization techniques can I utilize to improve this site (http://www.paradisus.com/)?
I use a Search Engine Spider Simulator to analyze the homepage and I think my client is using black hat tactics such as cloaking. Am I right? Any recommendations on to improve the top navigation under Resorts pull down. Each of the 6 resorts listed are all part of the Paradisus brand, but each resort has their own sub domain.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Melia0