Getting a Vanity (Clean) URL indexed
-
Hello, I have a vanity (clean looking) URL that 302 redirects to the ugly version. So in other words
302 >>>
http://www.site.com/directory/directory/url.aspx
What I'm trying to do is get the clean version to show up in search. However, for some reason Google only indexes the ugly version.
cache:http://www.site.com/directory/directory/url.aspx is showing the ugly URL as cached and cache:http://www.site.com/url is showing not cached at all.
Is there some way to force Google to index the clean version? Fetch as Google for the clean URL only returns a redirect status and canonicalizing the ugly to the clean would seem to send a strange message because of the redirect back to the ugly.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thank you,
-
Thank you, great answer.
-
Agree with Devanur - you need to use a 301 permanent redirect not a 302 temporary redirect.
-
Hi,
You need to go in for server-side URL rewrites in this case. With URL rewrite in place, the URL in the address bar for the visitor will be your SEO and user-friendly, vanity URL and the same will be in search engines' indices there by accomplishing your mission. Then you might want to make sure that your old, ugly URL passes on all its SEO goodies to the vanity URL. For this, you can go in for a 301 redirection from the ugly URL to the vanity URL.
Here is a beautiful article from Moz: http://moz.com/blog/url-rewrites-and-301-redirects-how-does-it-all-work
Hope it helps. Good Luck.
Best regards,
Devanur Rafi
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
-
Google selecting incorrect URL as canonical: 'Duplicate, submitted URL not selected as canonical'
Hi there, A number of our URLs are being de-indexed by Google. When looking into this using Google Search Console the same message is appearing on multiple pages across our sites: 'Duplicate, submitted URL not selected as canonical' 'IndexingIndexing allowed? YesUser-declared canonical - https://www.mrisoftware.com/ie/products/real-estate-financial-software/Google-selected canonical - https://www.mrisoftware.com/uk/products/real-estate-financial-software/'Has anyone else experienced this problem?How can I get Google to select the correct, user-declared canoncial? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | nfrank0 -
Usage of keywords in URL
Hi everyone, I'm trying to optimize our website and I'm not sure what's ideal for our URL structure. We have two products: one of them is focused on B2C & the other one on B2B.
Technical SEO | | Klouwers
Our homepage is focused on the B2C product. For our B2B product, I'm not sure what's ideal. The URL for our 'homepage' of the B2B product is ourdomain.com/software. We have different target groups for our B2B software, and therefore different pages on our website. Which URL would be best to use for the keyword personal trainer software?
1. ourdomain.com/software/personal-trainer-software
2. ourdomain.com/software/personal-trainer0 -
Index problems
“The website http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/nl/ does not show in the index of Google (site:vaneyckshutters.com/nl/). This must be the homepage in the Netherlands. Previously, the page www.vaneyckshutters.com was redirected to /nl/. This page is accessible now with a canonical tag to http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/nl/ in the hope to let /nl/ be indexed. When we look at the SERPS for keyword ‘shutters’, the page http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/ is shown in Google.nl on #32 and in Belgium #3. Problem & question: Why is it that /nl/ has not been indexed properly and why is it that we rank with http://www.vaneyckshutters.com on ‘shutters’ instead the/nl/ page?”
Technical SEO | | Happy-SEO1 -
If I want clean up my URLs and take the "www.site.com/page.html" and make it "www.site.com/page" do I need a redirect?
If I want clean up my URLs and take the "www.site.com/page.html" and make it "www.site.com/page" do I need a redirect? If this scenario requires a 301 redirect no matter what, I might as well update the URL to be a little more keyword rich for the page while I'm at it. However, since these pages are ranking well I'd rather not lose any authority in the process and keep the URL just stripped of the ".html" (if that's possible). Thanks for you help! [edited for formatting]
Technical SEO | | Booj0 -
Correct linking to the /index of a site and subfolders: what's the best practice? link to: domain.com/ or domain.com/index.html ?
Dear all, starting with my .htaccess file: RewriteEngine On
Technical SEO | | inlinear
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.inlinear.com$ [NC]
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://inlinear.com/$1 [R=301,L] RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^./index.html
RewriteRule ^(.)index.html$ http://inlinear.com/ [R=301,L] 1. I redirect all URL-requests with www. to the non www-version...
2. all requests with "index.html" will be redirected to "domain.com/" My questions are: A) When linking from a page to my frontpage (home) the best practice is?: "http://domain.com/" the best and NOT: "http://domain.com/index.php" B) When linking to the index of a subfolder "http://domain.com/products/index.php" I should link also to: "http://domain.com/products/" and not put also the index.php..., right? C) When I define the canonical ULR, should I also define it just: "http://domain.com/products/" or in this case I should link to the definite file: "http://domain.com/products**/index.php**" Is A) B) the best practice? and C) ? Thanks for all replies! 🙂
Holger0 -
Non existant URLs being generated in index
Hi all, I have a pretty big problem with my site at the moment which I'm worried will have an impact on my rankings. I've just had a crawl test done and for some reason I get a load of urls returned that don't actually exist... For example I am getting urls like this in my crawl test and xml sitemap: www.applicablejobs.com/jobs/add/android-designer/android-designer/android-designer/android-developer/android-developer/ www.applicablejobs.com/jobs/add/android-designer/android-designer/android-designer/android-developer/iphone-designer/ All the urls seem to start off with www.applicablejobs.com/jobs/ and there is an entry for every conceivable combination of slugs. I can only assume that if the crawl test and an xml sitemap generator is indexing these urls then Google and other search engines probably are too. Does anyone have any idea what might be causing this issue and what can I do to remove them from Googles index if they are? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Benji870 -
Getting a Video Sitemap Indexed
Hi, A client of mine completed a video sitemap to Google Webmaster Tools a couple of months ago. As of yet the videos are still not indexing in Google. All of the videos sit on the one page but have unique URLs in the sitemap. Does anybody know a reason why they are not being indexed? Thanks David
Technical SEO | | RadicalMedia0 -
Existing Pages in Google Index and Changing URLs
Hi!! I am launching a newly recoded site this week and had a another noobie question. The URL structure has changed slightly and I have installed a 301 redirect to take care of that. I am wondering how Google will handle my "old" pages? Will they just fall out of the index? Or does the 301 redirect tell Google to rewrite the URLs in the index? I am just concerned I may see an "old" page and a "new" page with the same content in the index. Just want to make sure I have covered all my bases. Thanks!! Lynn
Technical SEO | | hiphound0