Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Hi Rand,
thank you for the quick reply. After looking into the data again, it seems like I have exaggerated a tiny bit. Here are some examples. One of them is old kwd 38, new kwd 4, another one is old kwd 46, new kwd 6. Technically not "40+ to <5" but pretty close and bad enough.
Hey Rand,
from your blogpost regarding the launch of keyword explorer I got, that you guys are planing to retire the old keyword-diffuculty tool in favor of the new kw-explorer. On the other hand it is stated in that post and here as well, that the new explorer is - and for at least some more month will be - US and english language-centric.
After fiddling with it for a while I get more then > 90% "no data" for volume and many of the new difficulty scores don't make much sense to me (e.g. difficulty scores of < 5 for terms that got a score over >40 in the old tool).
That leads me to two questions:
If the new tool is more precise than the old one and the differences in scores are that big: Was it either a terrible idea to use the old scores for decission making in the first place? Or could it be, that the new tool has still some difficulties when it comes to non-english languages or non-us-searches?
Related to this: Why retire the old tool so quick if the new one is not an adequate alternative for folks like me yet?
Thanks, Christian
The 301 should be outside the <ifmodule>. Maybe you could post the other 301 redirects and the one which isn't working here.</ifmodule>
Creating a new index.html and redirecting from it would give you a 302 or even a meta-redirect, which in regard to seo is not recommended.
Do you allready have some rewrite-rules in yout htaccess? In this case try placing it at the end of them.
Works without any tags for me.
Hi Pascal,
Try this in you htaccess
RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,9}\ /index.html\ HTTP/
RewriteRule ^index.html$ http://YOURDOMAIN.COM/ [R=301,L]
Hi Pascal,
Try this in you htaccess
RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,9}\ /index.html\ HTTP/
RewriteRule ^index.html$ http://YOURDOMAIN.COM/ [R=301,L]
Hey Rand,
from your blogpost regarding the launch of keyword explorer I got, that you guys are planing to retire the old keyword-diffuculty tool in favor of the new kw-explorer. On the other hand it is stated in that post and here as well, that the new explorer is - and for at least some more month will be - US and english language-centric.
After fiddling with it for a while I get more then > 90% "no data" for volume and many of the new difficulty scores don't make much sense to me (e.g. difficulty scores of < 5 for terms that got a score over >40 in the old tool).
That leads me to two questions:
If the new tool is more precise than the old one and the differences in scores are that big: Was it either a terrible idea to use the old scores for decission making in the first place? Or could it be, that the new tool has still some difficulties when it comes to non-english languages or non-us-searches?
Related to this: Why retire the old tool so quick if the new one is not an adequate alternative for folks like me yet?
Thanks, Christian
Hi Rand,
thank you for the quick reply. After looking into the data again, it seems like I have exaggerated a tiny bit. Here are some examples. One of them is old kwd 38, new kwd 4, another one is old kwd 46, new kwd 6. Technically not "40+ to <5" but pretty close and bad enough.
