Replacing a site map
-
We are in the process of changing our folder/url structure. Currently we have about 5 sitemaps submitted to Google.
How is it best to deal with these site maps in terms of either (a) replacing the old URLs with the new ones in the site map and (b) what affect should we have if we removed the site map submission from the Google Webmaster Tools console.
Basically we have in the region of 20,000 urls to redirect to the new format, and to update in the site map.
-
Another thought might be to place a noindex on the new pages to start with and as we migrate and 301 redirect the old to the new remove the noindex on the new pages ?
That can work but it's not an approach i would use. It seems like a lot of extra work, you run the risk of forgetting to remove the noindex tag on some pages, and also you may wind up not having pages properly indexed for a month.
If you publish a page today, Google may crawl the new page and see the noindex tag. You can then remove the noindex tag but Google may not recrawl the page for some time leaving your site without an indexed page.
As part of the process of publishing the page, I would 301 the old URL to the new URL immediately.
-
Another thought might be to place a noindex on the new pages to start with and as we migrate and 301 redirect the old to the new remove the noindex on the new pages ?
Thoughts ??
-
since the site has over 10,000 pages we need to make sure all redirects etc are set-up before we go live with the new URLs ?
Whether your site has 10 pages or a million pages you should ensure all internal links work without the need for redirection. Any old external links should be redirected to the correct page on your site if one exists. Otherwise you can allow the URL to 404 if there is not a current equivalent page.
Set up your site's 404 page so users are offered a basic "page not found" message along with your site's navigation and a search function. You should set up a log to track which URLs are generating 404 errors.
Prior to launching the site run a crawl diagnostic to help ensure nothing has been missed.
-
Perfect thanks. Just one final question, since the site has over 10,000 pages we need to make sure all redirects etc are set-up before we go live with the new URLs ?
What is the best way to go forward with regards launching the site ?
Should we launch the new pages and then go through the URLs redirecting them ?
Thoughts please ??
-
We are changing our site structure for two main reasons
-
Ease of functionality, and having the ability to target friendly URLs suitable for SEO
-
Plus we've a new CMS, that allows this custom written URLs
The current structure has too many folders that are too deep, and is becoming too un-manageable. The new CMS gives us totally control from one control panel.
I understand that we will loose some PR, but believe it will be for the better of the site and user experience.
-
-
We are changing our site structure for two main reasons
-
Ease of functionality, and having the ability to target friendly URLs suitable for SEO
-
Plus we've a new CMS, that allows this custom written URLs
The current structure has too many folders that are too deep, and is becoming too un-manageable. The new CMS gives us totally control from one control panel.
I understand that we will loose some PR, but below it will be for the better of the site and user experience.
-
-
Big question: are you changing folder/url structure for aesthetics or functionality? Often times it's not worth making such a large change in hopes of getting some SEO-friendly URL's, as the weight on SEO-friendly URL's isn't what it once was. And the headache involved, as well as the inevitable loss in traffic, is quite often not worth it at all.
With that said, refresh your entire sitemap with the new URL's once they are made. Remove all old urls.
IMPORTANT: setup 301 redirects, either using .htaccess or PHP (or whatever language your site uses), to redirect all old urls to the respective new urls. You will lose a fair chunk of PR during this change, but if you feel your site will benefit greatly from a structure change, then you will be willing to take the hit.
Don't leave any redirect un-turned. Then, you'll just have to wait it out while Google re-indexes your entire site trying to figure out your new url structure. Could take a week, could take months. All depends on what Google has valued your site as. For example, if CNN changed their entire URL structure, they probably would miss a beat. Smaller websites tend to take much larger hits in the SERP's.
So, just be sure it's a necessary action, trust me. And don't ever remove those 301's from your .htaccess as you never know what Google still has in their index for your site.
-
A sitemap should be a link representation of your site. It should contain a link to every page you wish to be included in Google's index.
How is it best to deal with these site maps in terms of either (a) replacing the old URLs with the new ones in the site map
Just make the switch. If a page no longer exists on your site, remove the link. If you create a new page on your site, add the link.
what affect should we have if we removed the site map submission from the Google Webmaster Tools console
For the most part, none. During the next crawl Google would look for your sitemap at your root address: www.mydomain.com/sitemap.xml. Google will also check your robots.txt file for a path to your sitemap file. If a sitemap is not located, it will crawl your site normally.
The primary purpose of a sitemap is to allow Google to become aware about new pages on your site it otherwise might not find. If your site offers solid navigation, a site map is not necessary at all.
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
-
Off-site company blog linking to company site or blog incorporated into the company site?
Kind of a SEO newbie, so be gentle. I'm a beginner content strategist at a small design firm. Currently, I'm working with a client on a website redesign. Their current website is a single page dud with a page authority of 5. The client has a word press blog with a solid URL name, a domain authority of 100 and page authority of 30. My question is this: would it be better for my client from an SEO perspective to: Re-skin their existing blog and link to the new company website with it, hopefully passing on some of its "Google Juice,"or... Create a new blog on their new website (and maybe do a 301 redirect from the old blog)? Or are there better options that I'm not thinking of? Thanks for whatever help you can give a newbie. I just want to take good care of my client.
Technical SEO | | TheKatzMeow0 -
Partner Sites
Hi All, Within our company we have a media group that publishes magazines and videos, the sites have footers that link to our shopping site, one of them has 118,459 links to one URL, domain authority 23, and the other 17,726 to seven URLs, domain authority 52, (there are some articles which link organically). My question is are these links because they're from identifiable companies with the same ownership worth keeping or are they detrimental? The site being linked to has a DA of 39 Cheers Stew
Technical SEO | | StewMcG0 -
Can hreflang replace canonicalisation ?
Hi Im working with a site that has ALOT of duplicate content and have recommended developer fix via correct use of Canonicalisation i.e the canonical tag. However a US version (of this UK site) is about to be developed on a subfolder (domain.com/uk/ & domain.com/US/ etc so also looking into adopting the hreflang attribute on these. Upon reading up about the hreflang attribute i see that it performs a degree of canonicalisation too. Does that mean that developing the international versions with hreflang means there's no need to apply canonicalistion tags to deal with the dupe content, since will deal with the original dupe content problems as well as the new country related dupe content, via the hreflang ? I also understand that hreflang and canonicalisation can conflict/clash on different language versions of international subfolders etc as per: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Igbrm1z_7Hk In this instance we are only looking at US/UK versions but very likely will want to expand into non english countries too in the future like France for example. So given both the above points if you are using hreflang is it advisable (or even best) to totally avoid the canonical tag ? I would be surprised if the answers yes, since whilst makes logical sense given the above (if the above statements are correct), that seems strange given how important and standard best practice canonical usage seems to be these days. What best ? Use the Hreflang alone, or the Canonical tag alone or both ? What does everyone else do in similar situation ? All Best Dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence0 -
What should the combined domain rank of 2 sites?
We have just combined 2 sites by redirecting a site with a domain ranking of 35 to a site with a domain ranking of 27 (this is because the we want to use the address with a ranking of 27) After a week I now have 1 domain with a ranking of 26?? So my questions are; Should the ranking have increased already? What should I expect the ranking to increase to if at all? Is there something I could have done wrong when transferring? Thanks
Technical SEO | | benj450 -
Site Map Problems or Are They?
According to webmaster tools my Sitemap contains urls which are blocked by robots.txt Our site map is generically generated and encompasses all web pages, whether I have excluded them using the robots.txt file As far as I am aware this has never been an issue until recently. Is this hurting my rankings and how do I fix it? Secondly, webmaster tools says there is over 5,000 error/warnings on my site map. But site map is only 1,400 or so pages submitted. How do I see what is going on?
Technical SEO | | Professor0 -
One large site or a few microsites?
Hi, I have a client who runs a professional expo company and wants to redo his website. Right now he has one website that has the following sections: expo company info, wedding show info, electrical wire show info, fishing show info. My question is, when I rebuild the site would it be better to do one site or four microsites?
Technical SEO | | JohnWeb120 -
Redirect Flash Site for Google Only - Is this against TOS?
A photographer client has a flash website, purchased as from a (well respected) template company. The main site is at the root domain, and the HTML version is at www.example.com/?load=html If I visit the site on a browser without Flash installed, I am re-directed automatically to the HTML version. I'm concerned as the site has some great links and the HTML version is well optimised, but doesn't appear anywhere in Google for chosen keywords (ranks perfectly for brand related searches). Google is indexing the Flash version of the site, but I would rather it didn't (there's no real content (just Javascript to load the SWF) and all of the pages load under one URL). How can I block the Flash version from Google but still make the incoming links count towards the HTMl version of the site? If I re-direct Google to the HTML version, is this cloaking, and is it frowned upon? Thanks for any advice you can offer.
Technical SEO | | cmaddison0