How should I close my forum in a way that's best for SEO?
-
Hi Guys,
I have a forum on a subdomain and it is no longer used. (like forum.mywebsite.com)
It kind of feels like a dead limb and I don't know what's best to do for SEO. Should I just leave it as it is and let it stagnate? There is a link in the nav menu to the main domain so users have a chance to find the main domain.
Or should I remove it and just redirect the whole subdomain to the main domain? I don't know if redirects would work as I doubt most of the threads would match our articles, plus there are 700 of them.
The main domain is PR3 and so is the forum subdomain.
Please help!
-
There are two kinds of content that Google sees. One is evergreen, the other is fresh. Evergreen might be something that doesn't need to change (not all sites and pages change all the time), with fresh being the likes of articles and news. If there is a thread with good information on it, then it might still be useful.
However, if you think there are a handful of forum pages that could be redirected to main internal pages, then you can do this as well - there is no need to redirect every thread though. You could redirect 10 pages and 404 everything else.
-Andy
-
I'm just thinking because it's not being replied to, the content will never update and won't Google see it as just being "dead" content.
I'm happy to leave it if you guys think that's best.
-
If people are still reading the forum, is there then a reason you want to remove it? There is no harm in leaving it in place and it won't harm current SEO either.
-Andy
-
Hi, thanks for the replies.
We still get hits on the forum and people are reading it, but no one replies.
What's the best option for ranking and SEO. Is it to go through each one and redirect it to the most relevant article/blog on the main domain with 301's?
Should I post the links so you guys see and understand the sites better?
-
Hi,
Do people still visit the forum? If so, you can take it down, remove everything but the index and then just have a polite notice advising that the feature has been removed, and that you will be automatically redirected to the homepage in 10 seconds - that kind of thing.
However, I wouldn't advise to just 301 with there being so many pages that don't match anything else - If there is no chance it will ever be used again, I would just take it down and ensure you have a decent 404 in place. Google doesn't mind 404's where pages are no longer in use.
You don't want to 301 a forum to a site homepage where there is no forum.
-Andy
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
-
My website is currently failing Google's mobile friendly test. What are my options?
What can I tell my developer so I pass this test? What will they need to develop A web mockup? Is there an easy code to implement?
Technical SEO | | pmull0 -
Google how deal with licensed content when this placed on vendor & client's website too. Will Google penalize the client's site for this ?
One of my client bought licensed content from top vendor of Health Industry. This same content is on the vendor's website & my client's site also but on my site there is a link back to vendor is placed which clearly tells to anyone that this is a licensed content & we bought from this vendor. My client bought paid top quality content for best source of industry but at this same this is placed on vendor's website also. Will Google penalize my client's website for this ? Niche is HEALTH
Technical SEO | | sourabhrana1 -
Why are these URL's suddenly appearing in WMT?
One of our clients has suddenly experienced a sudden increase in crawl errors for smart phones overnight for pages which no longer exist and there are no links to these pages according to Google. There is no evidence as to why Google would suddenly start to crawl these pages as they have not existed for over 5 years, but it does come after a new site design has been put live. Pages do not appear to be in the index when a site search is used. There was a similar increase in crawl errors on desktop initially after the new site went live, but these quickly returned to normal. Mobile crawl errors only became apparent after this. There are some URL's showing which have no linking page detected so we don't know where these URL's are being found. WMT states "Googlebot couldn't crawl this URL because it points to a non-existent page". Those that do have a linking page are showing an internal page which also doesn't exist so it can't possibly link to any page. Any insight is appreciated. Andy and Mark at Click Consult.
Technical SEO | | ClickConsult0 -
Is 307 the best way to handle temporarily disabled items ?
I was wondering what would be the best way to handle temporarily disabled items. There is 302 and 307 and from what I understand 307 redirect is the HTTP 1.1 successor of the 302 redirect. Any one has any experience on how Google handles 307? I am thinking I 307 the temp disabled pages to a generic page like site.com/we-are-adding-some-final-touches-to-this.html where we will explain to users why an item would be disabled and will give them an option to get notification when it goes back up. Finally when it goes back up I remove the 307 redirect and make the page live.
Technical SEO | | Saijo.George0 -
Using a Feedburner RSS link in your blog's header tag
It was suggested in Quick Sprout's Advanced SEO guide that it's good form to place your Feedburner RSS link into the header tag of your blog. Anyone know if this needs to be done for every page header of the blog, or just the home/main/index page? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Martin_S0 -
What's best practice for blog meta titles?
I have the option of placing meta titles on the actual blog, or on the blog category on my site. Should I have separate meta titles for each blog or bundle them under a category and try to drive traffic to the category? Can anyone help with best practice?
Technical SEO | | Lubeman0 -
Cantags within links affect Google's perception of them?
Hi, All! This might be really obvious, but I have little coding experience, so when in doubt - ask... One of our client site's has navigation that looks (in part) like this: <a <span="">href</a><a <span="">="http://www.mysite.com/section1"></a> <a <span="">src="images/arrow6.gif" width="13" height="7" alt="Section 1">Section 1</a><a <span=""></a> WC3 told us the tags invalidate, and while I ignored most of their comments because I didn't think it would impact on what search engines saw, because thesetags are right in the links, it raised a question. Anyone know if this is for sure a problem/not a problem? Thanks in advance! Aviva B
Technical SEO | | debi_zyx0 -
URL's for news content
We have made modifications to the URL structure for a particular client who publishes news articles in various niche industries. In line with SEO best practice we removed the article ID from the URL - an example is below: http://www.website.com/news/123/news-article-title
Technical SEO | | mccormackmorrison
http://www.website.com/news/read/news-article-title Since this has been done we have noticed a decline in traffic volumes (we have not as yet assessed the impact on number of pages indexed). Google have suggested that we need to include unique numerical IDs in the URL somewhere to aid spidering. Firstly, is this policy for news submissions? Secondly (if the previous answer is yes), is this to overcome the obvious issue with the velocity and trend based nature of news submissions resulting in false duplicate URL/ title tag violations? Thirdly, do you have any advice on the way to go? Thanks P.S. One final one (you can count this as two question credits if required), is it possible to check the volume of pages indexed at various points in the past i.e. if you think that the number of pages being indexed may have declined, is there any way of confirming this after the event? Thanks again! Neil0