How do I recover from a double 301 mistake?
-
We have a site that was ranking top 10 for 15 KW and top 20 for about 40. We decided to restructure the site to create silos. The old site used a plugin to create ".html" pages and the juice in Google was all on those pages.
We asked our developer to eliminate the plugin / .html and forward the .html pages to our new structure.
Instead, he took a shortcut and did a mass forward in code which resulted in all pages - such as "example.com/mypage.html" now forwarding to "example.com/mypage/" - He then did a 301 redirect from those pages with the "/" such as example.com/mypage/ to "example.com/my-new-page/". He did this for over 500 pages.
To make matters worse, he mis-mapped about 100 pages and Google saw them as 404s, then in fixing those errors, new ones kept popping up. Those are now fixed.
The net result is that we dropped like a stone on all of our rankings.
Moving forward, do you think we can regain ground by manually doing 301s for the original .html pages to their new locations and eliminating the interim step?
What would be your suggestions to recover as quickly as possible?
-
Gotcha, ok well that's a relief. In troubleshooting the drop we are looking at a few more factors. Do any of these sound suspicious?
1. In redirecting everything, our developer was sloppy. There were slug conflicts all over the place and this resulted in hundreds of 404s and mis-directed pages (pages redirected to y instead of x), which he only corrected after we manually found the 404s. We went through 5 or 6 rounds of this.
2. We had over 100 pages without titles and he ran some script that rewrote a lot of existing titles. When we discovered this, he went back and fixed all the titles but only after Google reported 100+ duplicate titles.
3. We installed an internal link building plugin (that we've since deleted) and created business rules for cross linking. This resulted in hundreds of cross links with exact anchor text of the slug / page titles. As mentioned, we've since rolled this back but since the site only has about 50 external backlinks, wondering if the internal link building over-optimized and triggered a penalty. If this is something you think they'd ding us for, now that we've fixed the internal links, do you think Google will give us back some juice? Or is it gone daddy gone?
Otherwise, our pages rank 95%-98% optimized according to Moz and we have zero technical issues at this stage.
-
To be honest, it all looks correct and that would have been the way I did it. If Google is currently not ranking the correct URL, it'll likely update when they take the 301 into account when they next recrawl the page.
It might be a factor in why rankings have dropped but it's likely to pick back up again when their index is updated. My advice is to hold tight and hope it all fixes itself soon.
All the best,
Sean
-
Thanks Sean,
No, he first redirected the .html pages in code so:
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,}\s/+([^.]+).html [NC]
RewriteRule ^ /%1/ [R=301,L]So 500+ pages were redirected from .html to /
Step 2, he made manual 301s from the / to the new structure so for instance "example.com/mypage/" redirected to "example.com/new-parent/my-new-page/"
But Google has ranked example.com/mypage.html
So the question is - would doing the above be a contributor to losing our ranks? If so, would we benefit by manually linking "example.com/mypage.html" to "example.com/new-parent/my-new-page/" and therefore skipping the interim step?
Second, you mentioned having so many redirects could be problematic. Our reason for the change was to create a hierarchy - before we started, there were 500 pages with no parent...no hiearchy at all. So we created a silo structure and a proper site map. The 500 pages now belong to this hiearchy and the slugs are all different than before. Do you have a suggestion for a better way to do the 301s other than manually in this case?
Thanks for the advice!
-
Hey there,
My advice would be to minimize those redirect chains as soon as you can, not just for potential SEO benefit but more to lessen server stress and speed up page load.
Interestingly, chained 301s don't lose equity in the eyes of a search engine now (see updates below) so it's interesting that you're seeing such a fluctuation.
https://mza.seotoolninja.com/blog/301-redirection-rules-for-seo
For the .html to trailing slash pages, did you say that he did a page-to-page remap for all of them instead of putting a redirect rule in place to catch them all? That seems like a crazy thing to put in place! Your redirect file (htaccess or similar) must be enormous!
Hope that helps,
Sean
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
-
301 and rel=canonical AGAINNNN
Trying to understand rel=canonical if you have proper 301 redirects (redirects to the canonical URl) for example when migrating from a HTTP to HTTPS environment why would you also opt to add a rel=cannonical tag on the same pages. What effect does this have on SERP rankings or is it ok to have 301 redirects and rel=canonicalon the same page? Anyone?
Moz Pro | | InternetRep0 -
How to Check 301 Done Properly on Homepage
Hi All, I posted previously about this, and had some good advice (thanks!)... but not quite sure my problem has been fixed. About a month ago we changed our hosting over, and our dev didn't coordinate to have both versions of our homepage redirected to the same URL. Our crawl showed up with every single page as duplicate content, and our organic traffic has since dropped by over 60%. They have told me that it is fixed as of last Monday, and a redundant error that was appearing in my Google Analytics now says that it has been fixed, but Moz crawled my site 2 days ago and still says everything is duplicate content, and my organic traffic is stressing me out! Any advice on how I can check this is done for myself, rather than trusting these guys haven't messed it up any further? Or is it possible the Moz crawl is a bit slower? Thanks in advance.
Moz Pro | | b4cab0 -
I have double-checked the rel canonical is properly employed on our page but the On Page Grader says it's not working?
I have double-checked the rel canonical is properly employed on our page but the On Page Grader says it's not working Here is the URL - http://www.solidconcepts.com/industries/aerospace-parts-manufacturing/ What is wrong with how we are doing things?
Moz Pro | | StratasysDirectManufacturing0 -
Rel=canonical "redirects" to double links
Our devs have set up rel=canonical on our website. First they used relative links href="/dir1/dir2/dir3" for the page http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/?detail1=1?detail2=2 meaning that it will redirect to http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3, but no luck, the MOZ dashboard showed the tag value to be http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/dir1/dir2/dir3, then we have decided to rewrite the code, and now the canonical to http://wwwmysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/?detail1=1?detail2=2 looks like href="http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3/" but the tag on MOZ looks like http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3http://www.mysite.com/dir1/dir2/dir3. So what is the problem? I really got a problem or MOZ does? The code on website looks exactly like href="http://www.aaa.com/en/bbb/ccc/vvv/nnn/" rel="canonical" /> for the page http://www.aaa.com/en/bbb/ccc/vvv/nnn/
Moz Pro | | apartmentGin0 -
How long will it take for Page Rank (or Page Authority) to flow via a 301 redirect?
I've recently redeveloped a static site using WordPress and have created 301 redirects for the original urls to the new urls. I know I won't get all the value passed via the 301, but I'm hoping some will. Any idea how long this may take? It's been nearly a month since the changeover so wondering if it would be weeks, months or more?
Moz Pro | | annomd0 -
Some questions on Canonical tag AND 301 redirect
Hi everyone, I'm new here - always loved SEOMoz and glad to be part of the Pro community now. I have 2 questions regarding the Canonical URL tag. Some background info: We used to run an OsCommerce store, and recently migrated to Magento. In doing so, we right away created 301 redirects of the old category pages (OsCommerce) to the new category pages (Magento) via the Magento admin. Example: www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
Moz Pro | | yacpro13
301 redicrected to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html In Magento admin, we have enabled the Canonical tag for all product and category pages. Here's how Magento sets up the Canonical tag: The URL of interest which we want to rank is:
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html However Magento sets up the canonical tag on this page to point to:
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html When using the SEOMoz On Page Report Card, it pick this up as an error because the Canonical tag is pointing to a different URL. However, if we dig a little deeper, we see that the URL being pointed to
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
has a 301 redirect to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html
which is the URL we wan to rank. So because we set up a 301 redirect of the old-page to the new-page, on the new-page the canonical tag points to the old-page. Question 1)
What are you opinions on this? Do you think this method of setting up the Canonical tag is acceptable? Second question... We use pagination for category pages, so if we have 50 products in one category, we would have 5 pages of 10 products. The URL's would be: www.example.com/new-widget-category.html (which is the SAME as ?p=1)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=2
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=3
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=4
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=5 Now ALL the URLs above have the canonical tag set as:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/new-widget-category" /> However, the content of each page (page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) is different because different products are displayed. So far most what I read regarding the Canonical tag is that it is used for pages that have the same content but different URLs. I would hope that Google would combine the content of all 5 pages and view the result as a single URL www.example.com/new-widget-category Question 2) Is using the canonical tag appropriate in the case described above? Thanks !0 -
Experencing page authority issues after a 301 redirect
We just completed a build of a new site and used 301 redirects to retain our page authority. In the first week all the interior pages reported a page authority of 1 after 2 or so weeks the page authority began to look more accurate but they were still not as high as the original pages. The strange thing is that when you click on the link to a page the page authority populates correctly but when the page finally finished loading the PA goes back down. Has anyone ever experienced this and if so how did you fix it? Thanks!
Moz Pro | | Jo_vortx.com0 -
Is Open Site Explorer ignoring 301 redirects now?
I just recently saw a huge decline in the page rank of a specific page on my site. When I investigated a bit further I noticed that the drop in page rank looks like it is due to the fact that most of the links to the page come through 301 re-directs from an old page. I know you just made a change to Open Site Explorer. Did you change the way that you are treating 301 re-directs? Here is the new page: http://www.justjen.com/shop/big-sister-tshirts.htm Here is the old page: http://www.justjen.com/shop/bigsister-tshirts.htm Up until the last couple of days, the new page was showing the links from the old page in your cache, but as of today, the new page is only showing the links that go to it, not the links to the old page that is re-directed to it. If there was a change recently, was this intentional (trying to replicate the search engines better) or is it an oversight or database anomaly?
Moz Pro | | gametv0