Can we ignore "broken links" without redirecting to "new pages"?
-
Let's say we have reaplced www.website.com/page1 with www.website.com/page2.
Do we need to redirect page1 to page2 even page1 doesn't have any back-links?
If it's not a replacement, can we ignore a "lost page"?
Many websites loose hundreds of pages periodically. What's Google's stand on this. If a website has replaced or lost hundreds of links without reclaiming old links by redirection, will that hurts?
-
I highly recommend putting a 301 redirect in place for any links like the one you mentioned above.
Google wants the ensure that users have a great experience when in your website, and if there's even a slight chance that their visit could be interrupted by a broken link, you could be dinger. To stay safe, I recommend redirects.
-
Hi Patrick,
Will there be any issue if we do redirection for hundreds of pages in the process of link reclamation?
-
It is recommended you redirect page1 to page 2, don't worry about if there is any back link or not, Google already crawled the page1 and now if it turns to 404 you'll loose google rank given to that page. Let's say you go to your favorite restaurant and when you get there you found that the store is closed permanently, what you'll do you'll start looking for new restaurant, same issue with SEO here.
Hope this helps.
Antulio
-
Hi there
I would redirect the page to it's new URL because if this page ranked for any keywords or queries, the new page can stand to gain that visibility. I would also do it from a user experience standpoint. If a customer or user bookmarked that page, then they will be able to be redirected to the correct URL. So, my two cents, go ahead and redirect, especially if it's a few pages, and also make sure your internal links / sitemap XML are updated to the new URL.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
Patrick -
But how come we retain the reputation at Google? Page1 is familiar for Google. Page2 is new and cannot rank in Google for weeks and months. In this case, if we redirect page1 to page2....it must help somewhere right; even without back-links. We have noticed our new page was not ranking in Google for "same keyword" for weeks, but it would've made if we redirected it.
-
Hi,
We do use 301 redirect to pass link juice from one page to another page. If your webpage not ranking in top 10 or 20 and there is no backlink then you can ignore.
Thanks
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 Search Console Not Indexing Pages
Hi there! I have a problem that I was hoping someone could help me with. On google search console, my website does not seem to be indexed well. In fact, even after rectifying problems that Moz's on-demand crawl has pointed out, it still does not become "valid". There are some of the excluded pages that Google has pointed out. I have rectified some of the issues but it doesn't seem to be helping. However, when I submitted the sitemap, it says that the URLs were discoverable, hence I am not sure why they can be discovered but are not deemed "valid". I would sincerely appreciate any suggestions or insights as to how can I go about to solve this issue. Thanks! Screenshot+%28341%29.png Screenshot+%28342%29.png Screenshot+%28343%29.png
Algorithm Updates | | Chowsey0 -
Is "Author Rank," User Comments Driving Losses for YMYL Sites?
Hi, folks! So, our company publishes 50+ active, disease-specific news and perspectives websites -- mostly for rare diseases. We are also tenacious content creators: between news, columns, resource pages, and other content, we produce 1K+ pieces of original content across our network. Authors are either PhD scientists or patients/caregivers. All of our sites use the same design. We were big winners with the August Medic update in 2018 and subsequent update in September/October. However, the Medic update in March and de-indexing bug in April were huge losers for us across our monetized sites (about 10 in total). We've seen some recovery with this early June update, but also some further losses. It's a mixed bag. Take a look at this attached MOZ chart, which shows the jumps and falls around the various Medic updates. The pattern is very similar on many of our sites. As per JT Williamson's stellar article on EAT, I feel like we've done a good job in meeting those criteria, which has left we wondering what isn't jiving with the new core updates. I have two theories I wanted to run past you all: 1. Are user comments on YMYL sites problematic for Google now? I was thinking that maybe user comments underneath health news and perspectives articles might be concerning on YMYL sites now. On one hand, a healthy commenting community indicates an engaged user base and speaks to the trust and authority of the content. On the other hand, while the AUTHOR of the article might be a PhD researcher or a patient advocate, the people commenting -- how qualified are they? What if they are spouting off crazy ideas? Could Google's new update see user comments such as these as degrading the trust/authority/expertise of the page? The examples I linked to above have a good number of user comments. Could these now be problematic? 2. Is Google "Author Rank" finally happening, sort of? From what I've read about EAT -- particularly for YMYL sites -- it's important that authors have “formal expertise” and, according to Williamson, "an expert in the field or topic." He continues that the author's expertise and authority, "is informed by relevant credentials, reviews, testimonials, etc. " Well -- how is Google substantiating this? We no longer have the authorship markup, but is the algorithm doing its due diligence on authors in some more sophisticated way? It makes me wonder if we're doing enough to present our author's credentials on our articles, for example. Take a look -- Magdalena is a PhD researcher, but her user profile doesn't appear at the bottom of the article, and if you click on her name, it just takes you to her author category page (how WordPress'ish). Even worse -- our resource pages don't even list the author. Anyhow, I'd love to get some feedback from the community on these ideas. I know that Google has said there's nothing to do to "fix" these downturns, but it'd sure be nice to get some of this traffic back! Thanks! 243rn10.png
Algorithm Updates | | Michael_Nace1 -
Google search console: 404 and soft 404 without any back-links. Redirect needed?
Hi Moz community, We can see the 404 and soft 404 errors in Google web masters. Usually these are non-existing pages which are found somewhere on internet by Google. I can see some of these reported URLs don't have any back-links (checked on ahrefs tool). Do we need to redirect each and every link reported here or ignore or marked to be fixed? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
How do I code SEO for a secondary site without impacting the main site?
We have a secondary site for our online magazine, how do I code the SEO so I don't steal links from the main site?
Algorithm Updates | | gacwebteam0 -
How I can check if Google and other search engines will properly cache a page (a dynamic one)?
My site is currently disallowing search engine bots with the help of robots.txt. These dynamic pages can be crawled using Screamingfrog since they are linked to a static category page which is also linked to the homepage. Thanks in advance!
Algorithm Updates | | esiow20130 -
Too Many Non-Niche-Specific Links?
Something just occurred to me today. I work in-house for an embroidered patch company, but I respond to a lot of HARO queries about Marketing, SEO, SEM, Web Design, ect. So, we have a lot of links from these types of sites. Additionally, I have done guest blogs on these topics because those are what I'm knowledgeable about. We also have links from customers' personal blogs or websites stating they got their patches from us and are happy, blah, blah, blah. On top of that, we hired someone who ended up getting tons of .edu links by spamming blogs. Oy. I'd estimate only about 10% of our links come from embroidery, sewing, screen printing, promotional products, etc types of sites. I guess it's not really known or documented how much weight Google places on niche-specific links--we just assume that it matters, and I'm sure it does. Our rankings are fine now, but I'm looking for some opinions from other SEOs about how much they think this will matter in the future or how much it matters now. Could this hurt us in the future? .
Algorithm Updates | | UnderRugSwept0
