302 redirect used, submit old sitemap?
-
The website of a partner of mine was recently migrated to a new platform. Even though the content on the pages mostly stayed the same, both the HTML source (divs, meta data, headers, etc.) and URLs (removed index.php, removed capitalization, etc) changed heavily. Unfortunately, the URLs of ALL forum posts (150K+) were redirected using a 302 redirect, which was only recently discovered and swiftly changed to a 301 after the discovery. Several other important content pages (150+) weren't redirected at all at first, but most now have a 301 redirect as well. The 302 redirects and 404 content pages had been live for over 2 weeks at that point, and judging by the consistent day/day drop in organic traffic, I'm guessing Google didn't like the way this migration went.
My best guess would be that Google is currently treating all these content pages as 'new' (after all, the source code changed 50%+, most of the meta data changed, the URL changed, and a 302 redirect was used). On top of that, the large number of 404's they've encountered (40K+) probably also fueled their belief of a now non-worthy-of-traffic website.
Given that some of these pages had been online for almost a decade, I would love Google to see that these pages are actually new versions of the old page, and therefore pass on any link juice & authority. I had the idea of submitting a sitemap containing the most important URLs of the old website (as harvested from the Top Visited Pages from Google Analytics, because no old sitemap was ever generated...), thereby re-pointing Google to all these old pages, but presenting them with a nice 301 redirect this time instead, hopefully causing them to regain their rankings. To your best knowledge, would that help the problems I've outlined above? Could it hurt?
Any other tips are welcome as well.
-
Hi There,
As the other people have said here, 2 weeks isn't very long for Google to sort this out, though I know it feels like a really long time. While Google and Bing say they will treat 302's as 301's if they think it's a mistake, but I haven't really seen this happen.
Whenever I do a URL migration, I always submit a sitemap with the old URLs to help Google pick up the 301's faster. In your situation, I'd definitely submit an xml sitemap of as many old URLs as you can find to help Google pick up the updated redirects ASAP. Do you have any old files that you could pull URLs from (I know you don't have an old xml sitemap, but maybe a csv or something like that)?
Good luck!
-
You're right that the search engines are treating the new pages like...well...new pages. It has nothing to do with how much code has changed and everything to do with the fact that they simply have new URLs.
I agree with Alan. Two weeks isn't a terribly long time. Obviously, it's best to have all your ducks in a row from the start, but I think there's good chance that just from setting up the proper redirects for the pages the site should now transfer, though it may take few weeks and you may not get completely back to where you were.
As far as submitting the sitemap for all the old pages, I'm not sure what that would do. It's possible it may do exactly what you want, basically tell Google about all the redirects, but then again, Google may think it's a bit odd putting up a sitemap to redirected pages.
-
My guess is the large number of 404's was wasting your link juice(100%), also you will lose something from all the 301's (approx 15%),
as for the source code changing I would not worry about change itself. as long as the code has no problems. It a change in content that is the concern.
some other points,
2 weeks is not a long time for things to sort themselves out with this many pages.
You don't need to 301 redirect all the pages, just the ones that had external links.
Also just for interest, Bing treats a 302(temp) that has been in place for a long time as a 301, likewise a 301(permanent) that keeps changing is treated as a 302. Maybe google does the same, I don't know.
I would fix all the 404s and wait
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
-
Redirects, 301's & 404's
I have tons of links that I have had added a redirect to after creating my companies new website. Is it bad to have all these 301s? How do I permanently redirect those links? Also, on Google Search Console it's telling me I have 1,000+ excluded links. Is this bad? Will it negatively affect me? Is this something to do with my sitemap? Any help would be greatly appreciated 🙂
Technical SEO | | sammecooper0 -
302 a Homepage?
I am working with a site that wants to temporarily show a promotional landing page instead of their homepage. Theoretically you could do a 302, but what are the SEO implications of doing such a thing? I would appreciate any first hand experience or feedback on the idea. Ultimately it will not be my decision, but I do have influence. As a side note, there homepage is a mess (visually displeasing) and they really need a new website. This is one of the reasons that they are leaning this way. Thanks in advance for the feedback.
Technical SEO | | JerrodDavid0 -
Sitemap issue
How can I create XML as well as HTML sitemaps for my website (both eCommerce and non - eCommerce )Is there any script or tool that helps me making perfect sitemapPlease suggest
Technical SEO | | Obbserv0 -
60% Internal Redirects
A new client I am working with has a site with over 9,000 internal 301 redirects. These are as a result of old links not being updated and the number of internal 301 redirects far outweighs the number of 'correct' links on the site. My personal opinion is that creates the risk of crawl errors/issues and whilst a 301 redirect is correct in this case, it does not negate the need to update internal links. The problem I have is that when I explain this to the client, they reply with an Matt Cutts video from 2008 that talks about 301 redirects being correct for site migrations. Even though the video is not entirely relevant to the point, I can not get the client to move from his position. Ideally, what I am looking for help with is the following: Am I right in my position that having this many redirects is a potential issue and that internal links should be updated? Does anyone know of any articles from 'notable/reputable' sources that I can use in order to support my position? Thanks in advance for your help.
Technical SEO | | MattHopkins0 -
Use of Location Folders
I'd like to understand the pro's and con's of using a location subfolder as an SEO strategy (example: http://sqmedia.us/Dallas/content-marketing.html), where the /Dallas folder is holding all of my keyword rich page titles. The strategy is to get local-SEO benefits from the use of the folder titled /Dallas (a folder which is unnecessary in the over all structure of this site), but how much is this strategy taking away from the page-title keyword effectiveness?
Technical SEO | | sqmedia0 -
260k 301 redirects
Hello, I just found that some of the urls on my site have both ugly characters and some other things I'd like to fix (such as ---- into a single - ) After some local tests i've seen that If i leave some imperfections there will be 48k different urls on the other hand if the renaming procedure is strict i'll have around 260k out of 2.3M urls to be renamed. If I'm going to do this I'll create new canonicals meta tag and redirect old urls with 301 headers to the new location. The content will not change. My big doubt is SEO wise, I know that I'll have better urls, but aren't those too much redirects on a single day? what would you do if you wish to have shipshape urls and know some of these are crap? thanks
Technical SEO | | mylittlepwny0 -
Redirect old URL's from referring sites?
Hi I have just came across some URL's from the previous web designer and the site structure has now changed. There are some links on the web however that are still pointing at the old deep weblinks. Without having to contact each site it there a way to automatically sort the links from the old structure www.mydomain.com/show/english/index.aspx to just www.mydomain.com Many Thanks
Technical SEO | | ocelot0 -
Question about domain redirects
One of my clients has an odd domain redirect situation. See if you can get your head round this: Domain A is set-up as a domain alias of Domain B Entering domain A or domain B takes you to default.asp on domain B. The default.asp includes VB script to check the HTTP_HOST variable. It checks whether the main doman name for domain A is present in the HTTP_HOST and if so redirects it to domain A/sub-folder/index.htm. If not present it redirects to domain B/index.htm. In both cases the redirect uses a response.Redirect clause. I think what is trying to be achieved is to redirect requests to Domain A to a sub-folder of Domain B. It works but seems extremely convoluted. Can anyone see problems with this set-up? Will link juice be lost along the redirect paths?
Technical SEO | | bjalc20110