Anyone had problems using a 301 redirection.
I posted on this issue a few weeks back but can not reply to the last post as it has expired says "webmasterworld"
Anyway, I am still trying to work out why my site has not been picked up after 3 months :( my previous domain had (has) a PR5 and I decided to change name by purchasing a new domain, I was told the best thing to do was to use a 301 like redirection in order not to pick up any double content penalties. So I did... a few weeks later MSN and Yahoo picked up the 301 but not google so I thought OK I give it a bit longer and a bit longer has now become 3 months :( my traffic has dropped around 80% which is bad.
I have done all sorts,
- checked if the domain had any previous penalties
- created a sitemap
- changed previous incoming links to new domain
- contacted Google and funny enough they tried to help out by giving me a few tips but no luck with that...
Has anyone has any problems with using a 301?
Im pretty much desperate now...
|my traffic has dropped around 80% |
How it could be if 301 redirection is in place?
Have you removed your old site?
I moved with 301 without significant problems a couple of years ago.
However I kept the old site in place several months until the sites that linked to me changed their links to the new location. I naturally politely asked them to do so. I believe also that for Google it takes several months to completely re-index Internet and during this time it is better to preserve the old site.
If your domain is not new it may happened also that it has the bad history and bad inbound links.
a similar wickedry happened to me.
also 80% drop and after a 301. i asked as many webmasters as i could to change, but with thousands of IBLS i would guess that about 75% of those still point to the older domain.
What can we do?
While we're on the topic, can anyone help me out with this?
I just recently 302'd my non www directory to my www directory to clean up the index structure.
Of my 50,000 links, about 800 of them went to the non www version.
In G's eyes, does my www page now get the credit for those links?
|In G's eyes, does my www page now get the credit for those links? |
Nope, nor will any other SE. You should use a 301.
Phil_AM -- 302 means "moved temporarily"; you should use 301 which means "moved permanently".
The topic of this thread is your other question.
Theoretically, a page that moved from one location to another using a 301 redirect should eventually replace the old version of the page in the search engine's index. Because it's far from immediate, you should keep the old pages around for as long as possible.
While the old page itself should be replaced, the links from other sites to that page would only move if the linking site changes them. Since links are an important part of the credit a page gets for being authoritative on a subject, it's not clear to me whether Google continues to credit the new page for links pointing to the old page.
|Anyway, I am still trying to work out why my site has not been picked up after 3 months :( my previous domain had (has) a PR5 and I decided to change name by purchasing a new domain, I was told the best thing to do was to use a 301 like redirection in order not to pick up any double content penalties. So I did. |
Did you do a 301 for each page from the old site to the appropriate page on the new site?
|A few weeks later MSN and Yahoo picked up the 301 but not google so I thought OK I give it a bit longer and a bit longer has now become 3 months :( my traffic has dropped around 80% which is bad. |
Question, why did you change the domain in the first place?
Thanks for the replies guys. I get mixed up between 301, 302... In IIS, I just checked the box that syas permanent redirect, so hopefully that means 301!
pageoneresults, I do not know about sotoweb, but in my case, the website was bought by another ISP, so domain change was mandatory and it was impossible to keep the older domain, since it was property of another ISP.
That's the problem of automated stuff like G, there's always exceptions to their supposed "perfect techniques to do X or Y"