non-www & www. issues

I just discovered a site off mine has this listings

[vite_rts]

Hi Guys

I've been ooccasionally reading about the canonical issues regarding non-www & www pages indexed by google. I confess to not concentrating too much on this cause I believed my sites never had non-www pages,

Well, I just discovered that a site i first put up , as a learning hobby site in 2004 has like 15 non-www pages indexed, an all thesepages have since been deleted by me many months ago

I've recently used the url removal tool extensively on www pages that i've also deleted but which remained cached by google,

However, even tho the whole site is only 40 pages, google has only the default. and my login pages indexed

And I submitted a sitemap

Question:

Should I delete all the non www urls, the pages are already deleted an I don't want to 301 any of the cause they where obsolute anyway, tis a kinda web application.

Sorry if this has been asked before, but if I saw it, i sure didn't get it :-)

[g1smd]

You cannot use the URL removal tool to selectively delete the non-www version of a page while keeping the www version, or vice-versa.

Choose one, www or non-www, and set up a site-wide 301 redirect from one to the other. The one you redirect TO will be the one that will be listed.

Pages that are already marked as Supplemental Results will take a lot longer to be fixed, maybe years.

There is no other alternative.

[vite_rts]

Using ASP.net code, how would I set up a redirect from non-www to www?

After all, there is only 1 set off web pages?

Can I like use the system off checking what url was typed into the browser, then execute 301 if http://example.com was typed?

I fear an endless loop using that technique

[g1smd]

Yes, the script checks what was asked for, and then redirects if needed, i.e. only when non-www was asked for.

The visitor then returns a fraction of a second later, but now asking for the correct version, and gets it.

Google for a script extract. There are many.

[vite_rts]

Thanks G1

I found this thread

[webmasterworld.com...]

I will be trying this asp code tonite, but another question I have is that, even if one off your sites does not appear to suffer from the canonical issue, would you use the redirect anyway?

just in case .

[webdude]

g1smd said:

Pages that are already marked as Supplemental Results will take a lot longer to be fixed, maybe years.

Maybe never. I have pages from the later 90's still in there. I have tried just about everything and yet they remain. It is one aspect of G I wish they could clean up. You would figure the resources to keep such a DB would be huge. Do you think there ever will be a "supplemental fix?" Maybe they are saving it for "History of the Internet." Most of these pages still have cache.

[g1smd]

I can't find any Supplemental pages with a cache date older than (dated before) 2005 June; so I am surprised that you are finding older stuff. Use WebBug on HTTP/1.1 to find out what the server response code for those URLs is. If it isn't 404 or 410 then you have your answer.

Even if you can't see a problem with the site (i.e. all of the pages are already listed as either www or non-www, not a mixture) then I would still add the site-wide 301 redirect to stop it ever happening in the future.

[vite_rts]

Yes, thats what i'mm gonna do to all my sites.

[vite_rts]

This problem is complicted by the fact that the site is now hosted by a different host from the name registrars.

the http://example.com for an number off my domains are simply given a dns error. Now , I'm sure its because I haven't setup the correct dns records

Does anyone know the correct dns record format to set up to resolve

http://example.com

i am currently trying

cname record example.com. examplesNIC.com