Should I allow 404s, or do 301s to home page?

[maximus12]

I currently have a link exchange directory on my site and want to remove it to see if it helps lift a penalty I am under with Google (am cleaning everything up to file for reconsideration). Link exchanges are a thing of the past and I have read that google does not like them anymore. My question is if I remove all the links and pages (about 7 pages in total) will that be a positive or negative sign for google? And I have always wondered what google thinks of 404's? If it is bad to do? Or should their be some kind of 301 to the homepage?

Thanks

[tedster]

Wherever you read that Google does "not like" link exchanges, I wouldn't agree with a blanket statement like that. Here's what Google has to say - and in my experience it is accurate:

Examples of link schemes can include:

Links intended to manipulate PageRank

Links to web spammers or bad neighborhoods on the web

Excessive reciprocal links or excessive link exchanging ("Link to me and I'll link to you.")

[google.com...]

404 status replies (or 410) are standard and expected for content that is no longer available. If you use a 301 redirect, it's best to redirect to a url that is a true replacement for the content that was removed - and a home page is not a replacement for a list of link partners.

So it you feel your reciprocal linking has been excessive, I'd just remove those pages and let the status be 404. I doubt that many people are linking to your lists of link partners anyway.

But more moderately, isn't there a core set of link partners who are of value for your visitors? It might be a good thing to retain some of those links.

[BradleyT]

7 seperate pages of recip links?

[maximus12]

Tedster, thanks, just the answer I was looking for. What I plan to do is remove all the links and leave the most trusted valuable ones on one page that I think our users will benefit from. So in a few words google does not see 404s as a bad thing they just see it as the page does not exist anymore, so no negative points towards your site correct?

Bradley, yes about 7 pages, each has about 6- 9 links on it. Use to do allot of link exchanging :(

[tedster]

Right - 404's of previously active urls are not a black mark against a website. They get reported to you in WebmasterTools as an FYI, since many times 404 server errors are a sign of a problem that you didn't intend.

But since you will have a link page remaining, then you might at least consider a 301 from the six pages that you've removed that redirects to the one still existing page.

[g1smd]

Mass redirects to the root aren't usually a good idea.

Redirect to page with similar topic/content is fine.

[maximus12]

Well I deleted all the extra link pages and saved about 9 links that I added to one page? Should I just 301 redirect to that one linkpage or let all those link pages I deleted stay 404?

[tedster]

I'd say check your server logs to see if the deleted pages were entry pages for any traffic. If so, then use a 301 redirect.

[maximus12]

Well yes I can see some of the pages have had 100 - 300 hits over the past year, not many but some

[tedster]

Not just hits, but ENTRY traffic with a referrer, would be my criteria. Otherwise, you may just be looking at traffic from your reciprocal linking partners, verifying that you still link back. Or maybe stupid bot hits, too.

[maximus12]

"ENTRY traffic with a referrer, would be my criteria" is exactly right, it is no real traffic just webmasters looking for their link or following a link listed there... So is it still recommendable to 301?

[steveb]

If you had seven link pages, and now have one, redirect the other six to to the one. There is no logical reason not to do that.

[tangor]

steveb is right, nothing wrong with a redirect if you maintain such pages. I also don't see anything wrong with offering 404s. After all, things change. What you don't want to do is 301 a 404 to a page that has nothing to do with the original 404 page.

[maximus12]

True, I decided to leave them 404. Things change and I have not heard of google punishing for 404s

[tedster]

The only time I've heard of 404 responses causing trouble is if the site itself has many (and I mean MANY) broken links. If you've handled all internal backlinks, then external broken links - or Google spidering for urls that no longer exist - does not create a ranking problem.

[maximus12]

Well I do not know if you call about 10 -15 many. I deleted most of the link exchange pages and another 6 pages with a little duplicate content displaying that I was unaware of.

[tedster]

"Many" is a relative term. 15 broken links on a 3-page site is "many". On a 1 million page site, it is not.

But remember that I am talking about anchor tags on YOUR site that get a 404 response. You can find and fix that source code code -- either remove the anchor tag or correct its href attribute. Then you have no concerns at all.