Should I have a redirect from mysite.com to www.mysite.

Discussion in 'Search Engine Optimization' started by ferrarihire, Mar 14, 2009.

  1. #1
    Should I have a redirect - and what kind of redirect - from mysite.com to www.mysite.com

    I have been on website rater which says I have 1000 links to mysite.com that I am not getting the link juice for.

    Thanks FH
     
    ferrarihire, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  2. hkdigit

    hkdigit Peon

    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    I think there is no harm if you can make 301 redirection.
     
    hkdigit, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  3. GMBRDILOS

    GMBRDILOS Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    573
    Likes Received:
    6
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    130
    #3
    from the point of SEO the best way is 301 redirect.
     
    GMBRDILOS, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  4. mascot

    mascot Active Member

    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    80
    #4
    I think this issue is known as canonical issue and you can use .htaccess file to resolve this problem.

    301 redirect is used for redirecting users from url : abcd -> url : 1234

    The issue which you have mentioned is known as canonical issue of website urls.
     
    mascot, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  5. Alan Smith

    Alan Smith Active Member

    Messages:
    1,263
    Likes Received:
    12
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    78
    #5
    Alan Smith, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  6. ferrarihire

    ferrarihire Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    Thanks great help everyone!
     
    ferrarihire, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  7. catanich

    catanich Peon

    Messages:
    1,921
    Likes Received:
    40
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    There is also another way to solve this. Google Webmaster Tools

    And the links you have are PR0 or Graybars that don't pass PR
     
    catanich, Mar 14, 2009 IP
  8. jitendraag

    jitendraag Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,982
    Likes Received:
    324
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    270
    #8
    301 is better. I would put a redirect to see better stats and referral.
     
    jitendraag, Mar 15, 2009 IP
  9. Canonical

    Canonical Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,223
    Likes Received:
    141
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    110
    #9
    You can't solve canonicalization issues w/ Google Webmaster Tools. You CAN tell Google you prefer either the www or non-www to be used in the SERPs but it does NOT solve canonicalization issues. It does not fix the problem of www.example.com vs www.example.com/ vs www.example.com/index.html. Otherwise Google, Yahoo, & MSN wouldn't have bothered to come up with the new <link rel=canonical> method of fixing canonicalization issues. The approach suggested by Google and the other search engines for fixing canonical issues has always been to use 301 redirects. They came up w/ <link rel="canonical"> because some HTML sites without access to Mod_Rewrite on Apache or the equivalent (like ISAPI Rewrite for IIS) don't have the luxury of doing 301 redirects.

    Pages with a toolbar PR=0 DO pass PR. Toolbar PR0 does not mean NO PR... It means the page has more 'real' PR than 0 but less 'real' PR than is needed to show a Toolbar PR1... just like a Toolbar PR=3 means your (PR >=3 and PR < 4).

    If a page is graybarred it typically means 1) the page is not in the Google index so they haven't calculated a 'real' and Toolbar PR for it, 2) they page is in the index but Google hasn't issued a Toolbar PR update since it was indexed (they typically update Toolbar PR every 3-4 months and by the time it's updated it is already out of date), or 3) the page is being penalized for some violation of Webmaster Guidelines.

    And as others have said you should choose 1 URL to refer to each page on your site. This is the canonical URL. You should 301 redirect all other URLs for that same page to the canonical.

    For example, you might have an index.html for your home page. I can reference your home page several ways:

    http://example.com
    http://example.com/
    http://example.com/index.html
    http://www.example.com
    http://www.example.com/
    http://www.example.com/index.html

    If each of the above URL had 10 inbound links, Google sees these as 6 different pages each with 10 inbound links.

    It doesn't matter which you pick for your canonical. Typically you need to decide:

    1) use www or non-www
    2) show trailing '/' for folders containing default documents or hide trailing '/'
    3) show default document filename for folders containing default documents or hide default document filename

    I always use www, show trailing '/', and hide default document name... So I would pick http://www.example.com/ as my canonical URL. Again, it's personal preference. But I would come up with a set of rules as described above and enforce it site-wide.

    So... I would implement the following:

    http://example.com ---> 301 redirect ---> http://www.example.com/
    http://example.com/ ---> 301 redirect ---> http://www.example.com/
    http://example.com/index.html ---> 301 redirect ---> http://www.example.com/
    http://www.example.com ---> 301 redirect ---> http://www.example.com/
    http://www.example.com/ CANONICAL NO REDIRECT REQUIRED
    http://www.example.com/index.html ---> 301 redirect ---> http://www.example.com/

    This eliminates issues with duplicate content and split page rank / link equity. The canonical URL will get credit for all inbound links to the other 5 redirected URLs (and therefore the page rank). Google will now see this as a single URL with 60 inbound links.
     
    Canonical, Mar 15, 2009 IP
    ferrarihire likes this.
  10. ferrarihire

    ferrarihire Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    Thanks for this I will get it implemented straight away.
     
    ferrarihire, Mar 16, 2009 IP