Imagine a site that contains 100's of 'homepages' for merchants. (e.g. www.example.com/cool_merchant)

Some of these pages may exist for long periods, build up a nice SEO presence, and then be temporarily disabled for some time (e.g. a few weeks).

How bad for SEO is it for bots to see these pages return 404 for a while? Should I show bots a 302 instead?

Note that the user will be directed to the home page with an AngularJS app (not a 'real' 302). By default the bot will see a 404 so I am wondering if we need to cater for bots specifically.

  • "temporarily disabled for some time." - How long is "some time"; a few days, a few months?
    – MrWhite
    Dec 1, 2016 at 12:50
  • good question. let's say, a few weeks
    – Kieran
    Dec 1, 2016 at 12:53
  • What is the reason for disabling the pages temporarily?
    – unor
    Dec 2, 2016 at 16:36

1 Answer 1


A 302 to the home page is likely to be seen as a soft-404 anyway, so that's unlikely to be of any benefit.

A 404 can be perceived as temporary (a 410 is more permanent) and if the page doesn't exist then a 404 is certainly valid. There's not a lot you can do; if the page doesn't exist then it doesn't exist.

However, if this is really a "temporary" thing and its absence is planned. Then a 503 "Service Unavailable" status might be appropriate. If the period of time is known then this can be stated in a Retry-After header. The search engines are likely to hold on to the resource for as along as possible. But a "few weeks" might be too long?

If the original page is not available for a lengthy period of time then the search engines will likely drop the page from the SERPs regardless of status code.

  • Why not use 307? This one is really Temporary Redirect as opposed to 503 Server Error.
    – tonydoe
    Dec 1, 2016 at 17:08
  • Returning a 503 is a misdirection, as this code should be for genuine problems with the server. Based on the first half of your answer, I think maybe I'll stick with returning a 404. It's the truth after all! Thanks for your response.
    – Kieran
    Dec 1, 2016 at 17:24
  • 2
    @tonydoe I don't think any 3xx redirection is really appropriate. The page has been removed and there is no equivalent page to redirect to. Yes, a 503 may not be appropriate in this situation. However, a 503 doesn't necessarily indicate a lasting "error" state - it is a recognised method of indicating "planned maintenance" / "temporary downtime" in order to minimise the effect on rankings.
    – MrWhite
    Dec 1, 2016 at 18:04
  • 2
    A custom 404 is probably the best bet (for users as well). It is usually preferable for users to see a custom 404 with explanation and appropriate links, rather than be auto-redirected to the home page without explanation.
    – MrWhite
    Dec 1, 2016 at 18:05
  • @w3dk what I mean is just that the questioner noted that users will be actually redirected to the homepage and this redirection would be active for a few weeks. It only seems logical to use Temporary Redirect code for bots.
    – tonydoe
    Dec 1, 2016 at 20:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.