You can't redirect your old sites without losing 90% of their value and risking a penalty on your new site.
There usually isn't a huge cost to leaving old sites up and running. You could use them to advertise your new site. Put a banner about your new site on every page of your old sites.
First, something that's implied in other answers, but should probably be spelled out: the situation you describe is something Google actively wants to discourage -- you're not "collateral damage" in their fight against spammers, you are their intended target in their fight against irrelevant and 'deceptive' results. ('Deceptive' in the sense that you think ...
Quantcast Measure Terms of Service (https://www.quantcast.com/terms/measure-terms-service/) Section 6:
Quantcast servers may choose to occasionally respond to any publisher’s Tag by redirecting the browser to a third-party anonymous beacon to support the provision of Quantcast services in market. The decision to beacon is not related to you the publisher, ...
Bad Idea! Never, I repeat NEVER do that.
I tried that 3 days ago and after couple of days the site to which I redirected completely lost all its rankings. Not even it was ranking on searching domain.com in Google.
All indexed pages are still there but the site lost its ranking completely.
I can provide the links of the sites as proof but that's not allowed ...
I think there may be (or may have been) a few scenarios that can trigger this "redirect notice" from the Google SERPs. Some of these may have been historical "glitches" judging by some of the articles I stumbled across.
I have certainly seen this "redirect notice" several times directly from Google search results in recent times, however, I've not been able ...
As Stephen points out in comments, geo-IP redirects are generally bad for SEO (it prohibits the site from being crawled naturally and can at times hinder users through being redirected incorrectly). However, specialized bikes would appear to get around the SEO issues with sitemaps containing the different language versions (hreflang). (And only redirecting ...
Your first two requests are the same. All clients (including curl) have to send the slash after the domain name as part of the HTTP request whether or not it is on the URL. There is no way to formulate a valid HTTP request without it. A minimal HTTP request is:
GET / HTTP/1.0
Omitting the slash from that will result in a "400 bad ...
I highly suspect this is cookie matching with various audience data/analytics providers and ad companies.
We may share with third parties Non-PII, including certain Log Data, as part of providing and improving our Measure and Advertise products. For example, we may disclose such data ...
301 Redirects are completely fine if they're real.
If you had an old site and then decided to move/combine it with some other related site, there's absolutely no problem putting up a 301 redirect on the old site to send users to the new site.
You should not be penalized for this in Google and if you are, they're completely reasonable about fixing it if you ...
Reading through your questions it seems to me that you think that you only need to do one redirect. That is the case if you are moving a carbon copy of the site. If you changed things around then it gets a little trickier.
What would be the best redirect to use?
301 redirect is best if you are moving your site permanently. Here is a great article about ...
The best thing to do is not worry about the traffic to your old sites.
I had a good friend who graduated from Harvard Business. He told stories about how Harvard drummed into his head the mantra of "Know when to cut your losses." every day one way or another.
From a business perspective, this is excellent advice! It is good advice in life too!!
You are ...
Whilst I'd definitely always 301 http to https (as why would it ever be temporary?), Google have said that 301, 302, 30x do not dilute your pagerank in SEO.
The team at MOZ have recently studied this, and IIRC they're not so convinced.
If it was my site, I'd definitely tell/bribe whoever did your 302s, and get them to do 301s.
Sometimes when you share a URL from a single result in SERP with someone that didn't perform the search, the redirect notices appears.
This is for preventing click and CTR manipulation by having fake entrances (clicks that don't actually happen and is generated by an expired Google SERP URL. )
Also it might indicate your site is hacked and is redirecting ...
It is always a good idea to "test" with 302 (temporary) redirects in order to avoid the caching of erroneous redirects - as you have stated. Ordinarily "testing" is just a matter of running your own tests in development before going live.
tl;dr I don't see any problem in going live with a 302 in this instance and changing to 301 later.
The "only" duplicate ...
Redirection is the process of forwarding one URL to a different URL. There are three main kinds of redirects: 301, 302, and meta refresh.
Types of Redirects
301, "Moved Permanently"—recommended for SEO
302, "Found" or "Moved Temporarily"
A redirect is a way to send both users and search engines to a different URL from the one they originally ...
Wow, that is weird, indeed.
As the other answer has mentioned, a trailing slash after the domain name is always mandatory in HTTP requests, so, it is NOT expected to receive a redirect if you try to access the domain "without" any specific path in place.
I've tried up your domain as curl -v http://jekyllrb.com, and indeed only on the third attempt did I ...
...if it would be more efficient to use htaccess
If you have access to .htaccess then there doesn't seem any reason not to use this. Note that this is a "302 Temporary", not a "301 Permanent" redirect as you had initially tagged in the question.
To redirect just the home page to example.com (an external domain) in .htaccess using ...
Google considers the status code before looking at everything else, so the X-Robots-Tag will be ignored. We did some test a year ago with a client and this was not working.
If you redirect a page to another page, then Google will no longer index the redirected page. Implementing a redirect removes the content.
If you are moving a site from one domain to another without changing the content, you can use the change of address feature in Google Webmaster Tools. When doing so, your new site will take the place of your old site ...
I generally advise against this. The reason is simple. There often is little to no value in actually changing domain names.
Having said that, there are times where a domain name change is required.
The simplest way to do this is to set-up a blanket 301 redirect from your old domain to your new domain name. In the case where a page is removed, and you want ...
The type of redirect you are using is not the problem. 301 redirects are cacheable. In fact they are extremely hard to cache bust. 301 means "permanent" and browsers are very likely to cache 301 redirects with no way with the server to undo one that is already cached.
302 redirects are generally not cached by default unless other headers indicate that ...
A 302 response code would only be cached if accompanied with the Cache-Control or Expires headers. There is no explicit or embedded cache information within a 302 response.
According to RFC 2616, section 10.3.3 302 Found
The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI.
Since the redirection might be altered on occasion, ...
Yes, sort of.
Put yourself in the visitors shoes (with google at their back) and ask how you can introduce your new content to them in a relevant way.
old site is about say hiking and new one is about music recording services
add content to the hiking site aimed at say hikers who like to bring their guitars along on hikes to play encouraging them to ...
there are approximately 2 status codes to trigger a redirect
More like 5 ... 301, 302, 303, 307 and 308.
302 - Moved Temporarily
A 302 should never be cached. Browsers do not ordinarily cache a 302. It is after all "temporary".
301 - Moved Permanently
301s are cached by ...
You could use an error 401 = You are not authorised to view this page
However read this: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
A 301 redirect means that the page has permanently moved to a new location.
A 302 redirect means that the move is only temporary
A 404 redirect means that the page can't be ...
The answer is, ironically, in your title. [insert grin]
Use a canonical link.
You can read Googles page here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en
In the <head> section of b.example/bar, use a link like this:
<link rel="canonical" href="https://a.example.com/foo" />
Google will see that a.example.com/foo is preferred and ...
You cant tell if a site has been hacked purely from status codes. If it is going to a spammy dating site it likely has been hacked, or the site may be hooked into a questionable advertising network. In either case its likely appropriate to give the webmaster a heads-up.
As an outsider there are only a limited number of things you can do to see if a site ...
Generally, you shouldn't redirect to an entirely separate page or display an obtrusive "popup" to outdated browsers unless maybe the site/application is entirely inaccessible to those on the "outdated browser".
On most informational websites the content should still be accessible, even though it may not look as intended or be "broken&...
I think your question is a bit confusing, probably mainly because you have some terminology mixed up.
A redirect literally just means that a client tried to load a certain URL, and the server redirected them to another page. Whether or not this is the page the user intended has little to do with it from a technical standpoint.
A HTTP Status code is a ...