Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
HTC access 301 redirect rules regarding pagination and striped category base (wp)
-
I am an admin of a wordpress.org blog and I used to use "Yoast All in one SEO" plugin. While I was using this plugin it stripped the category base from my blog post URL's.
With yoast all in one seo: Site.com/topic/subtpoic/page/#
Without yoast all in one seo: Site.com/category/topic/subtopic/page/#Now, that I have switched to another plugin, I am trying to manage the page crawl errors which are tremendous somewhere around 1800, mostly due to pagination. Rather than redirecting each URL individually I would like to develop HTC access 301 redirects rules. However all instructions on how to create these HTC access 301 redirect rules are regarding the suffix rather than the category base. So my question is, can HTC access 301 redirects rules work to fix this problem? Including pagination? And if so, what would this particular HTC access 301 redirect look like? Especially regarding pagination? And do I really have to write a 301 redirect for each pagination page?
-
Did you have any luck using this plugin to correct your issue, Jennifer?
-
You could just try installing the No Category Base plugin to replace what the Yoast plugin was doing and see how much of your issue that corrects.
http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/wp-no-category-base/
If it's just the category base that disrupting your paginated pages as well, that will solve it.
Let us know if it works?
Paul
P.S. an .htaccess rule could be written to strip out the /category part of the URL, but the plugin handles it much more simply and has very low overhead.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Unsolved Ooops. Our crawlers are unable to access that URL
hello
Moz Pro | | ssblawton2533
i have enter my site faroush.com but i got an error
Ooops. Our crawlers are unable to access that URL - please check to make sure it is correct
what is problem ?0 -
Pages with Temporary Redirects on pages that don't exist!
Hi There Another obvious question to some I hope. I ran my first report using the Moz crawler and I have a bunch of pages with temporary redirects as a medium level issue showing up. Trouble is the pages don't exist so they are being redirected to my custom 404 page. So for example I have a URL in the report being called up from lord only knows where!: www.domain.com/pdf/home.aspx This doesn't exist, I have only 1 home.aspx page and it's in the root directory! but it is giving a temp redirect to my 404 page as I would expect but that then leads to a MOZ error as outlined. So basically you could randomize any url up and it would give this error so I am trying to work out how I deal with it before Google starts to notice or before a competitor starts to throw all kinds at my site generating these errors. Any steering on this would be much appreciated!
Moz Pro | | Raptor-crew0 -
Items listed based on size - Use "inches" or " " "
I sell Decorative nutcrackers of various sizes. At this time, I use the term "inches". I was looking at my competitor the other day, and when I did a search on his site, using the term inches did not provide me with a result. I was forced to use ex. "10" nutcracker" instead of "10 inch nutcracker". Is there a preferable usage for seo purposes. Thanks! my site: http://www.nutcrackerballetgifts.com/category/5/10-Inch-Nutcrackers.html his ite: http://www.kurtadler.com/Search?search=10"+nutcracker
Moz Pro | | NutcrackerBalletGifts0 -
301 or canonical for multiple homepage versions?
I used 301 redirects to point several versions of the homepage to www.site.com. i was just rereading moz's beginners guide to seo, and it uses that scenario as an example for rel canonical, not 301 redirects. Which is better? My understanding is that 301s remove all doubt of getting links to the wrong version and diluting link equity.
Moz Pro | | kimmiedawn0 -
Redirected pages still sending response code 200
SEO Moz tool reports missing title tags on all the links that have been redirected. E.g. this page: http://www.imoney.my/ms/personal-loan When I check the response code on the page with redirect checker it shows code 200 (page exists). Has it happened to anyone else? How can a redirected page send a 200 code?
Moz Pro | | imoney0 -
Redirect analysis tool
I'm looking for a tool like this: http://www.internetofficer.com/seo-tool/redirect-check/ that can check hundreds/thousands of URLs and give me a report as to which ones have been redirected. Does anyone know of something that can do this?
Moz Pro | | glass010 -
Some questions on Canonical tag AND 301 redirect
Hi everyone, I'm new here - always loved SEOMoz and glad to be part of the Pro community now. I have 2 questions regarding the Canonical URL tag. Some background info: We used to run an OsCommerce store, and recently migrated to Magento. In doing so, we right away created 301 redirects of the old category pages (OsCommerce) to the new category pages (Magento) via the Magento admin. Example: www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
Moz Pro | | yacpro13
301 redicrected to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html In Magento admin, we have enabled the Canonical tag for all product and category pages. Here's how Magento sets up the Canonical tag: The URL of interest which we want to rank is:
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html However Magento sets up the canonical tag on this page to point to:
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html When using the SEOMoz On Page Report Card, it pick this up as an error because the Canonical tag is pointing to a different URL. However, if we dig a little deeper, we see that the URL being pointed to
www.example.com/old-widget-category.html
has a 301 redirect to
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html
which is the URL we wan to rank. So because we set up a 301 redirect of the old-page to the new-page, on the new-page the canonical tag points to the old-page. Question 1)
What are you opinions on this? Do you think this method of setting up the Canonical tag is acceptable? Second question... We use pagination for category pages, so if we have 50 products in one category, we would have 5 pages of 10 products. The URL's would be: www.example.com/new-widget-category.html (which is the SAME as ?p=1)
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=1
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=2
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=3
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=4
www.example.com/new-widget-category.html?p=5 Now ALL the URLs above have the canonical tag set as:
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.example.com/new-widget-category" /> However, the content of each page (page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) is different because different products are displayed. So far most what I read regarding the Canonical tag is that it is used for pages that have the same content but different URLs. I would hope that Google would combine the content of all 5 pages and view the result as a single URL www.example.com/new-widget-category Question 2) Is using the canonical tag appropriate in the case described above? Thanks !0
