SEO question regarding redirect

GreGorGy

GreGorGy

BULLSFAN
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
15,290
Reaction score
1,527
Location
Benoniebfkweesnie
So, there exists some conflicting data. What I want to know is, in the following scenario, which has least damaging effect to SEO:

Website exists for years at www.mysite.co.za
Then, one day, we upload a new site and test it in the working folder "new" and when we are happy, we redirect all traffic to www.mysite.co.za/new/

So, which is best and which is worst:
(1) 301 Redirect in htaccess
(2) 301 Redirect in php
(3) META HTTP-EQUIV="refresh" in index.html on root

In the case of (3), if I have other tags in the <HEAD> section (like META Keywords or Description), does this cause SE penalties or blacklisting (as some sites tend to suggest)?
 
It's either 1 or 2.

Has to be a 301 for link juice to carry over.
 
Qwikslver said:
It's either 1 or 2.

Has to be a 301 for link juice to carry over.
Click to expand...

So you'd prefer neither over the other? IOW, 1 and 2 are equal before the lord (google)?

So far for (3), this black hat technique is seemingly the losing hand to play alright!
 
I agree with Qwikslver - use either 1 or 2. Google should not care, or even know the difference, between the two. htaccess is probably more effecient, though.
 
If you have planned it right, it should be easy enough for you to move all your files etc back to the root folder....and then, no issues!
 
jacksonc said:
Whats the point of directing to www.mysite.co.za/new/ ? why not www.mysite.co.za ? Arent u one day goin to move everything to home directory again ?
Click to expand...

Agreed - something I inherited from someone else. Story is (and I have heard this with a few hosts before) that old site was kak then new site in Joomla (1.5). Host says no joomla in the root - store it away one folder. They used several devs (cape and jhb based) and each of them did a half-arsed job and eventually left them in the lurch with a half-site.

They then had everything in site.co.za/new and have not moved it. Moving it becomes a little too involved now.
 
Is there a reason for not storing Joomla in the root. I see there that you said the hosts say you shouldn't, but is there a reason for this?
 
GarethC said:
Is there a reason for not storing Joomla in the root. I see there that you said the hosts say you shouldn't, but is there a reason for this?
Click to expand...

Not quite - they say they won't. Dunno the reason - probably too lazy to support or a security threat of sorts. We'll have to investigate that one separately. Bear in mind, a lot of the info I have around this is hearsay - things I have been told by the site owners. It could all be BS (the reason for it being in the /new/ sub, that is)
 
Cool, was just wondering if it's a security issue I'm not aware of, I've hosted a couple Joomla sites in the root directory :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X