What To Do With Broken Links?

[ArthJones]

Hi

Can anyone suggest what is the best thing to do with incoming broken links? E.g. Backlinks created by the previous domain name owner that no longer exist on my site.

I am getting crawl errors where Google have arrived at my site via a link for it not to be there..!!

My initial thought is to identify each incoming link and its intended url and actually creating a page so that it does exist!! A little feeling in my stomach says maybe there is an easier way?

Any suggestions would be appreciated..

Thanks


Arth

[Optic]

What they are doing if the page does not exist is creating a 404 page not found error. To fix this, and whenever moving a page, use a 301 Permanent Redirect.

There are a number of ways to do this. The easiest way for a single link on an apache server is a single line .htaccess redirect. This is added to the .htaccess file in the root of your domain. If it does not exist you can add it.

redirect 301 /old-page.html http://domain.com/new-page/

[davidweb]

creating a 404 error page is your best option. It would be best to put a sitemap on 404 error page or you can simply show content from your homepage on 404 error page.

Other than 404 there isnt any other best option.

[mydearvalentine]

yeah..its better option to redirect them but i hav question that the ranking will remain? and PR would be same?

[mjtaylor]

creating a 404 error page is your best option. It would be best to put a sitemap on 404 error page or you can simply show content from your homepage on 404 error page.

Other than 404 there isnt any other best option.

What about 301 redirects, Optic clearly outlined? That is a standard SEO "best practice" when file names are changed.

yeah..its better option to redirect them but i hav question that the ranking will remain? and PR would be same?

Well, if you know it's the better option, then it follows that you know that PR is passed by a 301 redirect, though Matt Cutts has suggested that there may be some loss. As to ranking, that would depend, in fair part, on the content and optimization of the new page.

[dburdon]

I'd agree with the 301ers. However, sometimes it is not possible to get access to the htaccess file. In these cases I've also tried a meta refresh.

[NJ]

I'd agree with the 301ers. However, sometimes it is not possible to get access to the htaccess file. In these cases I've also tried a meta refresh.

Is it the webhost or the client not giving access to the .htaccess file? If a webhosting company won't give my client access to the file, I'd suggest that they go to another webhost. Of course, proprietary template sites are another animal altogether.

[ArthJones]

Ok , some differences of opinion here..

If a 404 page is created, say with content, site map etc, basically giving 'options' where visitor can go next... is this scenario seen as a negative by Google and affect ranking?

Is the 301 redirect better? In terms of ranking the page by Google? If taking the 301 route however.... I would need to identify the page url that the incoming link is expecting to see right?

[NJ]

I personally like 301 redirects best because it gives you the option of sending the visitor directly to the most closely matching page on your site without the visitor having to do anything. It's the "Don't Make Me Think" factor. By the way, Don't Make Me Think is a great book.

[weegillis]

@OP:

First: Examine the link closely. Is it only a typo? Does the referred resource actually exist? Has the name changed?

Take the time to carefully match broken links to existing pages and list these pairs. Make a separate list of all others, for redirection to either a 404 page or the Home page.

Second: As advised, create 301 redirects to all the pages in your pair list.

Third: Create a custom 404 page displaying links to key sections of your site. Be sure to include this redirect in .htaccess