Removing obsolete pages from a site

[David Segall]

I have some pages on my web site that are no longer useful but I am
reluctant to simply delete them because they may be returned by a
search engine and, in any case, they are referenced in some Usenet
posts of mine which will never be deleted.

My current plan is to amend them to indicate they are obsolete and
remove the links to them on my web site. The links on the obsolete
page would allow someone to browse back to the current site but not
vice versa.

Is there a better or "standard" way of dealing with this problem?

 

[Jim Moe]

I have some pages on my web site that are no longer useful but I am
reluctant to simply delete them because they may be returned by a
search engine and, in any case, they are referenced in some Usenet
posts of mine which will never be deleted.

My current plan is to amend them to indicate they are obsolete and
remove the links to them on my web site. The links on the obsolete
page would allow someone to browse back to the current site but not
vice versa.

Is there a better or "standard" way of dealing with this problem?

In <.htaccess> add this type of directive:
Redirect permanent /oldpage.php http://example.com/newpage.php

After a year or so change it to:
Redirect gone /oldpage.php

 

[dorayme]

In <.htaccess> add this type of directive:
Redirect permanent /oldpage.php http://example.com/newpage.php

After a year or so change it to:
Redirect gone /oldpage.php

Is this the idea that op should go ahead and remove the links and
tidy all up by collecting all the html target files concerned
into a folder obsolete/ and making a server side instruction to
redirect any one of them via an .htaccess file in which each url
is listed? I say this to see if you might clarify further with an
example of more than one url...

 

[Jim Moe]

Is this the idea that op should go ahead and remove the links and
tidy all up by collecting all the html target files concerned
into a folder obsolete/ and making a server side instruction to
redirect any one of them via an .htaccess file in which each url
is listed?

Yes.
He only mentioned "some pages" that he wished to delete. It did not
sound like much and was mainly worried about search engine references.

I say this to see if you might clarify further with an
example of more than one url...

I do not see what else might be required. The "redirect" gets the
visitor to the new page, and tells the HTTP client that the link change is
permanent, useful info for search engines.

 

[dorayme]

Yes.
He only mentioned "some pages" that he wished to delete. It did not
sound like much and was mainly worried about search engine references.


I do not see what else might be required. The "redirect" gets the
visitor to the new page, and tells the HTTP client that the link change is
permanent, useful info for search engines.

OK. Is your "permanent" just an alternative to putting in "301"?

 

[Ken Sims]

Hi dorayme -

OK. Is your "permanent" just an alternative to putting in "301"?

From http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_alias.html#redirect

If no status argument is given, the redirect will be "temporary" (HTTP
status 302). This indicates to the client that the resource has moved
temporarily. The status argument can be used to return other HTTP
status codes:

permanent
Returns a permanent redirect status (301) indicating that the
resource has moved permanently.

temp
Returns a temporary redirect status (302). This is the default.

seeother
Returns a "See Other" status (303) indicating that the resource
has been replaced.

gone
Returns a "Gone" status (410) indicating that the resource has
been permanently removed. When this status is used the URL argument
should be omitted.

Other status codes can be returned by giving the numeric status code
as the value of status. If the status is between 300 and 399, the URL
argument must be present, otherwise it must be omitted. Note that the
status must be known to the Apache code (see the function
send_error_response in http_protocol.c).

Those codes apply to the Redirect and RedirectMatch directives.

There are also RedirectPermanent and RedirectTemp directives whose
status is always what is implied by the directive name.

 

[dorayme]

Hi dorayme -



From http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_alias.html#redirect



Those codes apply to the Redirect and RedirectMatch directives.

There are also RedirectPermanent and RedirectTemp directives whose
status is always what is implied by the directive name.

Thank you for this info. Is there any difference in effect
between putting "permanent" rather than "301"?

 

[Ken Sims]

Hi dorayme -

Thank you for this info. Is there any difference in effect
between putting "permanent" rather than "301"?

Assuming that you are using Apache, there is no difference.

Being a techno-nerd, I always use the numeric codes myself.
Particularly since for some of the things I do, I use numeric codes
which do not have a word equivalent.

 

[dorayme]

Thank you for this info. Is there any difference in effect
between putting "permanent" rather than "301"?

Assuming that you are using Apache, there is no difference.

Being a techno-nerd, I always use the numeric codes myself.
Particularly since for some of the things I do, I use numeric codes
which do not have a word equivalent.[/QUOTE]

Righto. Thanks.

(Just btw, is there some default code that techno-nerds use when
lost for words in an emotional situation? Like eg, proposing
marriage? "Darling I just want to say that... er... er...
70864ZXD!" <g>)

 

[Andy Dingley]

I have some pages on my web site that are no longer useful

What's "obsolete" ?

If they're actually harmful, then kill them quickly. Ideally serve a
301 redirect to a holding page, otherwise let your 404 mechanism cope
with them. A custom 404 for one section of the site that contains the
majority of these is quick and easy to set up, and can be a bit more
helpful than your vanilla site-wide 404 page.

If they're not harmful, just leave them be. There's no implicit reason
to remove content, certainly not if you'd have to do significant work
to get rid of it. Storage is cheap, especially if you're not having to
serve it.

 

[Ken Sims]

Hi dorayme -

(Just btw, is there some default code that techno-nerds use when
lost for words in an emotional situation? Like eg, proposing
marriage? "Darling I just want to say that... er... er...
70864ZXD!" <g>)

Unfortunately, no. That's why I'm 49 years old, never been married,
and am still a virgin. (And unfortunately I'm not kidding.)

 

[dorayme]

Hi dorayme -



Unfortunately, no. That's why I'm 49 years old, never been married,
and am still a virgin. (And unfortunately I'm not kidding.)

I know what you need. A good Jewish girl! There are sites where
you can negotiate for them. Just remember to show respect when
you bargain, they are going to be Jewish mothers and they are
always in training with the smart remarks. <g>

 

[Neredbojias]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:20:09 GMT
Ken Sims scribed:

Hi dorayme -



Unfortunately, no. That's why I'm 49 years old, never been married,
and am still a virgin. (And unfortunately I'm not kidding.)

Gee, that's a shame. Perhaps all you need is a hand getting started.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:20:09 GMT
Ken Sims scribed:


Gee, that's a shame. Perhaps all you need is a hand getting started.

STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!

 

[David Segall]

What's "obsolete" ?

If they're not harmful, just leave them be. There's no implicit reason
to remove content, certainly not if you'd have to do significant work
to get rid of it. Storage is cheap, especially if you're not having to
serve it.

They are not "harmful" but they contain links and references that are
no longer valid and there is no benefit in updating them even if that
was possible. That is why I thought that leaving them untouched except
for a note to indicate that they are obsolete and removing links to
them from the site was the simplest solution.

I am digesting the proposed alternatives (thanks to all) and
consulting the documentation to see if I can translate Apache
directives to Tomcat.

 

[rf]

I know what you need. A good Jewish girl! There are sites where
you can negotiate for them. Just remember to show respect when
you bargain, they are going to be Jewish mothers and they are
always in training with the smart remarks. <g>

dorayme, you are a bloody tart.

 

[rf]

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:20:09
GMT

Gee, that's a shame. Perhaps all you need is a hand getting started.

You too, Neredbojias are a tart. However _you_ did at least roll me off my
chair laughing

 

[rf]

Neredbojias wrote:

STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!

Do sharks..., er,

Retracts question.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Do sharks..., er,

Retracts question.

Fin job.

 

[dorayme]

"dorayme"

dorayme, you are a bloody tart.

No I am not, honestly I am not. There is not the slightest
trampish instinct in me. And if there is, it does not go with
*that* music that one hears when strippers are doing their
dance... And if there is this music in my head, it is only...

It is just that in this heaving bosom of mine there lies a
matchmaker.

Also a merchant already... psst... anything you want? Russian
girls, good Catholic, Jewish... hey, I can even do Thai Buddhist
(you have to be able to medititate together for hours before any
approach. That means, pal, you have to wait and behave yourself).