-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
301 Redirection for Dynamic Listing Pages #11
Comments
@joshua-isaac those dynamic routes should never be hit on the website unless you are previewing from Agility CMS. How are they being indexed? |
Hey guys! Diego here, gonna provide a bit more of information, the SEO teams is finding this via the ahrefs seo tool, I'll attach a screenshot: I recall seeing routes such as: https://www.pixel506.com/insights/insights-dynamic?ContentID=378 When linking an article url to a module, might that be where it's indexing the page and treating it like a 301 redirect? |
@greenscript ah! I see thank you for sharing that! That is right, forgot that those links are used within the CMS in link fields. Do you have this site hosted on Netlify? By default, Gatsby can't do server-side redirects (because it is static), but our plugin can create redirects for Netlify which should work. It may be a configuration we may need to tweak, either in our plugin or your site. |
Hello @jamesvidler! sorry for the late response, been crazed with work. Alright, so yeah, our site is currently hosted on Netlify, which is the plugin? |
Hi @greenscript I actually just tested this on our own site as I thought it was working We'll dig into this and see how we can get these to do real server-side redirects. |
Ok! thanks for update @jamesvidler, I'll stay tuned |
is there's a way to go around the 301 redirection that creates the dynamic listing pages?
an example use case: we have /insights-dynamic and /podcasts-dynamic, these routes are on Agility, but they are indexable and are returning a 301 JS redirection which the SEO team is marking as an issue and they are saying putting n no index no follow on those routes wouldn't work
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: