Removing obsolete pages from a site

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?

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

On 10/12/07 04:56 am, David Segall wrote:
> 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


--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article ,
Jim Moe wrote:

> On 10/12/07 04:56 am, David Segall wrote:
> > 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

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...

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

On 10/12/07 02:45 pm, dorayme wrote:
>> >
>> > 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
>>
> 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.

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article <5OqdneGt4fYV743anZ2dnUVZ_vGinZ2d@giganews.com>,
Jim Moe wrote:

> On 10/12/07 02:45 pm, dorayme wrote:
> >> >
> >> > 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
> >>
> > 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.

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

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Hi dorayme -

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 09:25:12 +1000, dorayme
wrote:

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

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

[QUOTE]
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).
[/QUOTE]

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.

--
Ken
http://www.kensims.net/

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article ,
Ken Sims wrote:

> Hi dorayme -
>
> On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 09:25:12 +1000, dorayme
> wrote:
>
> >OK. Is your "permanent" just an alternative to putting in "301"?
>
> From http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_alias.html#redirect
>
> [QUOTE]
> 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).
> [/QUOTE]
>
> 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"?

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Hi dorayme -

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:10:33 +1000, dorayme
wrote:

>In article ,
> Ken Sims wrote:
>
>> Hi dorayme -
>>
>> On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 09:25:12 +1000, dorayme
>> wrote:
>>
>> >OK. Is your "permanent" just an alternative to putting in "301"?
>>
>> From http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_alias.html#redirect
>>
>> [QUOTE]
>> 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).
>> [/QUOTE]
>>
>> 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"?

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.

--
Ken
http://www.kensims.net/

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article ,
Ken Sims wrote:

> >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.

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!" )

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

On 12 Oct, 12:56, David Segall wrote:
> 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.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Hi dorayme -

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:13:52 +1000, dorayme
wrote:

>(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!" )

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

--
Ken
http://www.kensims.net/

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article ,
Ken Sims wrote:

> Hi dorayme -
>
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:13:52 +1000, dorayme
> wrote:
>
> >(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!" )
>
> 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.

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

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

> Hi dorayme -
>
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:13:52 +1000, dorayme
> wrote:
>
>>(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!" )
>
> 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.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Neredbojias wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:20:09 GMT
> Ken Sims scribed:
>
>> Hi dorayme -
>>
>> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:13:52 +1000, dorayme
>> wrote:
>>
>>>(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!" )
>>
>> 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.

STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!

--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Andy Dingley wrote:

>On 12 Oct, 12:56, David Segall wrote:
>> I have some pages on my web site that are no longer useful
>
>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.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

"dorayme" wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-5B87CF.13454716102007@news-vip.optusnet. com.au...
> In article ,
> Ken Sims wrote:
>
>> Hi dorayme -
>>
>> On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 14:13:52 +1000, dorayme
>> wrote:
>>
>> >(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!" )
>>
>> 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.

dorayme, you are a bloody tart.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

"Neredbojias" wrote in message
news:Xns99CADAC252685nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161...
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:20:09
> GMT

>> 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.

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

--
Richard.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

"Blinky the Shark" wrote in message
news:slrnfh8fnu.rrm.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net...
> Neredbojias wrote:

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

> STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!

Do sharks..., er,

Retracts question.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

rf wrote:
>
> "Blinky the Shark" wrote in message
> news:slrnfh8fnu.rrm.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net...
>> Neredbojias wrote:
>
>>> Gee, that's a shame. Perhaps all you need is a hand getting started.
>
>> STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!
>
> Do sharks..., er,
>
> Retracts question.

Fin job.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article ,
"rf" wrote:

> "dorayme"

> > I know what you need. A good Jewish girl! ...
>
> 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).

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

"dorayme" wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-E164A0.05195617102007@news-vip.optusnet. com.au...
> In article ,
> "rf" wrote:
>
>> "dorayme"
>
>> > I know what you need. A good Jewish girl! ...
>>
>> 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).



What about a nice Aussie sheila? One knows right up front with them.

--
Richard.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:32:35
GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:

>>> 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.
>
> STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!

A thought just occured to me. Maybe your antipathy toward Google Groupers
is based upon a subconscious dislike of the noise certain fish make when
they burp underwater.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:14:28
GMT rf scribed:

>>> 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.
>
> You too, Neredbojias are a tart.

Well, I just can't resist getting up on stage in my tight sack cloth and
transparent tube wrap and letting it all hang out. Not only is it quite
stimulating but it airs things out at the same time.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Neredbojias wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:32:35
> GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:
>
>>>> 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.
>>
>> STAND BACK! HE'S GONNA BLOWWWW!
>
> A thought just occured to me. Maybe your antipathy toward Google Groupers
> is based upon a subconscious dislike of the noise certain fish make when
> they burp underwater.

That would be a good guess. But no, it's all about their lack of brain
matter. :)

--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

In article ,
"rf" wrote:

> "dorayme"

> > 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).
>
>
>
> What about a nice Aussie sheila? One knows right up front with them.

That's the commonly held view, for sure. There is no doubt about
one thing, oz sheilas are the best looking ones on the planet.
But what man is prepared never to be able to get away with a bit
of bullshit on a daily basis?

You don't want to bullshit? You want it all fair dinkum? Well,
ok, if that is what you are prepared to cop, I have several on my
books...

Just one small thing though, they are all called "Cheryl" and
things go much much smoother if male clients introduce themselves
as "Bruce"... I don't know why this is, it is just so...

--
dorayme

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 16 Oct 2007 13:14:28
GMT rf scribed:

>>> 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.
>
> You too, Neredbojias are a tart.

Yeah, but when I get up on stage in my tight jewel sack and transparent
shrink wrap and do "The Bactrian", all the women go absolutely, uh, nuts.
Furthermore, I get free drinks at the club all night as long as I don't
shrivel from stage fright or crowd-revulsion.

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.

Re: Removing obsolete pages from a site

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 17 Oct 2007 02:17:59
GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:

>> A thought just occured to me. Maybe your antipathy toward Google
>> Groupers is based upon a subconscious dislike of the noise certain
>> fish make when they burp underwater.
>
> That would be a good guess. But no, it's all about their lack of
> brain matter. :)

Perhaps they're just desperate. You know - like a woman in "heat".
Remember the old sorority saying: "Any sort in the dorm".

--
Neredbojias
Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.