The internet, a vast and intricate web of information, often leads users to the frustrating dead-end of a 404 error—those dreaded “page not found” messages that can sour a browsing experience. While these errors are a common occurrence, Gary Illyes from Google recently provided illuminating insights on the nuanced approach to managing them, emphasizing that not all 404 errors require fixing. His advice, shared on LinkedIn, reveals a strategic method to handling these errors that balances both user experience and SEO performance.
Gary began by reassuring webmasters that 404 errors are a normal part of maintaining a website. “404 (Not found) errors are not to be afraid of and you don’t need to scramble to fix them, at least not most of the time,” he stated, setting a foundation for his detailed advice. He explained that the HTTP 404 status code signifies that a URL on your server is not mapped to a resource, meaning the requested page doesn’t exist. However, he highlighted specific scenarios where these errors should be addressed promptly.
Gary distinguished between URLs that should return content with a 200 status code and those that were never meant to return content. The former scenario is straightforward: “For example, you accidentally deleted the HTML mapped to the URL, or you messed up something with your database,” Gary explained. “You should fix these as soon as possible, especially if the URL is important to your users and thus your site.”
The second scenario is more nuanced, divided into two categories. The first includes URLs that could be useful to users. “You should probably think about mapping these URLs somehow to a piece of content on your site by, for example, redirecting,” Gary suggested. He cited broken links from high-traffic pages as prime examples. “The users tap on the link, they find a 404 error even though you have the perfect content for them,” he noted, emphasizing the importance of fixing these to enhance user experience.
The second category involves URLs that are absolutely useless, such as off-site links to content that no longer exists. “From a user’s perspective, there’s nothing you should do about these. If you do, you just mislead them,” Gary stated, advising against unnecessary redirections that could confuse users.
Gary’s insights extended to how Google handles 404 errors within its crawling process. He addressed a question from Pierre Paqueton regarding the efficiency of Google’s crawling process when encountering 404 errors. “After a few tries, we give up on 404 URLs and won’t retry them until we see new (as in newly created) links to them,” Gary explained. This indicates that Google’s crawling resources are not indefinitely wasted on non-existent pages, highlighting the importance of efficient 404 management.
Another professional, Evgeniy Orlov, inquired whether it would be better to use a 410 status code instead of a 404 to avoid crawling issues. Gary’s response was enlightening: “We treat them the same, so 404 create as much crawling issues as 410. People misuse status codes, and we need to be flexible.” This response underscores the need for webmasters to understand and correctly implement status codes to avoid inefficient SEO practices.
Jimmy Hartill raised a point about user trust when encountering 404 errors, suggesting that it might be detrimental to user experience. Gary clarified that as long as the error page addresses the user’s query, it falls under the useful category and should ideally be redirected to relevant content. This advice aligns with the broader goal of maintaining a seamless user experience on the web.
The discourse around 404 errors reveals a critical balance between user experience and technical SEO. While 404 errors are indeed normal, they should not be ignored when they impact user satisfaction or SEO performance. Fixing high-traffic broken links and ensuring that important pages are accessible are paramount. Furthermore, Google’s adaptive crawling behavior underscores the importance of managing 404 errors efficiently to conserve server resources.
Interestingly, the dialogue between Gary and other professionals highlights a broader issue: the misuse of status codes. Webmasters often misunderstand or overlook the correct use of 404 and 410 status codes, leading to inefficient SEO practices. Gary’s advice to be selective and strategic in fixing 404 errors rather than adopting a blanket approach is a valuable takeaway.
Looking forward, the approach to managing 404 errors may evolve as search engine algorithms and user behaviors change. With increasing emphasis on user experience, websites might develop more sophisticated ways to handle non-existent pages, such as dynamic redirects or AI-generated content suggestions. Additionally, as voice search and AI-driven search become more prevalent, the importance of seamless user experiences will likely magnify, making the efficient management of 404 errors even more critical.
Moreover, advancements in Google’s crawling technology could lead to more intelligent handling of 404 errors, reducing the need for manual interventions. Webmasters may also have access to enhanced analytics tools that provide deeper insights into the impact of 404 errors on user behavior and site performance, facilitating more informed decisions.
In summary, while not all 404 errors demand immediate attention, understanding when and why to fix them can significantly enhance both user experience and SEO effectiveness. Gary Illyes’ insights offer a strategic roadmap for webmasters navigating the intricate landscape of 404 errors. By prioritizing high-traffic broken links and important pages, webmasters can improve their site’s functionality and user satisfaction, ultimately leading to better SEO performance. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, staying informed and adaptable will be key to maintaining a robust and user-friendly web presence.
