Google eliminated outdated structured information documentation, however as an alternative of returning a 404 response, they’ve chosen to redirect the outdated URLs to a changelog that hyperlinks to the outdated URL, thereby inflicting an infinite loop between the 2 pages. Though that’s technically not a mushy 404, it’s an fascinating use of a 301 redirect for a lacking net web page and never how SEOs usually deal with lacking net pages and 404 server responses. Did Google make a mistake?
Google Eliminated Structured Information Documentation
Google quitely revealed a changelog word saying that they had eliminated out of date structured information documentation. An announcement was made three months in the past in June and immediately they lastly eliminated the out of date documentation.
The lacking pages are for the next structured information that’s now not supported:
- Course data
- Estimated wage
- Studying video
- Particular announcement
- Car itemizing.
These pages are utterly lacking. Gone, and sure by no means coming again. The same old process in that type of scenario is to return a 404 Web page Not Discovered server response. However that’s not what is going on.
As an alternative of a 404 response Google is returning a 301 redirect again to the changelog. What makes this setup considerably bizarre is that Google is linking again to the lacking net web page from the changelog, which then redirects again to the changelog, creating an infinite loop between the 2 pages.
Screenshot Of Changelog
Within the above screenshot I’ve underlined in crimson the hyperlink to the Course Information structured information.
The phrases “course data” are a hyperlink to this URL:
https://builders.google.com/search/docs/look/structured-data/course-info
Which redirects proper again to the changelog right here:
https://builders.google.com/search/updates#september-2025
Which after all accommodates the hyperlinks to the 5 URLs that now not exist, basically inflicting an infinite loop.
It’s not person expertise and it’s not good for crawlers. So the query is, why did Google try this?
301 redirects are an possibility for pages which can be lacking, so Google is technically appropriate to make use of a 301 redirect. Nonetheless, 301 redirects are typically used to level “to a extra correct URL” which typically means a redirect to a substitute web page, one which serves the identical or comparable function.
Technically they didn’t create a mushy 404. However the way in which they dealt with the lacking pages creates a loop that sends crawlers backwards and forwards between a lacking net web page and the changelog. Plainly it might have been a greater person and crawler expertise to as an alternative hyperlink to the June 2025 weblog publish that explains why these structured information sorts are now not supported somewhat than create an infinite loop.
I don’t suppose it’s something most SEOs or publishers would do, so why does Google suppose it’s a good suggestion?
Featured Picture by Shutterstock/Kues
