The most common errorpage is the 404 error. Right now we are working on a website for a big client with several country websites.

My idea for http errors is:

One generic page which appologies for the error and gives 3 options and the error code

  • Homepage
  • Sitemap
  • Contact Us
  • Errorcode: XXX

Why? The Errorpages would def. be pages that are handled by the editors. I don't want to have several pages for several errors.

But I'm not sure if it's not better to have at least one dedicated 404 page, as this could be the most common one and one generic for the rest.

Any thoughts on this?

P.S. Search can't be provided right now

2 Answers 2


While you generally want to avoid your users seeing error pages, they are actually full of opportunities to turn a bad thing into a good thing. Apart from the standard things you may want to do for all error pages (apologise, explain what happened etc.) you will want to help the user decide what to do next.

This will obviously depend on many factors (what caused the error, what page was the user on before etc.), but I doubt that you can solve this with a generic error page. I imagine that if the user tried to click on a link that resulted in a 404, there is not much you can do (but perhaps you could dynamically generate a list of possible existing pages that the user may have intended to visit), but for many other errors you can suggest alternative actions, ways to prevent the error in the future and so on.

  • 1
    Thans for your answer but that's not specific enough. For example a 503 error says (the Twitter fale whale) could be handled like this: 1. "Sorry, there seems to be an error" or "Sorry, our servers are not available right now" - I agree that the second would be the better one, but that the case in not quite often and those texts would need to be edited and maintaned by the editors.
    – tamimat
    Commented Jan 22, 2013 at 16:30

Make an informed decision:

First, look at the server logs to learn the following:

  • How many errors occur on the site over a defined period of time?
  • How many distinct error codes occur, and how many instances of each code?
  • What is the effect of each error code on the user?

By quantifying and qualifying the errors that occur, you can analyze how these errors affect your users. Do a cost/benefit analyis for the errors and determine if managing the error message content is worth while. Only serve specific error messages if there is a compelling business case for it and leave a generic message for the remainder.

Do what makes sense for your use case:

If the error occurs because of something the user has done, and there are alternative actions a user could take in order to complete their task, then it would be imperative for the user's experience and your task completion/conversion rate to provide that information to the user.

If the error occurs because of a system failure, there is nothing the user can do about it, and there is no alternative action(s) a user could take in order to complete their task, then you should explicitly state that the system is unable to process their request.

In the event of system failure, you should give them an estimate of when it will be back up, or point them to a blog and/or twitter feed that they can go to in order to learn more about the nature of the disruption and when it will be back online.

Generally speaking you should have two error pages at minimum:

  • One for cases where there is a way out of the dead end.
  • One for when there is not.

How you break this down is specific to your use case, so you need to do that analysis and make that decision based on your data.

If your error analysis points to cases that fall under one or the other with enough regularity and with a specific message or path out, then you could consider making a specific error page to handle that. For the long tail of "other" errors, just the generic "try this" or "sorry it is down" error pages would be enough.

It is possible that after the analysis the results would suggest you only need 2-4 error pages. That is not as big a burden as maintaining one for each possible error code. Plus, you could do some traffic analysis to determine if any of the error pages have any measurable effect on conversion rates.

What you don't want to do is misinform your user

Don't tell the user to try something that you know very well due to the error will not result in a conversion. Conversely, you don't want to tell them to give up if they are in fact not at a dead end.

  • Thanks for your answer, but I can't track. I tried to find some data that say : 404 - 30% of errorpages / 403 - 4% of errorpages,... but couldn't find somethng like this.
    – tamimat
    Commented Jan 23, 2013 at 11:05
  • 1
    In that case I would look at it from the task completion angle and if you think certain errors are "escapable" by the user, you might think about a custom error message. Or, rather than investing time in it, use a generic message and spend your time building some kind of logger to track your errors. Commented Jan 23, 2013 at 16:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.