If two public directory profiles describe the same SaaS product, first confirm they are competing product pages. Keep the page you can maintain that best represents the product and preserves useful existing content; ask the publisher to correct, remove or consolidate the other. Do not assume the newer page should win—or that the publisher will redirect the URL you give up. The job is finished only when you have checked both public URLs and followed the surviving page’s product link.
Confirm that both URLs are competing product pages
Open both URLs as a visitor and note the publisher, page type, displayed product name, description, product website link and where that link actually leads. Compare the underlying product, not just its name: a renamed product can still be one product, while two products from the same company may legitimately need separate profiles. A category or search-results page featuring your product is not a second product profile.
Check whether one URL is a launch or release attached to a product page rather than another product page. Product Hunt, for example, describes its Product Page as the central place for a product’s launches and provides a way to attach a new launch to that page. Multiple product-related URLs there are not, by themselves, proof of duplicate Product Pages.
Submission records can help you locate candidates, but they do not establish that two pages are live. Ranks shows where it submitted a product, distinguishes submissions awaiting approval from live listings, and provides saved listing logins when available. Open the public URLs to confirm what exists, including pages your team did not submit through Ranks. For a fuller record of submission outcomes, use the directory submission-tracking guide. (ranks.so)
Choose the page to keep before requesting a fix
Compare the two pages on ownership, accuracy and public value. Which account can your team access? Which page already has the right name, description and working product link? Which URL has useful reviews, launch history or other content that would be lost if that page disappeared? Prefer a maintainable, accurate page with useful history over a newer but empty copy. If the stronger page is inaccessible, ask about claiming it before requesting that it be removed merely because the other page is easier to edit.
Here is a fictional decision. Both https://directory.example/products/northstar and https://directory.example/products/northstar-new describe the same product, Northstar, and link to its intended website, https://northstar.example. The founder controls the older /products/northstar profile; its name and description are accurate, and it contains useful customer reviews. The newer /products/northstar-new profile has no reviews, and the founder cannot access it. Keep the older URL and ask the publisher to remove or consolidate the newer profile. If instead the older page misrepresented a different product or the newer page held important content, the founder would reconsider which page to retain and ask how that content would be handled.
Send the publisher a specific duplicate-page request
Use the publisher’s claim, support or change-request route. Access to one profile may let you correct its details, but it does not necessarily let you remove the competing page. Product Hunt illustrates the distinction: verified owners and members can edit Page content, but its guidance directs them to request changes for fields unavailable in settings. Its claim process also asks makers to verify ownership; a claim using an email that does not match the product domain goes to moderation. Check the route offered by your particular publisher rather than treating these as universal directory rules.
Adapt this request: “Subject: Duplicate product profiles for [product]. I’m [name and role] at [company]. Both [URL A] and [URL B] describe [product] and link to [intended product website]. Please retain [preferred public URL] because [ownership, accuracy or useful content], and [remove or consolidate] [other public URL] if your policy permits. I can provide [appropriate ownership evidence or account details] to verify this request. Please tell me what will happen to the other URL and whether you need anything else from us.” Include both full public URLs, not screenshots alone, so the publisher can identify the exact pages.
In the fictional Northstar case, the founder would name /products/northstar as the preferred page, provide both full directory URLs and the intended product website, and explain that the preferred page is accessible, accurate and contains reviews. Ask what remedy is available if removal or consolidation is not offered; do not promise your team that the unwanted URL will redirect. If the real issue is one outdated page after a name change, follow the rebrand listing-update guide instead of requesting duplicate removal.
Verify the public result, not just the reply
After a publisher responds or you make an allowed edit, open both original URLs without relying on an account preview. Confirm which page remains public and what the other URL now displays; do not infer that removal, consolidation or redirection happened from a support reply. On the retained page, check the product identity and click its website link through to the intended live destination. A corrected profile with a link to the wrong product site is not resolved.
Record the preferred URL, competing URL, request date, publisher response and date of your public check. If both competing profiles still appear, keep the case open and send a focused follow-up with the two URLs and what remains wrong. If the publisher will not remove either page, ask whether it can clarify their distinct purposes or correct the misleading one, then document the outcome you can actually observe.
