Indexed pages and current pages - Big difference?
-
Our website shows ~22k pages in the sitemap but ~56k are showing indexed on Google through the "site:" command. Firstly, how much attention should we paying to the discrepancy? If we should be worried what's the best way to find the cause of the difference?
The domain canonical is set so can't really figure out if we've got a problem or not?
-
Hi Nathan,
The delta between the number of pages returned by the site: operator and the number of pages in your sitemap could be down to a number of issues:
- Your XML sitemap may represent only a percentage of the total number of valid content URLs that your site is capable of generating.
a) Often sites will only generate XML sitemaps for URLs that someone has decided are "important", when the total number of URLs is much larger.
- Your XML sitemap contains ALL the valid content URLs that your site is capable of generating, but search engines are somehow finding more URLs.
a) Look in Google Webmaster Tools under Optimization >> HTML improvements >> Duplicate title tags
i) Do the pages with duplicate titles have duplicate page content? If so, your publishing platform is allowing multiple URLs to render the same content, which is a bug that needs to be fixed
b) Run a crawler like Xenu Link Sleuth or Screaming Frog against your site, and see how many URLs they discover. Export the results to Excel and look for weird URLs
i) Usually culprits for duplicate content include incorrect canonicalization (www vs non-www, URLs ending in /index.html vs just /, etc)
ii) Look for URLs ending with strange query strings (affiliate tracking, session IDs, etc)
c) Use the site: operator in other engines (Bing, blekko, etc) and compare the numbers they return. Especially if this number is larger than the number Google is returning, starting looking for weird URL patterns
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "the domain canonical has been set correctly". If you're referring to use of the canonical link element for every URL, there are plenty of ways that can go wrong. E.g., if your CMS requires that each published URL have rel="canonical", but allows URLs to be published with and without the trailing /index.html, you can end up with a canonical link element on the non-canonical version of the URL, further confusing engines. Something to look into.
-
You might have a duplicate content issue. You will want to check if you have the proper 301 redirect and a canonical command in the head of your code. If you don't have this set properly then the search engines will see the www and non-www versions of your site as duplicate. Also remember that the search engines also by default place this at the end of the url /
Here are two links that can help if this is the issue.
http://www.webconfs.com/how-to-redirect-a-webpage.php/
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/rel-canonical-html-head/
Hope this helps. Good Luck
-
Yes this is a potentially significant problem. The easiest way to troubleshoot is to do the 'site:' command again, and go to the last page of results. You should be seeing pages that aren't in your sitemap. Very likely duplicated content.
If you are having a rough time troubleshooting, post a link and I'll be glad to take a peek.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Google Not Indexing Pages (Wordpress)
Hello, recently I started noticing that google is not indexing our new pages or our new blog posts. We are simply getting a "Discovered - Currently Not Indexed" message on all new pages. When I click "Request Indexing" is takes a few days, but eventually it does get indexed and is on Google. This is very strange, as our website has been around since the late 90's and the quality of the new content is neither duplicate nor "low quality". We started noticing this happening around February. We also do not have many pages - maybe 500 maximum? I have looked at all the obvious answers (allowing for indexing, etc.), but just can't seem to pinpoint a reason why. Has anyone had this happen recently? It is getting very annoying having to manually go in and request indexing for every page and makes me think there may be some underlying issues with the website that should be fixed.
Technical SEO | | Hasanovic1 -
New Pages in my Shopify website is not indexing
Hi The Service area pages created on my Shopify website is not indexing on google for a long time, Tried indexing the pages manually and also submitted the sitemap but still the pages doesn't seem to get indexed.
Technical SEO | | Bhisshaun
Thanks in Advance.0 -
Why is Google Webmaster Tools showing 404 Page Not Found Errors for web pages that don't have anything to do with my site?
I am currently working on a small site with approx 50 web pages. In the crawl error section in WMT Google has highlighted over 10,000 page not found errors for pages that have nothing to do with my site. Anyone come across this before?
Technical SEO | | Pete40 -
Are image pages considered 'thin' content pages?
I am currently doing a site audit. The total number of pages on the website are around 400... 187 of them are image pages and coming up as 'zero' word count in Screaming Frog report. I needed to know if they will be considered 'thin' content by search engines? Should I include them as an issue? An answer would be most appreciated.
Technical SEO | | MTalhaImtiaz0 -
Issue: Duplicate Page Content > Wordpress Comments Page
Hello Moz Community, I've create a campaign in Moz and received hundreds of errors, regarding "Duplicate Page Content". After some review, I've found that 99% of the errors in the "Duplicate Page Content" report are occurring due to Wordpress creating a new comment page (with the original post detail), if a comment is made on a blog post. The post comment can be displayed on the original blog post, but also viewable on a second URL, created by Wordpress. http://www.Example.com/example-post http://www.Example.com/example-post/comment-page-1 Anyone else experience this issue in Wordpress or this same type of report in Moz? Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | DomainUltra0 -
Unnecessary pages getting indexed in Google for my blog
I have a blog dapazze.com and I am suffering from a problem for a long time. I found out that Google have indexed hundreds of replytocom links and images attachment pages for my blog. I had to remove these pages manually using the URL removal tool. I had used "Disallow: ?replytocom" in my robots.txt, but Google disobeyed it. After that, I removed the parameter from my blog completely using the SEO by Yoast plugin. But now I see that Google has again started indexing these links even after they are not present in my blog (I use #comment). Google have also indexed many of my admin and plugin pages, whereas they are disallowed in my robots.txt file. Have a look at my robots.txt file here: http://dapazze.com/robots.txt Please help me out to solve this problem permanently?
Technical SEO | | rahulchowdhury0 -
Will having a big list of cities for areas a client services help or damage SEO on a page?
We have a client we inherited that has flat text list of all the cities and counties they service on their contact page. They service the entire southeast so the list just looks crazy ridiculous. --------- Example: ---- South Carolina: Abbeville, Aiken, Allendale, Anderson, Bamberg, Barnwell, Beaufort, Berkeley, Calhoun, Charleston, Cherokee, etc etc ------ end example ------ The question is, will this help or hinder their seo for their very specific niche industry? Is this key word spamming? It has an end-user purpose so it technically isn't spam, but perhaps the engines may look at it otherwise. I couldn't find a definitive answer to the question, any help would be appreciated.
Technical SEO | | Highforge0 -
De-indexing millions of pages - would this work?
Hi all, We run an e-commerce site with a catalogue of around 5 million products. Unfortunately, we have let Googlebot crawl and index tens of millions of search URLs, the majority of which are very thin of content or duplicates of other URLs. In short: we are in deep. Our bloated Google-index is hampering our real content to rank; Googlebot does not bother crawling our real content (product pages specifically) and hammers the life out of our servers. Since having Googlebot crawl and de-index tens of millions of old URLs would probably take years (?), my plan is this: 301 redirect all old SERP URLs to a new SERP URL. If new URL should not be indexed, add meta robots noindex tag on new URL. When it is evident that Google has indexed most "high quality" new URLs, robots.txt disallow crawling of old SERP URLs. Then directory style remove all old SERP URLs in GWT URL Removal Tool This would be an example of an old URL:
Technical SEO | | TalkInThePark
www.site.com/cgi-bin/weirdapplicationname.cgi?word=bmw&what=1.2&how=2 This would be an example of a new URL:
www.site.com/search?q=bmw&category=cars&color=blue I have to specific questions: Would Google both de-index the old URL and not index the new URL after 301 redirecting the old URL to the new URL (which is noindexed) as described in point 2 above? What risks are associated with removing tens of millions of URLs directory style in GWT URL Removal Tool? I have done this before but then I removed "only" some useless 50 000 "add to cart"-URLs.Google says themselves that you should not remove duplicate/thin content this way and that using this tool tools this way "may cause problems for your site". And yes, these tens of millions of SERP URLs is a result of a faceted navigation/search function let loose all to long.
And no, we cannot wait for Googlebot to crawl all these millions of URLs in order to discover the 301. By then we would be out of business. Best regards,
TalkInThePark0