Why are pages still showing in SERPs, despite being NOINDEXed for months?
-
We have thousands of pages we're trying to have de-indexed in Google for months now. They've all got . But they simply will not go away in the SERPs.
Here is just one example....
http://bitly.com/VutCFiIf you search this URL in Google, you will see that it is indexed, yet it's had for many months. This is just one example for thousands of pages, that will not get de-indexed. Am I missing something here? Does it have to do with using content="none" instead of content="noindex, follow"?
Any help is very much appreciated.
-
Thanks for your reply,
Let me know if you are able to deindex those pages. I will wait. Also please share what you have implemented to deindex those pages.
-
A page can have a link to it, and still not be indexed, so I disagree with you on that.
But thanks for using the domain name. That will teach me to use a URL shortener...
-
Hm, that is interesting. So you're saying that it will get crawled, and thus will eventually become deindexed (as noindex is part of the content="none" directive), but since it's a dead end page, it just takes an extra long time for that particular page to get crawled?
-
Just to add to the other answers, you can also remove the URLs (or entire directory if necessary) via the URL removal tool in Webmaster Tools, although Google prefers you to use it for emergencies of sorts (I've had no problems with it).
http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=164734
-
No, nofollow will only tell the bot that the page is a dead end - that the bot should not follow any links on page. And that means any inks from those pages won't be visited by the bot - that is slowing the crawling process overall for those pages.
If you block a page in robots.txt and the page is already in the index - that will remain in the index as the noindex or content=none won't be seen by the bot so it won't be removed from the index - it will just won't be visited anymore.
-
Ok, so, nofollow is stopping the page from being read at all? I thought that nofollow just means the links on the page will not be followed. Is meta nofollow essentially the same as blocking a page in robots.txt?
-
Hi Howard,
The page is in Google index because you are still linking to that page from your website. Here is the page from where that page links:
http://www.2mcctv.com/product_print-productinfoVeiluxVS70CDNRDhtml.html
As you are linking that page Google indexing the page. Google come to know about "noindex" tag before that he has already indexed it. Sorry for bad English.
Lindsay has written awesome post about it here:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/robot-access-indexation-restriction-techniques-avoiding-conflicts
After reading above blog post, my all doubts about noindex, follow, robots.txt get clear.
Thanks Lindsay
-
We always use the noindex code in our robot.txt file.
-
Hi,
In order to deindex you should use noindex as content=none also means nofollow. You do need to follow now in order to reach all other pages and see the no index tag and remove those from the index.
When you have all of them out of the index you can set the none back on.
This is the main reason "none" as attribute is not very wide in usage as "shooting yourself in the foot" with it it's easy.
On the otehr hand you need to see if google bot is actually reaching those pages:
-
see if you don't have any robots.txt restrictions first
-
see when google's bot last have a hit on any of the pages - that will give you a good idea and you can do a prediction.
If those pages are in the sup index you can wait for some time for Google bit to revisit.
One last note: build xml sitemaps with all of those pages and submit those via WMT - that will help at 100% to get those in front of the firing squad and also to be able to monitor those better.
Hope it helps.
-
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
-
Should search pages be indexed?
Hey guys, I've always believed that search pages should be no-indexed but now I'm wondering if there is an argument to index them? Appreciate any thoughts!
Technical SEO | | RebekahVP0 -
Redesigned and Migrated Website - Lost Almost All Organic Traffic - Mobile Pages Indexing over Normal Pages
We recently redesigned and migrated our site from www.jmacsupply.com to https://www.jmac.com It has been over 2 weeks since implementing 301 redirects, and we have lost over 90% of our organic traffic. Google seems to be indexing the mobile versions of our pages over our website pages. We hired a designer to redesign the site, and we are confident the code is doing something that is harmful for ranking our website. F or Example: If you google "KEEDEX-K-DS-FLX38" You should see our mobile page ranking: http://www.jmac.com/mobile/Product.aspx?ProductCode=KEEDEX-K-DS-FLX38 but the page that we want ranked (and we think should be, is https://www.jmac.com/Keedex_K_DS_FLX38_p/keedex-k-ds-flx38.htm) That second page isn't even indexed. (When you search for: "site:jmac.com Keedex K-DS-FLX38") We have implemented rel canonical, and rel alternate both ways. What are we doing wrong??? Thank you in advance for any help - it is much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | jmaccom0 -
Changed URL of all web pages to a new updated one - Keywords still pick the old URL
A month ago we updated our website and with that we created new URLs for each page. Under "On-Page", the keywords we put to check ranking on are still giving information on the old urls of our websites. Slowly, some new URLs are popping up. I'm wondering if there's a way I can manually make the keywords feedback information from the new urls.
Technical SEO | | Champions0 -
If a permanent redirect is supposed to transfer SEO from the old page to the new page, why has my domain authority been impacted?
For example, we redirected our old domain to a new one (leaving no duplicate content on the old domain) and saw a 40% decrease in domain authority. Isn't a permanent redirect supposed to transfer link authority to the place it is redirecting to? Did I do something wrong?
Technical SEO | | BlueLinkERP0 -
132 pages reported as having Duplicate Page Content but I'm not sure where to go to fix the problems?
I am seeing “Duplicate Page Content” coming up in our
Technical SEO | | danatanseo
reports on SEOMOZ.org Here’s an example: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/williams-sound-ppa-r35-e http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/aphex-230-master-voice-channel-processor http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/AT-AE4100.prod These three pages are for completely unrelated products.
They are returning “200” status codes, but are being identified as having
duplicate page content. It appears these are all going to the home page, but it’s
an odd version of the home page because there’s no title. I would understand if these pages 301-redirected to the home page if they were obsolete products, but it's not a 301-redirect. The referring page is
listed as: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/cd-duplicators None of the 3 links in question appear anywhere on that page. It's puzzling. We have 132 of these. Can anyone help me figure out
why this is happening and how best to fix it? Thanks!0 -
Rel=cannonical vs. noindex.follow for paginated pages
I"m working on a real estate site that has multiple listing pages, e.g. http://www.hhcrealestate.com/manhattan-beach-mls-real-estate-listings I'm trying to get the main result page to rank for that particular geo-keyword, i.e. "manhattan beach homes for sale". I want to make sure all of the individual listings on the paginated pages, 2,3, 4 etc. still get indexed. Is it better to add to all of the paginated pages, i.e.manhattan-beach-mls-real-estate-listings-2, manhattan-beach-mls-real-estate-listings--3, manhattan-beach-mls-real-estate-listings-4, etc. or is it better to add noindex,follow to those pages?
Technical SEO | | fthead91 -
SEOMoz is indicating I have 40 pages with duplicate content, yet it doesn't list the URL's of the pages???
When I look at the Errors and Warnings on my Campaign Overview, I have a lot of "duplicate content" errors. When I view the errors/warnings SEOMoz indicates the number of pages with duplicate content, yet when I go to view them the subsequent page says no pages were found... Any ideas are greatly welcomed! Thanks Marty K.
Technical SEO | | MartinKlausmeier0 -
Consolidate page strength
Hi, Our site has a fair amount of related/similiar content that has been historically placed on seperate pages. Unfortuantely this spreads out our page strength across multiple pages. We are looking to combine this content onto one page so that our page strength will be focused in one location (optimized for search). The content is extensive so placing it all on one page isn't ideal from a user experience (better to separate it out). We are looking into different approaches one main "tabbed" page with query string params to seperate the seperate pages. We'll use an AJAX driven design, but for non js browsers, we'll gracefully degrade to separate pages with querystring params. www.xxx.com/content/?pg=1 www.xxx.com/content/?pg=2 www.xxx.com/content/?pg=3 We'd then rel canonical all three pages to just be www.xxx.com/content/ Same concept but useAJAX crawlable hash tag design (!#). Load everything onto one page, but the page could get quite large so latency will increase. I don't think from an SEO perspective there is much difference between options 1 & 2. We'll mostly be relying on Google using the rel canonical tag. Have others dealt with this issue were you have lots of similiar content. From a UX perspective you want to separate/classifiy it, but from an SEO perspective want to consolidate? It really is very similiar content so using a rel canonical makes sense. What have others done? Thoughts?
Technical SEO | | NicB10