Is a site map necessary or recommended?
-
We have a website that has been up for the past 4 years without a site map.
Google is indexing it. Do we need a site map? Do you recommend we create one and submit it to goggle and bing?
The site is www.logobids.com
Thank you.
-
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the tip. I checked and our .xml sitemap has 55 pages and Google is indexing 53. not sure what the 2 missing pages are or how to find out, but I imagine the difference may have to do with blog archives or something along those lines. At any rate, I'm reassured by this. Thanks again.
Gina
-
Hi Gina,
If you use Google Webmaster Tools you can see how many pages you submitted on your sitemap and how many Google has indexed under Optimization > Sitemaps.
It will also list if you have an issues with your xml sitemap.
Hope this helps.
Mike
-
I would say that the sitemap is not needed per say, however, it is good practice to have one, whether it be for client navigation around a site or to assist Google with the root navigation of the website.
From the earlier days in my SEO career I was taught to always incorporate a few standard items as basic procedure as they once you are used to the routine you cannot do any harm if even Google no longer needs then, these were things like sitemap.html, sitemap.xml and robot.txt.
It seems like Google is no longer taking a sitemap for the same purpose as it used to as the technology is advancing, so it now seems like personal preference.
A little bit like the old:
"Which should you do first, On-page SEO or Off-page SEO?" debate.
Hope this helps.
-
It's not needed per se, but then if you have a large website and you think about the user and you want them to be easily able to find sections of your website, it can't hurt to have a HTML sitemap.
As for XML sitemap, the only reason I consider doing them to make sure if there are any issues of indexability, I know. So that I can act on that information and do something. Otherwise for a large scale website with over hundreds and thousands of pages, how'd you know if you have a section of your site not indexed for whatever reasons ?
-
This is a strong indicator something is up and deserves deeper investigation.
Perhaps you have content duplication issues, low value content (Panda), spammy back links (Penguin) or other indexing issue. See if there is a pattern to the missing pages, perhaps one of the directories is the cause. How old is the site and how is the domain trust/authority coming along?
-
I'm jumping in here with an offshoot question for Mike. (or anyone else with an idea)
You suggest "If you Google site:logobids.com you can see which of your pages Google has indexed."
I just tried that and only 10 out of 40+ pages on our site are coming up. We have both an html site map and an xml site map on our site. There isn't any noindex code on the site other than for blog comments.
Any idea why Google isn't showing them all?
Thanks!!
-
A stale or poorly created sitemap can hurt in the following ways:
- long lived 404 pages - deleted pages continue to be indexed if not removed from the sitemap
- use up Google indexing allowance - if 404 and low value pages are included, Googlebot will use up valuable indexing allowance on them vs covering more of your important content.
- links to private areas - depending on how the map is created, the tool may not be smart enough to not include administration or community pages that you don't want in the index.
- inclusion of noindex pages - a couple methods (such as a robot.txt update after a sitemap is created) will include noindex pages which a technical problem. I'm not 100% sure of the impact but I could see this being a quality indicator.
- create distracting work - maintaining sitemaps, particularly semi-manual ones from Xenu etc., suck time better spent improving your indexability or earning back links.
However, all of these are easily avoidable with a solid approach and/or good server side tools.
-
Thank you for the responses. It seems like it is something that cant hurt the site or the indexing. The sacrifice is my time, other than that it has nothing but upsides and no downside.
I think we will go forward with creating the site map and submitting to Google.
-
I don't have a site map on any of my sites. Never any problem getting indexed or ranking. None.
-
I may get chastised for this but I believe the value of sitemaps is over stated.
All things being equal, I feel they are crutches and band-aids for poor webdesign/production.
Your site should:
- be easily indexed by all engines
- expose all pages with in four-five links of the home page(s)
- utilize thoughtful linking to promote important content in an organic manner
- expose new content on a high value, frequently indexed page (ie the home page) long enough to be found
- be consistent enough that the site will seem similar after one or two passes by Googlebot.
I like sitemaps when big structural changes occur as the sites heal faster. They're good when a lots of pages are only exposed via a long pagination scheme. I also use them to break down parts of a site to expose problem areas (IE when a sitemap has 50 links but Google only indexes 25 of them)
But, they can be detrimental if they are not maintained properly. If anything changes in the structure, it should be immediately reflected in the sitemap. Lots of automated ones don't consider the robot.txt file which can cause problems.
For SEOs, adding a sitemap is an easy way to ensure everything is at least looked at without having to touch the actual site.
Advice: yes, use them but only if you can use them properly or can't fix current indexing issues. Over the long haul however, you should force yourself to think of it as not there.
-
A sitemap is like a map with driving directions for Google. Sure they can probably find their way through your site, but with a map they can get through more efficiently and make sure to look at all of your pages.
It is not required for a site to get indexed.
If you entire site is indexed, you don't "need" a sitemap; however, it is good practice to have one.
Say you add a new page and want it to get indexed quickly by Google, you would just update your sitemap and submit it to Google. It alerts them you have made changes and to reindex your site.
If you Google site:logobids.com you can see which of your pages Google has indexed.
Hope this helps.
Mike
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
-
Linking to External Site In Nav Bar
Hi, we are a celebrity site but also own a separate sports site with its own URL. We have a link to that site in our Nav bar. Are we being penalized by having that link? thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Uinterview0 -
Keyword distribution in the whole site
I've been taught during a SEO course that the whole site has to contain the chosen keywords with a fixed proportion of optimized pages, that should be like this: 50% of pages optimized on the most relevant keyword (just one keyword) 25% of pages optimized on secondary kewords (depending on the size of the site, could be a few pages for each secondary keywords) 25% of pages on long tail keywords. the teachers was a very respected SEO professional, but I've never seen this strategy anywhere in other articles or SEO guides. what do you think about it?
On-Page Optimization | | DavideM
It's true that it brings visibility for the top keyword?
does it lead to cannibalization?
what others strategy do you use?0 -
What is the best way to handle small business site architecture?
I do allot of work for small businesses with around 15-20 total pages. What is the best site architecture? For example if its a landscaping website, should there be a services category page and pages under that (domain.com/services/lawn-mowing.html) or should it be flatter (domain.com/lawn-mowing.html) They offer about 10 different services.
On-Page Optimization | | JohnWeb120 -
Altering site structure
I work for a business that operates several sites that were developed a very long time ago. We've been making many different changes over the past 12-18 months to improve these sites in several different ways. One area that we've never discussed or attempted is general site structure. Its pretty obvious that when the business was started they had never heard of information architecture or usability design. To make matters worse, the internal linking strategy appears to have been link everything to everything. Well after being told that it couldn't be done - I'm getting our team to say we must focus on this, if for no other reason that to help consumers figure out how to navigate through our site. Today we essentially have a series of category / information pages. In some cases, we hang more detailed topical content related to a category /informational page in a hub and spoke manner. Although remember what I said about linking everything to everything. In reality there are a series of subtopics that should been designed for every category / informational area. Instead, what happened is in some cases the subtopic is integrated into the hub or category page, in other situations is hung off the page as a spoke page and in others the subtopic isn't even covered. The plan is to standardize - each category will have 'n' subtopics (~10-12, we're still working this out). From a navigational standpoint users will be able to easily navigate both across categories as well as subtopics within a category as well as between categories within adjacent/similar subtopics. This is essentially a grid if that makes sense. The question is this - we have some keywords that do well in SEO and many many more that do not and the trend has not been our friend. We're considering keeping the URLs of the pages associated with strong keywords the same within the nav structure, even though this might mean the URL for a spoke page will be inconsistent with the spoke page name from a different category. I don't see any real danger for pages that either are not associated with any ranking keywords or only very weak keywords. Maybe I'm wrong. What things should we consider in this change? We believe that this standardization should help consumers find the information they are looking for in a much more efficient manner, so page views/visit should go up. Additionally, this prepares us for category and subtopic comparison pages and other added functionality being added in a logical manner. We also think that as we add depth about a subtopic, it will be easier for us to acquire links to our site because the subtopics within a category will appeal to different websites. This is by no means a small project. We have hundreds and hundreds of pages. Do folks think this is a worthwhile endeavor? We've spent a lot of time cleaning up H1 tags, structure of our pages, anchor tags, page load order and speed, image caching, etc. Site structure, URL length and internal link structure are essentially what is left. Once these are done we intend to really get going on better and more organized content on our site. Thoughts?
On-Page Optimization | | Allstar1 -
Website redesign: site going from .php to .html
A site I'm working on is being redesigned because the current platform does not allow for content to be changed easily. In the process, they are going from .php to .html. I am concerned about their losing link juice. Can a site work with the old content remaining .php and the new content being .html or should all pages stay .php?
On-Page Optimization | | cakelady0 -
If you were working on a wine site would you include the wine year in the URL?
I've come across a case where I'm asking myself what the best direction would be to go and while there is no right direction I would like to here some feedback from others. I'm working with some great content pages all about wine. As you probably know the difference between a 07 wine and a 95 is vastly different and up to this point I'm using the full year in the url much like this: grapesinyourtoesexample.com/2007-cellar-pod-viognier-adelaide-hills/. What I'm worried about is my use of the year in the URL. I feel it's very important for it to be used in the page title and on page but I'm concerned that it might be setting me back with my use of it in the url. My concern is that search engines might be interpretting it as a datestamp rather than as a informational piece of data describing the asset. Looking at my competitors, my content is one of the only sites using the year and in most searches for various wines my content is in the second half of the SERPs. If you were creating this content would you use the year? If you were working with current content would you drop the year across all of the site and implement to necessary redirects? Just to be clear this is a client related project so my use of "my site|my content" refers to the client's content.
On-Page Optimization | | DotCar0 -
Site Stucture Advice - Keyword Dillema
I am creating a new site and am looking for some advice on how to structure the site Using Google's keyword search tool it seems like I have a dilemma in that about 50% of the keyword pairs are contained in 10 keyword pairs that are similar The first two pairs have about 49% of the traffic and only differ between plural / singular, not quite sure how to handle that, or if google has a method to make these more or less synonomous The last 8 pairs are roughly similar in distribtuion As an example (not my case, just for visualization) Mountain Bike Classes Mountain Bike Instruction Mountain Bike Workshops Mountain Bike Training Etc ... which all more or less give the same results (yes some difference but they all deal with learning how to ride a mountain bike, again this is not my exact case, don't care a whit about mountain bikes 😉 I don't see giving each of those kinds of pairs their own page since the content would be pretty much the exact same, making it substantially different would also be problematic (if I am thinking about this correctly) I have a clean slate to work with from a site perspective so I am wondering how people here would, or better yet have handled similar situations
On-Page Optimization | | bThere0 -
Sister Sites or Joint Family?
A large News Media Group has a Tv Channel, print newspaper, radio channel (for music primarly) and an online website that includes the newspaper content and other original content in different media. My question is, is it better to have independant websites for these different mediums or have all the content on one big website. Currently the newspaper and blog are online as one whereas the radio channel has its own website and the television has its own. So should we maintain sister sites and cross link to each other or have one big happy family under one house? Best, Rishad.
On-Page Optimization | | RishadShaikh590