I need help compiling solid documentation and data (if possible) that having tons of orphaned pages is bad for SEO - Can you help?
-
I spent an hour this afternoon trying to convince my CEO that having thousands of orphaned pages is bad for SEO. His argument was "If they aren't indexed, then I don't see how it can be a problem."
Despite my best efforts to convince him that thousands of them ARE indexed, he simply said "Unless you can prove it's bad and prove what benefit the site would get out of cleaning them up, I don't see it as a priority."
So, I am turning to all you brilliant folks here in Q & A and asking for help...and some words of encouragement would be nice today too
Dana
-
Agreed on all counts Jason, not to mention the improved customer experience because we won't have people landing on those God-awful ugly and useless pages!
From a server perspective, could deleting 8,000 files (pages, images, PDFs) results in our site speed improving too? Or would it likely have no impact?
-
So you have roughly 8,500 pages that are part of your customer experience and that you want customers to be able to navigate to from your site and presumably would like customers to find on Google. (from Screaming Frog).
But only 7,500 only pages are in Google's index. So best case, roughly 1,000 of your good pages (almost 12% of all the pages on your site) don't exist in organic search. Worst case, is that some of those 7,500 pages in google are depreciated pages that aren't part of your active site, making the percentage of live pages in google even worse.
It's very possible that a portion of your google crawl budget is being consumed by pages that don't help you. If you get those pages out of the index, you stand a better chance to get your 1000 good pages into the index.
-
Hi Jason,
Ok, here is what I saw in Screaming Frog:
27,616 total spidered URLs, of which:
- 8,494 are HTML pages
- 45 are CSS files
- 14,687 are images
- 4,287 are PDFs
Google says we have only 7,540 URLs indexed (of all types) - I know for a fact that at least 500 orphaned pages are indexed in Google. It seems to me, then, that Google is indexing content that isn't important to us, and perhaps not indexing other content that is important to us because it's having trouble telling what's important and what's not.
Any insights on that Jason? What do you make of it?
-
Hi Jason,
I'm just following up as I get my ducks in a row on this one. Above in your comment you said "Google Count of Pages - Screaming Frog count of Pages = # of Orphaned Pages" - to be perfectly accurate, this would only give me the number of orphaned pages that are indexed. There could be many additional orphaned pages that are not in Google's index.
My follow up question is, should I be concerned about those too? Or are orphaned pages that aren't indexed not worth cleaning up? I think I already know the answer (Yes! Clean those up too because they can interfere with crawl rate and site speed...)....but I want to know your take on it please. Thanks so much!
Dana
-
Tempting! Very tempting.:-)
-
I would not do this if I was an employee... but.... I would ask him to bet me an amount that would be equivalent to about "one month's pay" on the results.
He is a chicken so he wouldn't accept that bet. And if he did accept I would want it in writing.
-
Thanks EGOL. You made me chuckle, because all of these things crossed my mind. I did go home mad yesterday, and I don't get mad very easily or very often. I usually welcome the idea of explaining SEO strategies and tactics to newbies and laypeople (as is evidenced by my many posts here in Q & A).
Let's just say - my feelers are out looking at other possibilities.
-
In my opinion, the links are still evaporating pagerank.
If some of these pages are still in the index they could be counting as thin/duplicate content.
-
What would your response be to that?
- thinks for a while *
I would be mad about this. This is why I prefer to be self-employed.
I don't know the temperament or personality of this person.
I might not be working there much longer.
It seems to me that the effort required to cut links into these pages is tiny and the potential for gain is pretty high.
Downside risk is zero. Upside opportunity is good. He is a chicken and a fool.
-
EGOL, I thought I would just follow up on these thin content "Reviews/Ratings" pages. They are blocked from Google crawling them via the robots.txt file. Is this enough? Or are they still diluting the product page's authority just by being there?
Thanks!
Dana
-
Thanks EGOL,
And yes, they are.
The comment I received when trying to explain that those links were draining authority off the product pages was "No they aren't. Whatever PageRank the product page has, it has, regardless of whether the links are there or not."
What would your response be to that? I tried to explain it several different ways, but he just looked at me like I was full of malarkey...He is a visual person. Perhaps I should try a diagram?
It's difficult going into a situation like this when the opening premise in the other person's mind is that he knows more about SEO than I do, because all SEO is in his mind is a bunch of guesswork.
Sorry, moral's a bit low in my heart at the moment. I work too hard and study too hard at what I do to have someone who maybe read's a blog about SEO occasionally to come in and treat me like I have no idea what I'm talking about.
Thanks very much for responding. I appreciate it mucho!
Dana
-
Thanks Jason,
These are great suggestions and are exactly the kinds of things that will give me the proof I need to convince him that removing these is a worthwhile endeavor. I'm off to do them now and will come back here and post my discoveries.
Dana
-
Are these those thin content, duplicate content, review and email pages?
There are links into those pages that are evaporating pagerank.
Two links on each of your product pages are being wasted.
If they are getting indexed then they are dead weight on your site and make your site look like a skimpy spammy publisher.
-
By "orphaned" do you mean pages that are no longer linked to your site navigation taxonomy?
If you know the subject matter and/or URLs, you can easy show your boss that they are indexed: Google "site:oursite.com orphaned topic" and show him all the pages in the google index.
If you can't find the pages, then do a complete crawl of your site with Screaming Frog and see how many pages it finds. Now compare that number with how many pages Google has in your index in Google Webmaster Tools (under Health -> Index Status). Google Count of Pages - Screaming Frog count of Pages = # of Orphaned Pages.
Now to see if those pages are hurting you, run them through Open Site Explorer to see if any of them have backlinks. If so, they are diluting your SEO efforts. Even if not, look at your crawl stats in Google Webmaster tools under Health and see how many pages you're getting crawled per day. If it's a fraction of your total pages, then if you got rid of the orphaned pages, you could be getting your important pages crawled more regularly.
I hope that helps.
Jason "Retailgeek" Goldberg
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
-
Help Center/Knowledgebase effects on SEO: Is it worth my time fixing technical issues on no-indexed subdomain pages?
We're a SaaS company and have a pretty extensive help center resource on a subdomain (help.domain.com). This has been set up and managed over a few years by someone with no knowledge of SEO, meaning technical things like 404 links, bad redirects and http/https mixes have not been paid attention to. Every page on this subdomain is set to NOT be indexed in search engines, but we do sometimes link to help pages from indexable posts on the main domain. After spending time fixing problems on our main website, our site audits now flag almost solely errors and issues on these non-indexable help center pages every week. So my question is: is it worth my time fixing technical issues on a help center subdomain that has all its pages non-indexable in search engines? I don't manage this section of the site, and so getting fixes done is a laborious process that requires going through someone else - something I'd rather only do if necessary.
Technical SEO | | mglover19880 -
Local Landing Pages struggling with rankings although I've done most things needed. Any idea?
Hi Mozzers, I am wondering if someone could advise if there's anything obvious here as to why my local landing pages suck ranking wise even though I have done all of the following. http://goo.gl/Lr4HXa I am trying to rank for Garden tool hire Bristol on my landing page. Main category page is garden tool hire Consitant NAP - Citations. Local branch address on Page , in title tag, H1 tag and the address is in on page content which is unique. Schema.org has been set up with address in this aswell etc. Pagination set up and view all page has concanical tag pointing to page 1 Speed not an issue as this is a fast site. Currently all the product links on the page are H3 tags but I've seen this on lots of other sites. All my NAP Citations point to the parent branch pages although I don't have any individual deep links pointing to this page. Unique Content I currently don't have internal links to relevant articles on my blog page as I have those on my main category landing page as you can see here - http://goo.gl/sO9A9U but I can add these as well to all my location specific landing pages if you think it would help. Any thoughts greatly appreciated Pete
Technical SEO | | PeteC120 -
Website SEO Product Pages - Condense Product Pages
We are managing a website that has seen consistently dropping rankings over the last 2 years (http://www.independence-bunting.com/). Our long term strategy has been purely content-based and is of high quality, but isn’t seeing the desired results. It is an ecommerce site that has a lot of pages, most of which are category or product pages. Many of the product pages have duplicate or thin content, which we currently see as one of the primary reasons for the ranking drops.The website has many individual products which have the same fabric and size options, but have different designs. So it is difficult to write valuable content that differs between several products that have similar designs. Right now each of the different designs has its own product page. We have a dilemma, because our options are:A.Combine similar designs of the product into one product page where the customer must choose a design, a fabric, and a size before checking out. This way we can have valuable content and don’t have to duplicate that content on other pages or try to find more to say about something that there really isn’t anything else to say about. However, this process will remove between 50% and 70% of the pages on the website. We know number of indexed pages is important to search engines and if they suddenly see that half of our pages are gone, we may cause more negative effects despite the fact that we are in fact aiming to provide more value to the user, rather than less.B.Leave the product pages alone and try to write more valuable content for each product page, which will be difficult because there really isn’t that much more to say, or more valuable ways to say it. This is the “safe” option as it means that our negative potential impact is reduced but we won’t necessarily see much positive trending either. C.Test solution A on a small percentage of the product categories to see any impact over the next several months before making sitewide updates to the product pages if we see positive impact, or revert to the old way if we see negative impact.Any sound advice would be of incredible value at this point, as the work we are doing isn’t having the desired effects and we are seeing consistent dropping rankings at this point.Any information would be greatly appreciated. Thank you,
Technical SEO | | Ed-iOVA0 -
Problem of possible duplicate title tag and description. Help me!
Hi everybody, I'm optimizing this huge website that has a lot of identical categories for differente locations. I'm trying to find a smart way to write title and description for these categories, changing the location as a variable on the title and description phrase. Here some examples: Title: Attractions in [CITY]. Sightseeings, monuments and museums in [CITY]. Description: Find travel ideas and suggestions for [CITY]. On [NAME OF THE WEBSITE] you can find a lot of attractions, monuments and sightseeing off the beaten path in [CITY]. Changing only the name of the CITY on these Titles and Descriptions, am I running the risk of duplicate title and description? Thanks in advance for your help!
Technical SEO | | OptimizedGroup0 -
Need Urgent Help
I have found one mistake that my place page address is little different than address on all local directories like on place page address is: 10010 S Tryon St #122 Charlotte, NC 28273 and on directories : 10010 South Tryon St 122 Charlotte, NC 28273 so on place page it is just "S" instead of South and "#" is before 122 but on all directories # is missing So what do you suggest ? Should i change address and re verify place page ? Re verify will put down place page value ???
Technical SEO | | mnkpso0 -
Can you help with some concerns over mobile site in SERPS
Hi Guys I wonder if you can put me right on this query please? We have a mobile version of our site, on an m. domain. it is actually http://m.uniquemagazines.co.uk. I have created a mobile sitemap, and added the sitemap reference to the robots.txt file. I have setup the site in web master tools, and submitted the sitemap to web master tools. The sitemap can be found at http://m.uniquemagazines.co.uk/sitemap.xml. This is an index file, which in turn links to 3 sitemaps, one for pages, one for product pages and one for category pages. I have not blocked any crawlers in the robots.txt file. My query is we have some products showing up in the SERPS with both the mobile and normal website. Secondly, in web master tools I am told that our mobile sitemap contains 3675 submitted URLs. However, it states under the WEB banner that 3675 submitted, and 3675 indexed. But under MOBILE it states 3675 submitted, none indexed... I will attempt to attach a screenshot from WMT of this. Do you have any ideas what has gone wrong here? is it wrong, or is this what you would expect to see? Many thanks Paul ScreenHunter_18%20Feb.%2021%2010.55.jpg
Technical SEO | | TheUniqueSEO0 -
Do rss feeds help seo?
If we put relevant RSS feeds on a site, will it help the SEO value? Years ago, I shied away from RSS feeds because they slowed the site down and I didn't like relying on them. However, the past couple years, the Internet has become better, especially in Alaska.
Technical SEO | | manintights280 -
If you only want your home page to rank, can you use rel="canonical" on all your other pages?
If you have a lot of pages with 1 or 2 inbound links, what would be the effect of using rel="canonical" to point all those pages to the home page? Would it boost the rankings of the home page? As I understand it, your long-tail keyword traffic would start landing on the home page instead of finding what they were looking for. That would be bad, but might be worth it.
Technical SEO | | watchcases0