"INDEX,FOLLOW" then later in the code "NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW" which does google follow?
-
background info: we have an established closed E-commerce system which the company has been using for years. I have only just started and reviewing the system, I don't have direct access to the code, but can request changes, but it could take months before the changes are in effect (or done at all), and we won't can't change to a new E-commerce system for the short to mid term.
While reviewing the site (with help of seomoz crawl diagnostics) I noticed that some of the existing "landing pages" have in the code:
<meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">INDEX,FOLLOW</a>" /> then a few lines later
<meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW</a>" />
Which the crawl diagnostics flagged up, but in the webmaster tools says
"We didn't detect any issues with non-indexable content on your site."so the question is which instructions does google follow? the first or 2nd?
note: clearly this is need fixed, but I have a big list of changes for the system so I need to know how important this is
tthanks
-
I've never actually had any errors listed for non-indexable content in the HTML Improvements section of WMT. So I'm not 100% sure what would set off that notification. Though the sites I work on do have a number of pages that are NoIndex and/or NoFollow. So i guess the issue would be caused not by purposefully blocking the page but some other means that makes your page unable to be crawled properly.
-
Yeah I did that after posting the question I started test like that, but its not coming up and searching the url does not show the page, but other normal pages ("lower" pages) are showing (that don't have this problem), so it seems that it is de-indexed those pages.
its weird that webmaster tools say ""We didn't detect any issues with non-indexable content on your site.", when there are.
Getting this sorted one way or another is my top priority
-
If you copy a string of text on the page and paste it into google search, does your page show up in the results? If so, then its being indexed despite the second robots tag. If it doesn't show up, then its not being indexed. So importance would rely on whether you want that page to be indexed and whether or not it is being indexed. Either way, you should look into cleaning that up at some point.
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
-
Does Index Status Goes Down If Website is Penalized by Google?
Hi Friends, Few of my friends told me that index status of a website goes down goes if it is penalized by Google. I can see my organic traffic has went down drastically after the Panda update on July 17th 2015 but index status still remains the same. So, I am bit confused. Any advice on this.
Technical SEO | | Prabhu.Sundar0 -
Are nofollow, noindex meta tags healthy for this particular situation?
Hi mozzers, I am conducting an audit for a client and found over 200 instances using meta tags(nofollow, noindex). These were implemented essentially on Blog pages/category pages, tags not blog posts which is a good sign. I believe that tagged URLs aren't something to worry about since these create tons of duplicates. In regards to the category page, i feel that it falls in the same basket as tags but I am not positive about it. Can someone tell me if these are fine to have noindex, nofollow? Also on the website subnav which are related to the category pages mentioned prev, the webmaster have implemented noindex,follow(screenshot below), which seems ok to me? am i right? Thanks 8egLLbo.png?1
Technical SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
How can I stop google indexing an image
I have put a map of cornwall on my site on the Corwnall Page, and for some reason Google.de has picked it up and shows it up in the top 4 images for a search for cornwall? The result is I am getting about 80% of the traffic coming to my site for the search Cornwall (I get about 50 unique visits per day, over 40 a day are landing on the Cornwall page. Is this a problem for my normal SEO as a Close up Magician? Will google start to think my site is about Cornwall? Should I noindex the image (I say that like I know how! - How do I noindex that image? ) Or is any traffic to a site good traffic, I imagine they will be clicking on the link landing on the page and then leaving, which I suspect is not good for google reputation. Any thoughts anyone Thanks Roger http://www.rogerlapin.co.uk Where they land http://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=http://www.rogerlapin.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/map-of-cornwall.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.rogerlapin.co.uk/magician-cornwall-magicians-hire-cornwall&h=904&w=1000&sz=167&tbnid=9GFlDv3BTz4ikM:&tbnh=99&tbnw=110&zoom=1&usg=__-b4bUYWREU_wAy2M04LrsrkzZpw=&docid=AUFmzso0arbGDM&sa=X&ei=HLZ2UpGYDMrY0QWXp4D4Dg&ved=0CEgQ9QEwAw&dur=2958
Technical SEO | | rnperki0 -
Meta data & xml sitemaps for mobile sites when using rel="canonical"/rel="alternate" annotations
When using rel="canonical" and rel="alternate" annotations between mobile and desktop sites (rel="canonical" on mobile, pointing to desktop, and rel="alternate" on desktop pointing to mobile), what are everyone's thoughts on using meta data on the mobile site? Is it necessary? And also, what is the common consensus on using a separate mobile xml sitemap?
Technical SEO | | 4Ps0 -
What is "canonical." And what do I need to do to fix it?
I'm seeing about 450 warnings on this. What is "Using rel=canonical suggests to search engines which URL should be seen as canonical." And what do I need to do to fix it?
Technical SEO | | KimCalvert0 -
NoIndex/NoFollow pages showing up when doing a Google search using "Site:" parameter
We recently launched a beta version of our new website in a subdomain of our existing site. The existing site is www.fonts.com with the beta living at new.fonts.com. We do not want Google to crawl the new site until it's out of beta so we have added the following on all pages: However, one of our team members noticed that google is displaying results from new.fonts.com when doing an "site:new.fonts.com" search (see attached screenshot). Is it possible that Google is indexing the content despite the noindex, nofollow tags? We have double checked the syntax and it seems correct except the trailing "/". I know Google still crawls noindexed pages, however, the fact that they're showing up in search results using the site search syntax is unsettling. Any thoughts would be appreciated! DyWRP.png
Technical SEO | | ChrisRoberts-MTI0 -
How "Optimised" is my home page content
Good afternoon from 1 degrees C overcast frozen wetherby UK... I've made a number of on page html markup changes to optimise the page for steel suppliers steel stockholders but I'd like to know if there are any other on page improvments I could make for this page http://www.barrettsteel.com/ Im particulary concerned that contnet in in li tags and not p, could this be an issue? And finaaly on the home page a third party developer has slapped a header banner pointing to an external site know as woodberry tools, that cant be good can it? Any insights welcome 🙂
Technical SEO | | Nightwing0 -
We are still seeing duplicate content on SEOmoz even though we have marked those pages as "noindex, follow." Any ideas why?
We have many pages on our website that have been set to "no index, follow." However, SEOmoz is indexing them as duplicate content. Why is that?
Technical SEO | | cmaseattle0