Staging & Development areas should be not indexable (i.e. no followed/no index in meta robots etc)
-
Hi
I take it if theres a staging or development area on a subdomain for a site, who's content is hence usually duplicate then this should not be indexable i.e. (no-indexed & nofollowed in metarobots) ? In order to prevent dupe content probs as well as non project related people seeing work in progress or finding accidentally in search engine listings ?
Also if theres no such info in meta robots is there any other way it may have been made non-indexable, or at least dupe content prob removed by canonicalising the page to the equivalent page on the live site ?
In the case in question i am finding it listed in serps when i search for the staging/dev area url, so i presume this needs urgent attention ?
Cheers
Dan
-
- use robots.txt vs the meta tags - robots.txt is preferred.
-
I'm about to issue these instructions would appreciate it if you could quickly confirm covers your advice correctly and nothing missing:
1) Setup a completely different GWT account unrelated to the main site, so that there is a new GWT account specific to the staging subdomain
2) Add a robots.txt on the staging area subdomain site that disallows all pages and all crawlers OR use the noindex meta tag on all pages. Its obviously very important when you update the main site it DOES NOTinclude or push out these files too (since that would result in main site or pages being de-indexed)3) Request removal of all pages in GWT. Leave the form blank for the page to be removed since this will remove the entire site4) After about 1 month (or you see that the pages are all out of the serps), and google has spidered and seen the robots.txt, then put up a password on the entire staging site.Note:For brand new sites staging areas that don't yet exist or exist but are new and not yet showing up in the index then simply add a password for human access to prevent the above process being required in the future. -
Thanks for clarifying that CleverPHD & thanks again for all your help and great advice
Have a great weekend !!
All Best
Dan
-
That is a completely valid question. This is why setting up the separate GWT account for the dev.domain.ext vs www.domain.ext. When you submit the removal request it will only be in the dev.domain.ext account.
The only thing you want to watch is that if you setup robots.txt in your dev environment you want to make sure that it does not get pushed out to your production server. That is the only gotcha as I see it.
-
thanks !
as er my last question theres no risk of accidentally taking out the main site as part of this process ?
cheers
dan
-
Thanks so much for that great advice
just a bit worried about accidentally getting main site removed by accident, i take it so long as its a brand new GWT account for that specific subdomain then this cant happen ?
Cheers
Dan
-
Here is a Google documentation on how to use the GWT to remove a page/directory/site and then the interaction with robots.txt
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2010/03/url-removal-explained-part-i-urls.html
"In order for a directory or site-wide removal to be successful, the directory or site must be disallowed in the site's robots.txt file."
Side story. I once had a subdomain that I needed to take out, but I could not modify the robots.txt file properly (long story). So, we used the GWT tool and the meta noindex tag. It still worked, but I think that would only be a backup approach to the one suggested by the documentation.
-
Usually, this would be true that you would need to use the noindex tag to get things out of the SERPs and need to leave the robots.txt "open" to the crawlers. But when you are working with the remove URL tool in GWT,they rx that you then put the site in robots.txt to keep them out of it
The removal tool in GWT takes care of Google taking the URLs out and then the robots.txt keeps the bots from coming back. Just a different sequence than if you were to use the noindex meta.
-
If you create the GWT account for the dev site and you submit for removal, GWT requires that you either a) have the site blocked in robots.tx or have a noindex meta tag on the pages. Otherwise they will just crawl you again later and you are back in the index. See my post from earlier.
-
Short answer - no dev sites should be public to start with to anyone (let along Google et alia). The simplest way is to put an htacess password on all your dev sites. You can do a password per person in your company, or just one general one that everyone on the dev team shares.
If you do have a dev site in the Serps, the simplest way to get it out is to setup a GWT account for that subdomain and then e.g. dev.yourdomain.ext and then go into that account and request removal of all pages. You just leave the form blank for the page to be removed and it takes out the whole site. You then need a robots.txt on dev.yourdomain.ext (different from the www. version) that disallows all pages all crawlers - that or use the noindex meta tag on all page.
After about 1 month (or you see that the pages are all out of the serps), then I would put up a password on that entire site and be done with it. Key point, dont put the password up until you let google try to spider and it sees the robots etc.
Also, if you have any other staging sites that are out there like test.yourdomain.ext etc. If they are not indexed, go ahead and put the password up on them to limit your exposure.
Public dev sites are the fastest way to get duplicate content into the index and to jack with the ranking of your current site. It is key that all of them are locked down. If one of your developers say it is no big deal, call BS, it is a big deal and it can cause a big mess.
-
Hey Dan,
In this case, I would not exclude crawling via robots.txt. Perhaps later after you have verified the URLs are out of the index.
Just because Google can't crawl a page, doesn't mean they won't keep it in the index. Excluding crawling will not get a page out of the index.
Add the NOINDEX, FOLLOW tag you listed above and give it some time.
Use GWT if it's urgent or the information is sensitive.
-
Thanks Anthony,
The staging area already exists and is indexable as far as i can tell
So i need to tell developers to exclude crawling via robots.txt, add a no-index tag to head of each page but keep it followed so still crawlable i.e. within the Head section of every page on the dev area
OR alternatively just remove urls from GWT)
If excluding crawling via robots.txt file then why do you need to add a noindex tag to each page too, surely the robots.txt deals with this situation ?
cheers
dan
-
Ideally when creating a new staging area, you'd want to exclude crawling via robots.txt.
Add the NoIndex tag to the head of your pages to get them removed from the SERPs. Make sure the page is still crawlable though, as if you exclude it in robots.txt first and then NoIndex it, Google won't be able to see the new NoIndex tag.
If there are not a lot of pages to remove, you can request page removal within Google Webmaster Tools.
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
-
How to index Backlink Fast
hi, From the past some month i am facing the problem in indexing backlinks, please share the method to index backlink in google fast
Technical SEO | | vijay231 -
Why are my images not being indexed?
I have submitted an image sitemap with over 2,000 images yet only about 35 have been indexed. Could you please help me understand why Google is not indexing my images? www.creative-calendars.com
Technical SEO | | nicole20140 -
Http:// to https:// 301 or 302 redirect
I've read over the Q & A in the Community, but am wondering the reasoning behind this issue. I know - 301's are permanent and pass links, and 302s are temporary (due to cache) and don't pass links. But, I've run across two sites now that 302 redirect http:// to https://. Is there a valid reason behind this? From my POV and research, the redirect should 301 if it's permanent, but is there a larger issue I am missing?
Technical SEO | | FOTF_DigitalMarketing1 -
WordPress - How to stop both http:// and https:// pages being indexed?
Just published a static page 2 days ago on WordPress site but noticed that Google has indexed both http:// and https:// url's. Usually I only get http:// indexed though. Could anyone please explain why this may have happened and how I can fix? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Clicksjim1 -
Correct Redirect method for switching pages from .html to /pretty urls/
I have a customer that has all his site files as .html extensions and i'm going to rebuild this site into a wordpress site for easier management, regarding the new permalink structure, should i just do a 301 redirect on this?
Technical SEO | | tgr0ss0 -
Long Meta Descriptions
I want to create a template for Meta titles, descriptions and keywords on my website for old news and minor pages in order to get some long tail traffic from them. The only template I can think to use for the descriptions takes the first sentence of the news article (which often if above 160 characters). Since these are minor pages, how big of a problem is that? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | theLotter0 -
E-commerce Optimization
If you're optimizing an e-commerce site where you sell a certain brand of product, can you re-use the product descriptions from that brand's store? For example, if I'm selling Nike's, can I use the product descriptions and info from the Nike product pages? (This is not what I'm selling). Or should you write your own descriptions. I understand that original content is best, but in an online store situation, how do you write up a product description that's different from the original? It is what it is, right?
Technical SEO | | MichaelWeisbaum0 -
Google News not indexing .index.html pages
Hi all, we've been asked by a blog to help them better indexing and ranking on Google News (with the site being already included in Google News with poor results) The blog had a chronicle URL duplication problem with each post existing with 3 different URLs: #1) www.domain.com/post.html (currently in noindex for editorial choices as showing all the comments) #2) www.domain.com/post/index.html (currently indexed showing only top comments) #3) www.domain.com/post/ (very same as #2) We've chosen URL #2 (/index.html) as canonical URL, and included a rel=canonical tag on URL #3 (/) linking to URL #2.
Technical SEO | | H-FARM
Also we've submitted yesterday a Google News sitemap including consistently the list of URLs #2 from the last 48h . The sitemap has been properly "digested" by Google and shows that all URLs have been sent and indexed. However if we use the site:domain.com command on Google News we see something completely different: Google News has indexed actually only some news and more specifically only the URLs #3 type (ending with the trailing slash instead of /index.html). Why ? What's wrong ? a) Does Google News bot have problems indexing URLs ending with .index.html ? While figuring out what's wrong we've found out that http://news.google.it/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=inurl%3Aindex.html gives no results...it seems that Google News index overall does not include any URLs ending with /index.html b) Does Google News bot recognise rel=canonical tag ? c) Is it just a matter of time and then Google News will pick up the right URLs (/index.html) and/or shall we communicate Google News team any changes ? d) Any suggestions ? OR Shall we do the other way around. meaning make URL #3 the canonical one ? While Google News is showing these problems, Google Web search has actually well received the changes, so we don't know what to do. Thanks for your help, Matteo0