Can't get auto-generated content de-indexed
-
Hello and thanks in advance for any help you can offer me!
Customgia.com, a costume jewelry e-commerce site, has two types of product pages - public pages that are internally linked and private pages that are only accessible by accessing the URL directly. Every item on Customgia is created online using an online design tool. Users can register for a free account and save the designs they create, even if they don't purchase them. Prior to saving their design, the user is required to enter a product name and choose "public" or "private" for that design. The page title and product description are auto-generated.
Since launching in October '11, the number of products grew and grew as more users designed jewelry items. Most users chose to show their designs publicly, so the number of products in the store swelled to nearly 3000. I realized many of these designs were similar to each and occasionally exact duplicates. So over the past 8 months, I've made 2300 of these design "private" - and no longer accessible unless the designer logs into their account (these pages can also be linked to directly).
When I realized that Google had indexed nearly all 3000 products, I entered URL removal requests on Webmaster Tools for the designs that I had changed to "private". I did this starting about 4 months ago. At the time, I did not have NOINDEX meta tags on these product pages (obviously a mistake) so it appears that most of these product pages were never removed from the index. Or if they were removed, they were added back in after the 90 days were up.
Of the 716 products currently showing (the ones I want Google to know about), 466 have unique, informative descriptions written by humans. The remaining 250 have auto-generated descriptions that read coherently but are somewhat similar to one another. I don't think these 250 descriptions are the big problem right now but these product pages can be hidden if necessary.
I think the big problem is the 2000 product pages that are still in the Google index but shouldn't be. The following Google query tells me roughly how many product pages are in the index: site:Customgia.com inurl:shop-for
Ideally, it should return just over 716 results but instead it's returning 2650 results. Most of these 1900 product pages have bad product names and highly similar, auto-generated descriptions and page titles. I wish Google never crawled them.
Last week, NOINDEX tags were added to all 1900 "private" designs so currently the only product pages that should be indexed are the 716 showing on the site. Unfortunately, over the past ten days the number of product pages in the Google index hasn't changed.
One solution I initially thought might work is to re-enter the removal requests because now, with the NOINDEX tags, these pages should be removed permanently. But I can't determine which product pages need to be removed because Google doesn't let me see that deep into the search results. If I look at the removal request history it says "Expired" or "Removed" but these labels don't seem to correspond in any way to whether or not that page is currently indexed. Additionally, Google is unlikely to crawl these "private" pages because they are orphaned and no longer linked to any public pages of the site (and no external links either).
Currently, Customgia.com averages 25 organic visits per month (branded and non-branded) and close to zero sales. Does anyone think de-indexing the entire site would be appropriate here? Start with a clean slate and then let Google re-crawl and index only the public pages - would that be easier than battling with Webmaster tools for months on end?
Back in August, I posted a similar problem that was solved using NOINDEX tags (de-indexing a different set of pages on Customgia): http://moz.com/community/q/does-this-site-have-a-duplicate-content-issue#reply_176813
Thanks for reading through all this!
-
I don't think there's any harm in submitting a new/full list, even if it duplicates past lists. The URLs haven't been removed, and you did fix the tags. This isn't like disavowing links - it's more of a technical issue. Worst case, it doesn't work, from what I've seen.
-
Thanks for helping me with this.
You are correct that all the product pages are in the same folder regardless of whether they are public or private so unfortunately, removing an entire folder isn't an option at this point.
When I go to Webmaster tools and view past removal requests, each one shows as either "Expired" or "Removed". WMT only allows me to resubmit the removal request if the label is "Expired". Going back past 90 days, many are still labeled "removed" but the further back I go, more and more say "Expired". There are too many requests to try to determine whether or not each page is indexed - so I think our best bet is to re-submit every expired private product page removal request and then monitor removal. Does this make sense?
Back in August, a Moz crawl showed tons of duplicates for the designer pages (the pages where the user actually designs the jewelry). Using NOINDEX tags and removal requests (credit to Dr. Pete and Everett Sizemore) the number of designer pages in the index dropped from 5K to exactly 8 - so it worked.
Our XML sitemap is dynamic and doesn't list private product pages.
-
It honestly sounds like you're on the right track - you do need to explicitly mark those (and META NOINDEX should be fine). Could you just request removal for all private pages? Worst case, Google removes some that aren't in the index, or attempts to. Since the public/private setting can be changed, you can't really put the private pages all in one folder (real or virtual) - that would make life easier, long-term, but probably isn't useful/appropriate for your case.
I'd also recommend having a clean XML sitemap with just the public entries (updated dynamically). That won't deindex the other pages, but it's one more cue Google can use. You want all of the signals you're sending to be consistent.
I agree with Doug, though - this is really tricky, because ideally you would want people to share these pages, and if you NOINDEX then you're losing out on that. My gut feeling is that, until your site is stronger, you probably can't support 3K near duplicates (and counting). If you want to get sophisticated, though, you could dynamically NOINDEX and only noindex posts that have very little content or our obvious dupes. As people fill out or share a product, you could remove the NOINDEX.
-
Hi Doug,
Thanks for the quick response. I will do my best to answer each of your points.
In Webmaster Tools, under Index Status, it shows 1781 pages indexed, with a high of 6515 on June 2, 2013. Not sure that helps to clarify anything but it's another piece of Google data to consider.
We continually monitor WMT and Analytics. I'm addressing this issue specifically because search impressions on our product pages average less than 5 impressions/day despite continuous improvements over the last 12 months - keyword research, better page titles/product names and longer, more informative descriptions. These 500 or so product pages are vastly better today than then were 12 months ago - but impressions have not improved at all.
Every design, public or private, has social/sharing buttons. As I mentioned above, these designs can all be linked to directly from any external website.
I think the category pages are sufficient. There is some fine-tuning that could be done in terms of how products are organized within categories but overall it's pretty solid and probably not an issue.
Our initial strategy was to attract long-tail traffic with user-generated content but the problem is most users gave their products personal, irrelevant (and possibly spammy) product names. There were other problems with the user generated designs as well - like one user who designed 15 earrings that looked exactly the same except for one bead which she changed to a different color for each design. Anyway, we left all these designs public for over 12 months - as more and more designs were added to the site, organic search traffic actually fell.
-
I agree with Doug.
create better category pages - make sure each product page is under a category.
the user generated products are great and should be indexed.
-
Hey Richard,
First, note that the estimated number of pages displayed by that is an estimate which gets refined the deeper you go into the search results. On page one, they tend to be wildly inaccurate.
If you go all the way to the end (page 13) and then repeat the process with ommitted results included you still get to page 13, and a total of 123 pages. (Somewhat better than the 2k+ results.)
This is less than the 716 pages you mention so maybe you've got he opposite problem? What do you see if you check your google analytics and webmaster tools? Which pages are getting organic traffic from google? Which pages are showing in the search results (Webmaster Tools, Impressions)
What are the pages you want to appear in search and what are the keywords you're targeting?
My first thought is - if you're allowing people to design your own jewellery - are you also allowing them to easily share their creations on social, etc? Have you got embed codes so that they can put their designs on their blog etc? If you're not then I think you're missing a trick.
All of these individual items, designed by users, will (should) all be linking back to the specific category pages (or other landning page) and increasing the authority of that page. Make sure your category/landing pages have good unique content that communicates both the value proposition and the products you've got available.
If you don't have these category pages, then it might be worth looking at your site architecture/hierarchy and think about creating them.
Your individual product pages might get long-tail traffic (and having lots of different variations, described in real-people's own words might actually work to your advantage here), your category pages should be the ones targeting head terms.
I notice you've no-indexed and no-followed the product pages in question. This means that if these pages are shared, then any inbound authority/link equity/link-juice/ is just being discarded. Are you sure you want to do that?
I don't think you need to worry too much about google's index at this point and I certainly wouldn't consider deindexing the whole site.
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
-
Mobile site scrolls past content straight to the products. Can this affect our seo?
As our content can be quite long at the top, we introduced js anchor scroll going straight to the products, by passing the banner and the content at the top. Can this have an issue on seo?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JH_OffLimits1 -
Can anyone tell me why this page has content wider than screen?
I am getting that error on my product pages. This link is in the errors http://www.wolfautomation.com/drive-accessory-safety-sto-module-i500 but when I look at it on mobile it is fine.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Tylerj0 -
Duplicate Content through 'Gclid'
Hello, We've had the known problem of duplicate content through the gclid parameter caused by Google Adwords. As per Google's recommendation - we added the canonical tag to every page on our site so when the bot came to each page they would go 'Ah-ha, this is the original page'. We also added the paramter to the URL parameters in Google Wemaster Tools. However, now it seems as though a canonical is automatically been given to these newly created gclid pages; below https://www.google.com.au/search?espv=2&q=site%3Awww.mypetwarehouse.com.au+inurl%3Agclid&oq=site%3A&gs_l=serp.3.0.35i39l2j0i67l4j0i10j0i67j0j0i131.58677.61871.0.63823.11.8.3.0.0.0.208.930.0j3j2.5.0....0...1c.1.64.serp..8.3.419.nUJod6dYZmI Therefore these new pages are now being indexed, causing duplicate content. Does anyone have any idea about what to do in this situation? Thanks, Stephen.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MyPetWarehouse0 -
Penalized because of Pharma Wordpress Hack, Fixed, When can we expect to get out?
Hey Guys, so one of our clients hired a web designers to re do his site. Unfortunately in the process the client got a nasty pharma hack and we had to completely re do his site in drupal by scratch because it was so difficult to remove the hack. In this process his lost all his rankings, sub 100 and the hack produced super low quality links from drug related sites pointing to his pages. We're 100% certain the hack is gone, we've disavowed every link, and used WMT to deindex all the drug pages the hack had created. Still 2 weeks later he is sub 100. Does anyone else know of any way to push this along faster? I wish there was some way to get Google to recognize its fixed faster as his business is destroyed.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iAnalyst.com0 -
Link earning for local businesses who can't afford content marketing
What are some of the best ways to earn and build quality relevant links that will increase exposure to your target market in addition to assisting search rankings? I personally find that local niche directories and PR are the best ways to accomplish this without having content to "earn links"..what else works? Any interesting ideas??
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Technical Automated Content - Indexing & Value
One of my clients provides some Financial Analysis tools, which generate automated content on a daily basis for a set of financial derivatives. Basically they try to estimate through technical means weather a particular share price is going up or down, during the day as well as their support and resistance levels. These tools are fairly popular with the visitors, however I'm not sure on the 'quality' of the content from a Google Perspective. They keep an archive of these tools which tally up to nearly a 100 thousand pages, what bothers me particularly is that the content in between each of these varies only slightly. Textually there are maybe up to 10-20 different phrases which describe the move for the day, however the page structure is otherwise similar, except for the Values which are thought to be reached on a daily basis. They believe that it could be useful for users to be able to access back-dated information to be able to see what happened in the past. The main issue is however that there is currently no back-links at all to any of these pages and I assume Google could deem these to be 'shallow' provide little content which as time passes become irrelevant. And I'm not sure if this could cause a duplicate content issue; however they already add a Date in the Title Tags, and in the content to differentiate. I am not sure how I should handle these pages; is it possible to have Google prioritize the 'daily' published one. Say If I published one today; if I had to search "Derivative Analysis" I would see the one which is dated today rather then the 'list-view' or any other older analysis.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jonmifsud0 -
Preferred domain can't set in Web master Tool
I have put my domain name as xxxxxtours.com without www in web master tool. i have redirect to www version using htaccess file .So I wanna put Preferred domain "Display urls as www.xxxxtours.com .When trying it give error as attached image.but i have verified site the .waiting for expert help . Ar5qx.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | innofidelity0 -
Can you see the 'indexing rules' that are in place for your own site?
By 'index rules' I mean the stipulations that constitute whether or not a given page will be indexed. If you can see them - how?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Visually0