404's being re-indexed
-
Hi All,
We are experiencing issues with pages that have been 404'd being indexed. Originally, these were /wp-content/ index pages, that were included in Google's index. Once I realized this, I added in a directive into our htaccess to 404 all of these pages - as there were hundreds. I tried to let Google crawl and remove these pages naturally but after a few months I used the URL removal tool to remove them manually.
However, Google seems to be continually re/indexing these pages, even after they have been manually requested for removal in search console. Do you have suggestions? They all respond to 404's.
Thanks
-
Just to follow up - I have now actually 410'd the pages and the 410's are still being re-indexed.
-
I'll check this one out as well, thanks! I used a header response extension which reveals the presence of x-botots headers called web developer.
-
First it would be helpful to know how you are detecting that it isn't working. What indexation tool are you using to see whether the blocks are being detected? I personally really like this one: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/seo-indexability-check/olojclckfadnlhnlmlekdihebmjpjnoa?hl=en-GB
Or obviously at scale - Screaming Frog
-
Thank you for the quick response,
The pages are truly removed, however, because there were so many of these types of pages that leaked into the index, I added a redirect to keep users on our site - no intentions of being "shady", I just didn't want hundreds of 404's getting clicked and causing a very high bounce rate.
For the x-robots header, could you offer some insight into why my directive isn't working? I believe it's a regex issue on the wp-content. I have tried to troubleshoot to no avail.
<filesmatch <strong="">"(wp-content)">
Header set X-Robots-Tag: "noindex, nofollow"</filesmatch>I appreciate the help!
-
Well if a page has been removed and has not been moved to a new destination - you shouldn't redirect a user anyway (which kind of 'tricks' users into thinking the content was found). That's actually bad UX
If the content has been properly removed or was never supposed to be there, just leave it at a 410 (but maybe create a nice custom 410 page, in the same vein as a decent UX custom 404 page). Use the page to admit that the content is gone (without shady redirects) but to point to related posts or products. Let the user decide, but still be useful
If the content is actually still there and, hence you are doing a redirect - then you shouldn't be serving 404s or 410s in the first place. You should be serving 301s, and just doing HTTP redirects to the content's new (or revised) destination URL
Yes, the HTTP header method is the correct replacement when the HTML implementation gets stripped out. HTTP Header X-Robots is the way for you!
-
Thank you! I am in the process of doing so, however with a 410 I can not leave my JS redirect after the page loads, this creates some UX issues. Do you have any suggestions to remedy this?
Additionally, after the 410 the non x-robots noindex is now being stripped so it only resolves to a 410 with no noindex or redirect. I am still working on a noindex header, as the 410 is server-side, I assume this would be the only way, correct?
-
You know that 404 means "temporarily gone but will be coming back" right? By saying a page is temporarily unavailable, you actively encourage Google to come back later
If you want to say that the page is permanently gone use status code 410 (gone)
Leave the Meta no-index stuff in the HTTP header via X-Robots, that was a good call. But it was a bad call to combine Meta no-index and 404, as they contradict each other ("don't index me now but then do come back and index me later as I'll probably be back at some point")
Use Meta no-index and 410, which agree with each other ("don't index me now and don't bother coming back")
-
Yes, all pages have a noindex. I have also tried to noindex them using htaccess, to add an extra layer of security, but it seems to be incorrect. I believe it is an issue with the regex. Attempting to match anything with wp-content.
<filesmatch "(wp-content)"="">Header set X-Robots-Tag: "noindex, nofollow"</filesmatch>
-
Back to basics. Have you marked those pages/posts as 'no-index'. With many wp plugins, you can no-index them in bulk then submit for re-indexation.
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
-
URL Structure On Site - Currently it's domain/product-name NOT domain/category/product name is this bad?
I have a eCommerce site and the site structure is domain/product-name rather than domain/product-category/product-name Do you think this will have a negative impact SEO Wise? I have seen that some of my individual product pages do get better rankings than my categories.
Technical SEO | | the-gate-films0 -
Why are only a few of our pages being indexed
Recently rebuilt a site for an auctioneers, however it has a problem in that none of the lots and auctions are being indexed by Google on the new site, only the pages like About, FAQ, home, contact. Checking WMT shows that Google has crawled all the pages, and I've done a "Fetch as Google" on them and it loads up fine, so there's no crawling issues that is standing out. I've set the "URL Parameters" to no effect too. Also built a sitemap with all the lots in, pushed to Google which then crawled them all (massive spike in Crawl rate for a couple days), and still just indexing a handful of pages. Any clues to look into would be greatly appreciated. https://www.wilkinsons-auctioneers.co.uk/auctions/
Technical SEO | | Blue-shark0 -
Will multiple internal links with the same anchor text hurt a site's ranking?
Hello, I just watched this video from the Google Webmasters channel at YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ybpXU0ckKQ My question: If a site is built up on subdomains, will linking the different subdomains with exact anchor text hurt the site's ranking? Thanks
Technical SEO | | arnoldwender0 -
My blog post for a specific keyword is in the 'omitted results'. Why might this be, and how to overcome it?
My website Homepage: http://kulraj.org Here is the page I am working to rank for:** http://kulraj.org/2014/07/15/hedonic-treadmill/** When I search specifically for 'kulraj hedonic treadmill' just to test it, the first result is this: kulraj.org_/tag/_hedonic-treadmill. It shows the shortened version of the article that is within the Tag page. [I'm new to SEO and Moz, please keep in mind] Moz has told me I have duplicate content, which is regarding my main Blog page and Tags page, which is true the content is duplicate. However, the actual blog post itself is not displayed anywhere else on the website, or anywhere else on the web. Moz confirms this, and reports no duplicate content warning. My questions, therefore, are: 1. How do I actually go about installing a rel canonical tag within a standard WordPress dashboard (I'm using Genesis Framework) - I'm finding great difficulty finding instructions on this anywhere on the web. I clearly need to fix the issue with Blog page and Tags Page. 2. Why would my blog post be omitted, and are there any suggestions I could implement to bring it into the main search results. Other things I've noticed: 1. If I type this URL in: kulraj.org/hedonic-treadmill, it automatically redirects to http://kulraj.org/2014/07/15/hedonic-treadmill/ 2. Inside Google Webmaster Tools it says: No new messages or recent critical issues. 3. Regarding the above, when I click 'Labs > author stats' within Webmaster Tools, it shows nil stats, so something there is not quite right either, even though Google+ Authorship is confirmed.
Technical SEO | | Kulraj0 -
What's our easiest, quickest "win" for page load speed?
This is a follow up question to an earlier thread located here: http://www.seomoz.org/q/we-just-fixed-a-meta-refresh-unified-our-link-profile-and-now-our-rankings-are-going-crazy In that thread, Dr. Pete Meyers said "You'd really be better off getting all that script into external files." Our IT Director is willing to spend time working on this, but he believes it is a complicated process because each script must be evaluated to determine which ones are needed "pre" page load and which ones can be loaded "post." Our IT Director went on to say that he believes the quickest "win" we could get would be to move our SSL javascript for our SSL icon (in our site footer) to an internal page, and just link to that page from an image of the icon in the footer. He says this javascript, more than any other, slows our page down. My question is two parts: 1. How can I verify that this javascript is indeed, a major culprit of our page load speed? 2. Is it possible that it is slow because so many styles have been applied to the surrounding area? In other words, if I stripped out the "Secured by" text and all the syles associated with that, could that effect the efficiency of the script? 3. Are there any negatives to moving that javascript to an interior landing page, leaving the icon as an image in the footer and linking to the new page? Any thoughts, suggestions, comments, etc. are greatly appreciated! Dana
Technical SEO | | danatanseo0 -
Would duplicate listings effect a client's ranking if they used same address?
Lots of duplication on directory listings using similar or same address, just different company names... like so-and-so carpet cleaning; and another listing with so-and-so janitorial services. Now my client went from a rank around 3 - 4 to not even in the top 50 within a week. -- -- -- Would duplication cause this sudden drop? Not a lot of competition for a client using keyword (janitorial services nh); -- -- -- would a competitor that recently optimized a site cause this sudden drop? Client does need to optimize for this keyword, and they do need to clean up this duplication. (Unfortunately this drop happened first of March -- I provided the audit, recommendations/implementation and still awaiting the thumbs up to continue with implementation). --- --- --- Did Google make a change and possibly find these discrepancies within listings and suddenly drop this client's ranking? And they there's Google Places:
Technical SEO | | CeCeBar
Client usually ranks #1 for Google Places with up to 12 excellent reviews, so they are still getting a good spot on the first page. The very odd thing though is that Google is still saying that need to re-verify their Google places. I really would like to know for my how this knowledge how a Google Places account could still need verification and yet still rank so well within Google places on page results? because of great reviews? --- Any ideas here, too? _Cindy0 -
De-indexing thin content & Panda--any advantage to immediate de-indexing?
We added the nonidex, follow tag to our site about a week ago on several hundred URLs, and they are still in Google's index. I know de-indexing takes time, but I am wondering if having those URLs in the index will continue to "pandalize" the site. Would it be better to use the URL removal request? Or, should we just wait for the noindex tags to remove the URLs from the index?
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Why is this url showing as "not crawled" on opensiteexplorer, but still showing up in Google's index?
The below url is showing up as "not crawled" on opensitexplorer.com, but when you google the title tag "Joel Roberts, Our Family Doctors - Doctor in Clearwater, FL" it is showing up in the Google index. Can you explain why this is happening? Thank you http://doctor.webmd.com/physician_finder/profile.aspx?sponsor=core&pid=14ef09dd-e216-4369-99d3-460aa3c4f1ce
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0