Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Crawl solutions for landing pages that don't contain a robots.txt file?
-
My site (www.nomader.com) is currently built on Instapage, which does not offer the ability to add a robots.txt file. I plan to migrate to a Shopify site in the coming months, but for now the Instapage site is my primary website. In the interim, would you suggest that I manually request a Google crawl through the search console tool? If so, how often? Any other suggestions for countering this Meta Noindex issue?
-
No problem Tom. Thanks for the additional info — that is helpful to know.
-
Bryan,
I’m glad that you found what you where looking for.
I must have missed the part about it being 100% Instapage when you said CMS I thought meant something on else with instapage I think of it as landing pages not a CMS
I want to help so you asked about Google search console how often you need to request google index your site.
First make sure
You should have 5 urls in Google search console
your domain, http://www. , http:// , https://www. & https://
- nomader.com
- https://www.nomader.com
- https://nomader.com
- http;//www.nomader.com
- http://nomader.com
you should not have to requests google index once you’re pages are in googles index. There is no time line to make you need to requests google index.
Use search consoles index system to see if you need to make a request and look for notifications
Times you should request google crawl when adding new unlinked pages , when making big changes to your site , whatever adding pages with out a xml sitemap or fixing problems / testing.
I want to help so as you said you’re going to be using Shopify.
Just before you go live running on Shopify in the future you should make a xml sitemap of the Instapage site
You can do it for free using https://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/
you’re running now name it /sitemap_ip.xml or /sitemap2.xml upload it to Shopify
& make sure it’s not the same name so it will work with your Shopify xml sitemap /sitemap.xml
submit the /sitemap._ip.xml to search console then add the Shopify /sitemap.xml
You can run multiple xml sitemaps as long as they are not overlapping
just remember never add non-200 page, 404s, 300sno flow , no index or redirects to a xml sitemap ScreamingFrog will ask if you want to when you’re making the sitemap.
Shopify will make its own xml sitemaps and and having the current site as a second xml sitemap will help to make sure your change to the site will not hurt the intipage par of the Shopify site
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/34592?hl=en
know adding a XML Sitemap is a smart move
I hope that was of help I’m so about miss what you meant.
respectfully,
Tom
-
Thanks so much for your thoughtful, detailed response. That answers my question.
-
Bryan,
If I understand your intent, you want your pages indexed. I see that your site has 5 pages indexed (/, /help, /influencers, /wholesale, /co-brand). And that you have some other pages (e.g. /donations), which are not indexed, but these have "noindex" tags explicitly in their HEAD sections.
Not having a robots.txt file is equal to having a robots.txt file with a directive to allow crawling of all pages. This is per http://www.robotstxt.org/orig.html, where they say "The presence of an empty "/robots.txt" file has no explicit associated semantics, it will be treated as if it was not present, i.e. all robots will consider themselves welcome."
So, if you have no robots.txt file, the search engine will feel free to crawl everything it discovers, and then whether or not it indexes those pages will be guided by presence or absence of NOINDEX tags in your HEAD sections. From a quick browse of your site and its indexed pages, this seems to be working properly.
Note that I'm referencing a distinction between "crawling" and "indexing". The robots.txt file provides directives for crawling (i.e. access discovered pages, and discovering pages linked to those). Whereas the meta robots tags in the head provide directives for indexing (i.e. including the discovered pages in search index and displaying those as results to searchers). And in this context, absence of a robots.txt file simply allows the search engine to crawl all of your content, discover all linked pages, and then rely on meta robots directives in those pages for any guidance on whether or not to index those pages it finds.
As for a sitemap, while they are helpful for monitoring indexation, and also provide help to search engines to discover all desired pages, in your case it doesn't look especially necessary. Again, I only took a quick look, but it seems you have your key pages all linked from your home page, and you have meta directives in pages you wish to keep out of the index. And you have a very small number of pages. So, it looks like you are meeting your crawl and indexation desires.
-
Hi Tom,
Unfortunately, Instapage is a proprietary CMS that does not currently support robots.txt or site maps. Instapage is primarily built for landing pages, and not actual websites so that's their reasoning for not adding SEO support for basics like robots.txt and site maps.
Thanks anyway for your help.
Best,
-Bryan
-
hi
so I see the problem now
https://www.nomader.com/robots.txt
Does not have a robots.txt file upload it to the root of your server or specific place where Developer and/or CMS / Hosting company recommends I could not figure out what to type of CMS you’re useing if you’re using one
make a robots.txt file using
http://tools.seobook.com/robots-txt/generator/
https://www.internetmarketingninjas.com/seo-tools/robots-txt-generator/exportrobots.php
https://moz.com/learn/seo/robotstxt
It will look like this below.
User-Agent: *
Disallow:Sitemap: https://www.nomader.com/sitemap.xml
it looks like you’re using Java for your website?
https://builtwith.com/detailed/nomader.com
I am guessing you’re not using a subdomain to host the Landing Pages?
If you are using a subdomain you would have to create a robots.txt file for that but from everything I can see you’re using your regular domain. So you would simply create these files ( i’m in a car on a cell phone so I did quick to see check if you have a XML site map file but I do think you do
https://www.nomader.com/sitemap.xml
You can purchase a tool called Screaming Frog SEO spider if your site is over 500 pages you will need to pay for it it’s approximately $200 however you will be able to create a wonderful site map you can also create a XML site map by googling xml sitemap generators. However I would recommend Screaming Prod because you can separate the images and it’s a very good tool to have.
Because you will need to generate a new site map whenever you update your site or add Landing Pages it will be done using screaming frog and uploaded to the same place in the server. Unless you can create a dynamic sitemap using whatever website of the infrastructure structure using.
Here are the directions to add your site Google Search Console / Google Webmaster Tools
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/34592?hl=en
If you need any help with any of this please do not hesitate to ask I am more than happy to help you can also generate a site map in the old version of Google Webmaster Tools / Google Search Console.
Hope this helps,
Tom
-
Thanks for the reply Thomas. Where do you see that my site has the robots.txt file? As far as I can tell, it is missing. Instapage does not offer robots.txt as I mentioned in my post. Here's a community help page of theirs where this question was asked and answered: https://help.instapage.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/213622968-Sitemap-and-Robotx-txt
So in the absence of having a robots.txt file, I guess the only way to counter this is to manually request a fetch/index from Google console? How often do you recommend I do this?
-
You don’t need to worry about instapage & robot.txt your site has the robots.txt & instapage is not set to no index.
so yes use google search console to fetch / index the pages it’s very easy if you read the help information I posted below
https://help.instapage.com/hc/en-us#
hope that helps,
Tom
-
If you cannot turn off “Meta Noindex“ you cannot fix it with robots.txt I suggest you contact the developer of the Instapage landing pages app. If it’s locked to no index as you said that is the only of for countering a pre coded by the company Meta Noindex issue?
I will look into this for you I bet that you can change it but not via robots.txt. I
will update it in the morning for you.
All the best,
Tom
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
-
Rel=Canonical For Landing Pages
We have PPC landing pages that are also ranking in organic search. We've decided to create new landing pages that have been improved to rank better in natural search. The PPC team however wants to use their original landing pages so we are unable to 301 these pages to the new pages being created. We need to block the old PPC pages from search. Any idea if we can use rel=canonical? The difference between old PPC page and new landing page is much more content to support keyword targeting and provide value to users. Google says it's OK to use rel=canonical if pages are similar but not sure if this applies to us. The old PPC pages have 1 paragraph of content followed by featured products for sale. The new pages have 4-5 paragraphs of content and many more products for sale. The other option would be to add meta noindex to the old PPC landing pages. Curious as to what you guys think. Thanks.
Technical SEO | | SoulSurfer80 -
Is sitemap required on my robots.txt?
Hi, I know that linking your sitemap from your robots.txt file is a good practice. Ok, but... may I just send my sitemap to search console and forget about adding ti to my robots.txt? That's my situation: 1 multilang platform which means... ... 2 set of pages. One for each lang, of course But my CMS (magento) only allows me to have 1 robots.txt file So, again: may I have a robots.txt file woth no sitemap AND not suffering any potential SEO loss? Thanks in advance, Juan Vicente Mañanas Abad
Technical SEO | | Webicultors0 -
Should I disavow links from pages that don't exist any more
Hi. Im doing a backlinks audit to two sites, one with 48k and the other with 2M backlinks. Both are very old sites and both have tons of backlinks from old pages and websites that don't exist any more, but these backlinks still exist in the Majestic Historic index. I cleaned up the obvious useless links and passed the rest through Screaming Frog to check if those old pages/sites even exist. There are tons of link sending pages that return a 0, 301, 302, 307, 404 etc errors. Should I consider all of these pages as being bad backlinks and add them to the disavow file? Just a clarification, Im not talking about l301-ing a backlink to a new target page. Im talking about the origin page generating an error at ping eg: originpage.com/page-gone sends me a link to mysite.com/product1. Screamingfrog pings originpage.com/page-gone, and returns a Status error. Do I add the originpage.com/page-gone in the disavow file or not? Hope Im making sense 🙂
Technical SEO | | IgorMateski0 -
Blocking Affiliate Links via robots.txt
Hi, I work with a client who has a large affiliate network pointing to their domain which is a large part of their inbound marketing strategy. All of these links point to a subdomain of affiliates.example.com, which then redirects the links through a 301 redirect to the relevant target page for the link. These links have been showing up in Webmaster Tools as top linking domains and also in the latest downloaded links reports. To follow guidelines and ensure that these links aren't counted by Google for either positive or negative impact on the site, we have added a block on the robots.txt of the affiliates.example.com subdomain, blocking search engines from crawling the full subddomain. The robots.txt file is the following code: User-agent: * Disallow: / We have authenticated the subdomain with Google Webmaster Tools and made certain that Google can reach and read the robots.txt file. We know they are being blocked from reading the affiliates subdomain. However, we added this affiliates subdomain block a few weeks ago to the robots.txt, but links are still showing up in the latest downloads report as first being discovered after we added the block. It's been a few weeks already, and we want to make sure that the block was implemented properly and that these links aren't being used to negatively impact the site. Any suggestions or clarification would be helpful - if the subdomain is being blocked for the search engines, why are the search engines following the links and reporting them in the www.example.com subdomain GWMT account as latest links. And if the block is implemented properly, will the total number of links pointing to our site as reported in the links to your site section be reduced, or does this not have an impact on that figure?From a development standpoint, it's a much easier fix for us to adjust the robots.txt file than to change the affiliate linking connection from a 301 to a 302, which is why we decided to go with this option.Any help you can offer will be greatly appreciated.Thanks,Mark
Technical SEO | | Mark_Ginsberg0 -
Will an XML sitemap override a robots.txt
I have a client that has a robots.txt file that is blocking an entire subdomain, entirely by accident. Their original solution, not realizing the robots.txt error, was to submit an xml sitemap to get their pages indexed. I did not think this tactic would work, as the robots.txt would take precedent over the xmls sitemap. But it worked... I have no explanation as to how or why. Does anyone have an answer to this? or any experience with a website that has had a clear Disallow: / for months , that somehow has pages in the index?
Technical SEO | | KCBackofen0 -
Googlebot does not obey robots.txt disallow
Hi Mozzers! We are trying to get Googlebot to steer away from our internal search results pages by adding a parameter "nocrawl=1" to facet/filter links and then robots.txt disallow all URLs containing that parameter. We implemented this late august and since that, the GWMT message "Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site", stopped coming. But today we received yet another. The weird thing is that Google gives many of our nowadays robots.txt disallowed URLs as examples of URLs that may cause us problems. What could be the reason? Best regards, Martin
Technical SEO | | TalkInThePark0 -
Invisible robots.txt?
So here's a weird one... Client comes to me for some simple changes, turns out there are some major issues with the site, one of which is that none of the correct content pages are showing up in Google, just ancillary (outdated) ones. Looks like an issue because even the main homepage isn't showing up with a "site:domain.com" So, I add to Webmaster Tools and, after an hour or so, I get the red bar of doom, "robots.txt is blocking important pages." I check it out in Webmasters and, sure enough, it's a "User agent: * Disallow /" ACK! But wait... there's no robots.txt to be found on the server. I can go to domain.com/robots.txt and see it but nothing via FTP. I upload a new one and, thankfully, that is now showing but I've never seen that before. Question is: can a robots.txt file be stored in a way that can't be seen? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | joshcanhelp0 -
Robots.txt and canonical tag
In the SEOmoz post - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/robot-access-indexation-restriction-techniques-avoiding-conflicts, it's being said - If you have a robots.txt disallow in place for a page, the canonical tag will never be seen. Does it so happen that if a page is disallowed by robots.txt, spiders DO NOT read the html code ?
Technical SEO | | seoug_20050