Video SiteMap Updating
-
Hi all!
We noticed some issues with our sitemap and so we went through and optimized it to re-submit it. At the same time, it seemed prudent to optimize our video sitemap, however we probably should have thought through that more as we are seeing the numbers of indexed videos going down.
Why and what we changed:
We recently moved from flash/flv video to Html5 videos with webm and mp4. So it seemed prudent to change our sitemap which was using the old flv videos.
At the same time updating our videos with more SEO friendly titles seemed prudent.
So far our indexed videos from the video sitemap have gone from 70,000 to 28,000, so:
A. How much does a video sitemap depend on the URL of the web page versus the title and the video itself?
I am assuming that Google sees a new file extension and title and assumes that it is a completely new video and that might be why they are de-indexing the old ones?
I suppose we could go back and put the old sitemap to the old flv videos back up, but maybe we should just tough out the change and wait for the new videos to be indexed.
Thanks!!
Craig
-
Ilcho,
It sounds like you probably have a technical issue which is preventing your content from being indexed. I'm afraid I can't really offer more advice on this point, other to suggest paying a specialist to take a look into your specific situation.
Thanks,
Phil.
-
Hi Phil,
Just saw your answers, and they grabbed my attention. My problem is similar to Craig's.
In our case, we have the video pages indexed, but not the videos itself. We added both page URL (<loc>) and video content location (video:content_loc) in the video sitemap.
Is there a chance of canibalization or prioritization, since only the content loc URL has been indexed by Google, instead the full page URL?
Note: we added the schema.org properties as well (Embed URL).
Thanks</video:content_loc></loc>
-
Roger that Phil,
I figured as much, but didn't realize it could take that long. Since updating our sitemaps, it says that they have already crawled and indexed about 200,000 regular pages.
Hopefully the videos will kick in as well.
Thanks!
Craig
-
Hey Craig,
Unfortunately it's really difficult for me to offer you a decent answer for this blind (without trawling through the site and sitemaps) - but I expect that it's just a waiting game, yes.
If you've updated all your video embeds and the sitemaps to match that - then essentially Google need to recrawl and verify all your pages and videos. This will take time, especially for the number you're talking about - as, yes, Google will see these as new videos (they technically are).
There isn't a way to go back on this either, as if you've refreshed all your content and sitemaps - Going backwards Google will still need to recrawl everything.
I don't know how long you've been waiting - but I'd expect it to be a couple of months before everything is as it was, and that's if your site is SEOmoz kinda strengh - so DA90 odd..
Basically - I'd recommend just tracking this week by week and seeing if things improve. Make sure all the Sitemap entries are referenced via robots.txt as well as WMT and then hold tight. If you're still not having all the videos indexed after a couple of months, then you might need to drill down a bit deeper.
Cheers,
Phil.
-
Last question Phil. While webmaster tools is saying what it is saying, I am definitely seeing our old video records disappearing from Google. so this drop from 70,000 to 28,000 doesn't just seem to be a webmaster tools thing, but does appear to be showing itself in Google as well.
A search that was showing several video results a week ago, now shows none.
Should I be concerned or will the new ones come back in their place you think?
Is it just a waiting game at this point? I know that's the case with regular sitemaps, but those reference the same pages. I am a little concerned since Google is seeing these as all new videos. So, if Google sees them as all new and sends them to the back of the line, I think I would rather have the other flv ones back.
Thanks!
C
-
I've tried that before and only had it not work - I think it just confuses the algorithm. No real advantage in referencing both the .mp4 and .flv of the same file, as Google aren't preferential regarding the encapsulated format.
-
Thanks Phil!
Yeah, I am definitely learning how un-reliable WMT is and trusting it less and less...
Thanks for the input. Very much appreciated!
Craig
-
Hmm. Ever heard of putting in 2 different URLs for the same video? i.e.
<video:content_loc>House_Cat_Mauling_Postal_Worker.flvvideo:content_loc>
<video:content_loc>House_Cat_Mauling_Postal_Worker.mp4video:content_loc>
Thanks for the answer!
Craig
-
Hey Craig,
In short - it sounds like you're doing everything right and I'd be inclined to question the indexation stats first rather than the method you've implemented.
Q1) Neither are a major factor in the video getting indexed. Indexation on that front is essentially binary - it's either indexed, or Google doesn't accept some of the inputted tags and then won't provide a rich snippet
Re - deindexing old ones and indexing new ones, i think that's exactly what's happening. If you refresh all the content and the sitemaps, it will take a while for Google to crawl through and reindex everything properly.
I'd advise just sticking with it for now and waiting a few weeks to see if you can get everything indexed as it should be. If you've got some of the new videos indexed - then it means your implementation is correct and you'll probably just need to be patient given the amount of content you've got.
Additionally, I wouldn't trust the Google webmaster tools data on indexation either - it's notoriously unreliable and may be undereporting the amount of videos you actually have in the search results.
Cheers,
Phil.
-
Google looks at the URLs in sitemaps, not the titles, so if you changed the URL then Google will see it as a new video (multiple videos can have the same title, but URLs are unique to each piece of content).
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
-
Image Sitemap - Are You Using One?
We have a lot of nice images and I have been thinking about uploading an image sitemap. If you would care to share your experience with the questions below, I would appreciate hearing what you have learned. Thank you. Have you been using an image sitemap? Do you think that it has brought some benefits to your domain's presence in image search? Did you include thumbnail - size images or only the full size images?
Image & Video Optimization | | EGOL1 -
SEO for Videos and Infographics
Hi Mozers, When optimizing videos and infographics does it helps to put the word "video" or "infographic" in the browser title and H1? Any guidance is much appreciated! Yael
Image & Video Optimization | | yaelslater0 -
How to Create A Cost-Effective Video OR Outsource?
We are planning to make videos for our unique products but we do not have the experience of doing one before. Is there any tutorial online teaches people how to make one without spending alot of money or using expensive equipment? Does anyone have experience outsource their videos and how much am i looking to spend? Where to find talented videos maker with cheap price?
Image & Video Optimization | | ringochan0 -
Vimeo Pro, video SEO and rich snippets
Hi All, we are producing product demonstration videos. One major aim with these videos is to help our rankings for these specific product pages and associated keywords... and to get rich snippets displayed on Google results pages against our listing. We have used schema.org markup in the product pages body code along with / next to the embed vimeo video code on the product page in order to hopefully get us rich snippet listing... we used schema.org markup as this seems to be the main current markup for rich snippets we have hosted the video via Vimeo Pro so that it is served quickly and not affected by speed of our hosting server or any possible bandwidth issues on our hosting server and ensure sthat the traffic comes to our site pages rather then Youtube or similar Vimeo Privacy settings for the video have been set so that we have not allowed it to be embed anywhere except for our own domain and the video is not displayed on Vimeo.com to ensure that the video is not duplicated anywhere else... so that this is unique content on our own site for maximum value for our domain We have used the "old code" from Vimeo Pro for embedding the video on our product page rather than the current iframe code as from what i understand Google cant follow very well and doesn't necessarily trust content displayed in iframes. Video and schema.org markup code used is on product page is: <div itemprop="<a class="attribute-value">video</a>" itemscope itemtype="<a class="attribute-value">http://schema.org/VideoObject</a>"> <p ><strong>Watch our <span itemprop="<a class="attribute-value">name</a>">Click 7 Lite Duo demonstrationspan>:strong>p> <meta itemprop="<a class="attribute-value">thumbnailURL</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">http://www.3wisemonkeys.co.uk/img/products/nextbase-click-7-lite-duo-thumb.jpg</a>" /> <meta itemprop="<a class="attribute-value">duration</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">T2M23S</a>" /> <span itemprop="<a class="attribute-value">description</a>">A product demonstration showing what's included in the box when you buy a Click 7 Lite Duospan>...:<br /> <p align="<a class="attribute-value">center</a>"> p> <p align="<a class="attribute-value">center</a>"><object width="<a class="attribute-value">500</a>" height="<a class="attribute-value">281</a>"><param name="<a class="attribute-value">allowfullscreen</a>" value="<a class="attribute-value">true</a>" /><param name="<a class="attribute-value">allowscriptaccess</a>" value="<a class="attribute-value">always</a>" /><param name="<a class="attribute-value">movie</a>" value="<a class="attribute-value">http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=67392721&force_embed=1&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=1&color=00adef&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&loop=0</a>" /><embed src="[http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=67392721&force_embed=1&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=1&color=00adef&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&loop=0](view-source:http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=67392721&force_embed=1&server=vimeo.com&show_title=1&show_byline=1&show_portrait=1&color=00adef&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&loop=0)" type="<a class="attribute-value">application/x-shockwave-flash</a>" allowfullscreen="<a class="attribute-value">true</a>" allowscriptaccess="<a class="attribute-value">always</a>" width="<a class="attribute-value">500</a>" height="<a class="attribute-value">281</a>">embed>object> p> div> Page this code is used on: http://www.3wisemonkeys.co.uk/proddet.jsp?id=2016&cat=1 Could anyone confirm whether the above seems to be what we need to do / should be doing to get the most value from these videos for helping our web site rank better with Google / search engine results pages as well as getting rich snippets displayed? Lastly does the above code seem correct and include all the necessaries for rich snippets? Thanks for any pointers.
Image & Video Optimization | | jasef0 -
Video Embeding
I would like to ask if somebody know what is the best way to embed video on home page. I read that google does not read i frame. Also it is a problem if i have featured video on home page with link to post where is again the same video? Also it is not a problem if I plan to be changing the videos on the home page in period of the time 1-2months? Also, people can embed video from there, is this not a problem? Thank you for any advice
Image & Video Optimization | | VillasDiani0 -
What is the best way to embed a link back to our site in our video embed codes?
Our site has over 100 great videos. We are currently streaming them all from our YouTube channel. I noticed SEOMoz is using http://www.wistia.com and that when I copy and paste a video from SEOMoz that code has a link back to the SEOMoz site in it, which of course is awesome for SEO. My question has several parts: Is this possible to do with an embed code from YouTube? Specifically directed towards SEOMoz: Which of the 3 types of player did you choose, HTML5, Flash or javascript? Why? Is Wistia just creating a video feed, or are they actually hosting your video content too? Our goal is two-fold: 1. We want people who embed our videos to be also embeddding a link back to our site and 2. We want our videos to be found in SERPs and have those direct people to our site instead of our YouTUbe channel. I'd welcome any comments regarding video SEO in this thread. Thanks!
Image & Video Optimization | | danatanseo0 -
Video SEO - Why are my videos not being indexed?
Hello All, I work on a site that has a lot of videos. The trouble is none of them are ranking. Here is an example of a page with a video on. If you click the play button you will see But none of these videos are being indexed, as you can see here. Is it because these videos are just mp4 files, rather than being embedded players (like SEOmoz use for instance)? Would embedding videos through Viddler / Wistia / Youtube etc help? Or is there some other issue at work here? Any help on this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Rich
Image & Video Optimization | | JBGlobalSEO0 -
Video SEO - Youtube vs. 3rd party hosting with Video Sitemap
We need some feedback on the best place to upload videos. Should we be uploading our videos everywhere (YouTube, Metacafe, Vimeo, etc.)? Note: Currently we are using a 3rd party video video hosting solution called Treepodia. Previously we used Wistia. Both host our videos, and submit a Video Sitemap through Webmaster tools. When one of these videos shows up in search results and somebody clicks on it, they are directed back to our website. Are we competing against ourselves if we upload videos to other networks like Youtube, etc. if we are already submitting a Video Sitemap through a 3rd party? I've noticed we rank higher in Google Videos search for our Youtube videos vs. our 3rd party hosted videos. Also, how do Youtube video views tie into this situation... we used to embed videos via Youtube embed code. Now we seem to be missing out on the extra views we were getting by doing so. Ultimate question: host videos through a 3rd party and submit a video sitemap OR host videos on Youtube and embed on our website?
Image & Video Optimization | | tennisexpress0