Robot.txt File Not Appearing, but seems to be working?
-
Hi Mozzers,
I am conducting a site audit for a client, and I am confused with what they are doing with their robot.txt file. It shows in GWT that there is a file and it is blocking about 12K URLs (image attached). It also shows in GWT that the file was downloaded 10 hours ago successfully. However, when I go to the robot.txt file link, the page is blank.
Would they be doing something advanced to be blocking URLs to hide it it from users? It appears to correctly be blocking log-ins, but I would like to know for sure that it is working correctly. Any advice on this would be most appreciated. Thanks!
Jared
-
There is an old webmaster world thread that explains how to hide the robots.txt file from browsers.... not sure why one would do this however....
http://www.webmasterworld.com/forum93/74.htm
Perhaps they are doing something like this?
-
I verified that I was checking /robots.txt. I had trouble verifying if it was under the non-www because everything redirects to the www. I also checked to see if it was being blocked, and it is not.
I went to Archive.org (Wayback Machine), and I can see the robot.txt file in previous versions of the site. I cannot, however, view it online, even though Google says they are downloading it successfully, and the robots.txt file is successfully blocking URLs from the search index.
-
Be sure you are visiting /robots.txt In all of your copy above, you are referencing robot.txt
Also, check to see if it possibly is only showing up on the www. version or the site or the non-www version of the site.
To be sure if it's working, you can test URLs of your website within Google Webmaster Tools. Go to Crawl->Blocked URLs and scroll down to the bottom.
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
-
Descriptions appearing for review star Rich Snippets
Hello, We recently added the review star markup to our website: If you search Esplendido hotel in Google, you'll see us appear: https://www.i-escape.com/esplendido-hotel Google appears to be picking up the actual review and using it as the description in SERPs. Is there a way we can revert this back to the old description? Happy to keep as is but it is too long as it is according to Google? Thanks all, Clair
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iescape0 -
Having 2 brands with the same content - will this work from an SEO perspective
Hi All, I would love if someone could help and provide some insights on this. We're a financial institution and have a set of products that we offer. We have recently joined with another brand and will now be offering all our products to their customers. What we are looking to do is have 1 site that masks the content for both sites so it appears as there are 2 seperate brands with different content - in fact we have a main site and then a sister brand that offers the same products. Is there anyway to do this so when someone searches for Credit Card from Brand A it is indexed under Brand A and same when someone searched for Credit Card from Brand B it is indexed under Brand B. The one thing is we would not want to rel:can the pages nor be penalised by googles latest PR algorithm. Hope someone can help! Thanks Dave
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CFCU1 -
Sitelinks Not Appearing
We've have been ranking number 1 for all brand related terms but yet still sitelinks won't appear. We have submitted an xml sitemap We have a front facing sitemap in the footer We have a clear hierarchy of pages on the site We have a strong link profile We have a few hundred visits a month from organic search We are running Google Shopping ads Is there anything else that I should be doing?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | the-gate-films0 -
Robots.txt - blocking JavaScript and CSS, best practice for Magento
Hi Mozzers, I'm looking for some feedback regarding best practices for setting up Robots.txt file in Magento. I'm concerned we are blocking bots from crawling essential information for page rank. My main concern comes with blocking JavaScript and CSS, are you supposed to block JavaScript and CSS or not? You can view our robots.txt file here Thanks, Blake
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LeapOfBelief0 -
Google Indexing Duplicate URLs : Ignoring Robots & Canonical Tags
Hi Moz Community, We have the following robots command that should prevent URLs with tracking parameters being indexed. Disallow: /*? We have noticed google has started indexing pages that are using tracking parameters. Example below. http://www.oakfurnitureland.co.uk/furniture/original-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table/1149.html http://www.oakfurnitureland.co.uk/furniture/original-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table/1149.html?ec=affee77a60fe4867 These pages are identified as duplicate content yet have the correct canonical tags: https://www.google.co.uk/search?num=100&site=&source=hp&q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.oakfurnitureland.co.uk%2Ffurniture%2Foriginal-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table%2F1149.html&oq=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.oakfurnitureland.co.uk%2Ffurniture%2Foriginal-rustic-solid-oak-4-drawer-storage-coffee-table%2F1149.html&gs_l=hp.3..0i10j0l9.4201.5461.0.5879.8.8.0.0.0.0.82.376.7.7.0....0...1c.1.58.hp..3.5.268.0.JTW91YEkjh4 With various affiliate feeds available for our site, we effectively have duplicate versions of every page due to the tracking query that Google seems to be willing to index, ignoring both robots rules & canonical tags. Can anyone shed any light onto the situation?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JBGlobalSEO0 -
Does Link Detox Boost Work?
That is a question I am sure many of your have been asking since they launched the product several weeks ago. Cemper claims they helped get a penalty removed in 3 days by using this product. Sounds great doesn't it? Maybe even sounds too good to be true. Well, here is my experience with it. We have been working to get a site's rankings back up for several months now. While it has no penalty, it clearly got hit by the algo change. So we have been very busy creating new content and attempting to remove as much "keyword rich" links as possible. This really hasn't been working very well at all, so when I heard about link detox boost I thought this was the answer to our prayers. The basic idea is link detox boost forces google to crawl your bad links so it know you no longer have links from those sites or have disavowed them. So we ran it and it was NOT cheap. Roughly $300. Now, 3 weeks after running it, the report only shows it has actually crawled 25% of our links, but they assure us it is a reporting issue and the full process has ran its course. The results. No change at all. Some of our rankings are worse, some are better, but nothing worth mentioning. Many products from Link Research Tools are very good, but i'm afraid this isn't one of them. Anyone else use this product? What were your results?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper2 -
Does this work as a tactic for including keyword in URL structure
Howdy, I'm planning out a website and need to plan out the URL structure for best SEO value. Generally I would do something like this:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IrvCo_Interactive
site.com/widgetssite.com/widgets/large
site.com/widgets/large/blue
etc. I think this is a pretty straight forward SEO tactic. The issue I have with it is in terms of natural language the "thing" you are searching for in this case is a widget, so typically you would type/search [adjective] [noun], or in this case "large blue widgets." So one proposal I have is to instead append the "widget" to the end of the URL:
site.com/large-widgets
site.com/large/blue-widgets
site.com/large/blue/square-widgets
etc. Obviously this breaks the whole silo concept since the square-widgets page is inside the /blue directory but the blue widgets page isn't at /blue it is /blue-widgets. My solution is to setup 301 redirects from /blue to /blue-widgets (even thought there are no site links pointing to that page). Does this seem like a good idea? Or does this break the whole folder silo concept? What I like about it is that it feels more user friendly in terms of natural language and for certain high value keywords we can get certain pairings of words into the URL more like how a person would type them in.0 -
How does authorship work for two authors?
How does Google's version of authorship work for 2 authors?: support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1408986 https://plus.google.com/authorship
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BobGW0