Problem of indexing
-
Hello, sorry, I'm French and my English is not necessarily correct.
I have a problem indexing in Google.
Only the home page is referenced: http://bit.ly/yKP4nD.
I am looking for several days but I do not understand why.
I looked at:
-
The robots.txt file is ok
-
The sitemap, although it is in ASP, is valid with Google
-
No spam, no hidden text
-
I made a request for reconsideration via Google Webmaster Tools and it has no penalties
-
We do not have noindex
So I'm stuck and I'd like your opinion.
thank you very much
A.
-
-
Hello Rasmus,
i think it's ok now.
Indexing is better http://bit.ly/yKP4nD
Thank you so much.
Take care
A.
-
Hi,
very interesting, good idea !!!
I think you're right.
I will tell you
Best regards
A.
-
Ah!
I've found it!
You have a canonical link on each page?
| rel="canonical" href="http://www.syrahetcompagnie.com/Default.asp" /> |
This is not so good, as it is on http://www.syrahetcompagnie.com/vins-vallee-du-rhone-nord.htm AND http://www.syrahetcompagnie.com/PBHotNews.asp?PBMInit=1
If you remove that (and keep it on the start page) you should experience a whole lot of indexing in the following days
Best regards
Rasmus
-
You are correct. I've just found this page:
http://www.robotstxt.org/robotstxt.html
It says:
User-agent: *
Disallow:
Allows all robots to all pages.So that was my mistake. I am truly sorry for the confusion.
I will have a look at it later to see if I can find a good explanation...
-
Hi Rasmus,
User-agent: *
Disallow:means that all robots can enter the site
User-agent: *
Disallow: /block all robots to enter.
User-agent: WebCrawler
Disallow:block WebCrawler robot, but other can enter
Always first line of robots.txt tells what robots can crawl a site and * means all. Second and next lines are pointing specific catalogues on a server e.g. Disallow: /admin/
So I think that is not a robots.txt issue - please ensure me
-
Hi again,
Do you use Google Webmaster tools?
In Webmaster tools you can see how many URLs on your site that has been restricted due to robots.txt file. Perhaps that could give you a clue.
I would recommend that you take a look at webmaster tools. All in all there are a lot of good information in there for optimizing your site.
Best regards
Rasmus
-
Thanks for your answer.
OK I will edit the file but I am not convinced that this is causing my problem because it was written that way.
Take care
-
Actually your robots.txt is NOT ok. It says:
Sitemap: http://www.syrahetcompagnie.com/Sitemap.asp?AccID=27018&LangID=0 User-agent: * Disallow: Which means that all pages are to be disallowed. You should have: User-agent: * Allow: /
If you change that, it should fix it!
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
-
Staging website got indexed by google
Our staging website got indexed by google and now MOZ is showing all inbound links from staging site, how should i remove those links and make it no index. Note- we already added Meta NOINDEX in head tag
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Asmi-Ta0 -
My url disappeared from Google but Search Console shows indexed. This url has been indexed for more than a year. Please help!
Super weird problem that I can't solve for last 5 hours. One of my urls: https://www.dcacar.com/lax-car-service.html Has been indexed for more than a year and also has an AMP version, few hours ago I realized that it had disappeared from serps. We were ranking on page 1 for several key terms. When I perform a search "site:dcacar.com " the url is no where to be found on all 5 pages. But when I check my Google Console it shows as indexed I requested to index again but nothing changed. All other 50 or so urls are not effected at all, this is the only url that has gone missing can someone solve this mystery for me please. Thanks a lot in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Davit19850 -
Site move-Redirecting and Indexing dynamic pages
I have an interesting problem I would like to pick someone else’s brain. Our business has over 80 different products, each with a dedicated page (specs, gallery, copy etc.) on the main website. Main site itself, is used for presentation purpose only and doesn’t offer a direct path to purchase. A few years ago, to serve a specific customer segment, we have created a site where customers can perform a quick purchase via one of our major strategic partners. Now we are looking to migrate this old legacy service, site and all its pages under the new umbrella (main domain/CMS). Problem #1 Redirects/ relevancy/ SEO equity Ideally, we could simply perform 1:1 - 301 redirect from old legacy product pages to the relevant new site products pages. The problem is that Call to action (buy), some images and in some cases, parts of the copy must be changed to some degree to accommodate this segment. The second problem is in our dev and creative team. There are not enough resources to dedicate for the creation of the new pages so we can perform 1:1 301 redirects. So, the potential decision is to redirect a visitor to the dynamic page URL where parent product page will be used to apply personalization rules and a new page with dynamic content (buy button, different gallery etc.) is displayed to the user (see attached diagram). If we redirect directly to parent URL and then apply personalization rules, URL will stay the same and this is what we are trying to avoid (we must mention in the URL that user is on purchase path, otherwise this redirect and page where the user lands, can be seen as deceptive). Also Dynamic pages will have static URLs and unique page/title tag and meta description. Problem #2 : Indexation/Canonicalization The dynamic page is canonicalized to the parent page and does have nearly identical content/look and feel, but both serve a different purpose and we want both indexed in search. Hope my explanation is clear and someone can chip in. Any input is greatly appreciated! vCm2Dt.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bgvsiteadmin1 -
What does actually Mobile First Index means?
Hello All, What does actually Mobile First Index means? Is it that on my desktop in google.co.uk when I will search my keyword then site will come on top whose Mobile performance is good as per google? and then what is Mobile Second Index? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | micey1231 -
Question about Indexing of /?limit=all
Hi, i've got your SEO Suite Ultimate installed on my site (www.customlogocases.com). I've got a relatively new magento site (around 1 year). We have recently been doing some pr/seo for the category pages, for example /custom-ipad-cases/ But when I search on google, it seems that google has indexed the /custom-ipad-cases/?limit=all This /?limit=all page is one without any links, and only has a PA of 1. Whereas the standard /custom-ipad-cases/ without the /? query has a much higher pa of 20, and a couple of links pointing towards it. So therefore I would want this particular page to be the one that google indexes. And along the same logic, this page really should be able to achieve higher rankings than the /?limit=all page. Is my thinking here correct? Should I disallow all the /? now, even though these are the ones that are indexed, and the others currently are not. I'd be happy to take the hit while it figures it out, because the higher PA pages are what I ultimately am getting links to... Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RobAus0 -
Canonical or No-index
Just a quick question really. Say I have a Promotions page where I list all current promotions for a product, and update it regularly to reflect the latest offer codes etc. On top of that I have Offer announcement posts for specific promotions for that product, highlighting very briefly the promotion, but also linking back to the main product promotion page which has a the promotion duplicated. So main page is 1000+ words with half a dozen promotions, the small post might be 200 words, and quickly become irrelevant as it is a limited time news article. Now, I don't want the promotion page indexed (unless it has a larger news story attached to the promotion, but for this purpose presume it is doesn't). Initially the core essence of the post will be duplicated in the main Promotion page, but later as the offer expires it wouldn't be. Therefore would you Rel Canonical or just simply No-index?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TheWebMastercom0 -
How accurate are the index figures in GWT?
I've been looking at a site in GWT and the number of indexed urls is very low when compared with the number or submitted urls on the xml sitemaps. The site has several stores which are all submitted using different sitemaps. When you perform a search in Google, eg site:domain.com/store1 site:domain.com/store2 site:domain.com/store3 The results are similar to the webmaster urls. However, looking in the analytics for landing pages used for organic traffic from Google shows a much higher number of pages. If these pages aren't indexed as reported in GMT, how could they be found in the results and be recorded as landing pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | edwardlewis0 -
Adding Orphaned Pages to the Google Index
Hey folks, How do you think Google will treat adding 300K orphaned pages to a 4.5 million page site. The URLs would resolve but there would be no on site navigation to those pages, Google would only know about them through sitemap.xmls. These pages are super low competition. The plot thickens, what we are really after is to get 150k real pages back on the site, these pages do have crawlable paths on the site but in order to do that (for technical reasons) we need to push these other 300k orphaned pages live (it's an all or nothing deal) a) Do you think Google will have a problem with this or just decide to not index some or most these pages since they are orphaned. b) If these pages will just fall out of the index or not get included, and have no chance of ever accumulating PR anyway since they are not linked to, would it make sense to just noindex them? c) Should we not submit sitemap.xml files at all, and take our 150k and just ignore these 300k and hope Google ignores them as well since they are orhpaned? d) If Google is OK with this maybe we should submit the sitemap.xmls and keep an eye on the pages, maybe they will rank and bring us a bit of traffic, but we don't want to do that if it could be an issue with Google. Thanks for your opinions and if you have any hard evidence either way especially thanks for that info. 😉
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | irvingw0