Best way to handle indexed pages you don't want indexed
-
We've had a lot of pages indexed by google which we didn't want indexed. They relate to a ajax category filter module that works ok for front end customers but under the bonnet google has been following all of the links.
I've put a rule in the robots.txt file to stop google from following any dynamic pages (with a ?) and also any ajax pages but the pages are still indexed on google.
At the moment there is over 5000 pages which have been indexed which I don't want on there and I'm worried is causing issues with my rankings.
Would a redirect rule work or could someone offer any advice?
-
Gavin Since you have added the noindex in the pages, the best way is to let Google crawl those pages, see the noindex and remove them. The other option is to keep everything as is and request these parameter pages via your Google Webmaster Console. Option 1: You never know how long it takes Option 2: This should happen relatively fast I would therefore suggest keeping everything as is and doing a removal request.
-
Right... We think we've been able to get the code noindex code into the dodgy pages. The only way we could think of doing it without breaking the user interface was to put this rule into the PHP.
if(!empty($_SERVER['HTTP_X_REQUESTED_WITH']) && strtolower($_SERVER['HTTP_X_REQUESTED_WITH']) == 'xmlhttprequest')
{normal code
}
else
{echo '';
echo '';
echo '';
echo '';
echo '';
echo '404';
echo '';
echo '';
}Its rendering ok for us front end, if anyone would like to test... I'm just hopeful it would work for google?
http://www.outdoormegastore.co.uk/cycling/cycling-clothing/protective-clothing.html?ajax=1
One thing I am not sure about is how google is going to revisit the said pages. I have put in various rules to the robots.txt files as well as the url parameter handling in webmaster tools to prevent any future pages from being followed... Would these rules need to be removed?
-
The AJAX URLs are used by the site, though, right (for visitors)? If you 404 them, you may be breaking the functionality and not just impacting Google.
Another problem is that, if these pages are no longer crawlable, and you add a page-level directive (whether it's a 404, 301, canonical, NOINDEX, etc.), Google won't process those new instructions. So, they could get stuck in the index. If that's the case, ti may actually be more effective to block the "ajax=" parameter with parameter handling in Google Webmaster Tools (there's a similar option in Bing).
If you know the path is cut and this isn't a recurrent problem, that could be the fastest short-term solution. You do need to monitor, though, as they can re-enter the index later.
-
Gavin, that's a more generic response. In this scenario, unless you can make a 404 happen, it won't work and therefore is not applicable. Noindex and / or the canonical tag are the choices and I would try and get those going if possible.
-
Thanks for all of the replies... My best option seems to be the meta noindex rule but the nature of the pages that are getting indexed are just one long ajax string with no access to the header are. I hope I have already 'prevented' google from following the links in the future by adding the rules to robots.txt but I'm now desperate to clean up (cure) the existing ones.
My next thought would be to put a rule in htaccess and redirect anything with ajax in the url to a 404 page?
I'm worried that this may have even worse side effects with rankings but its based on this article that google publish: https://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=59819
"To remove a page or image, you must do one of the following:
- Make sure the content is no longer live on the web. Requests for the page must return an HTTP 404 (not found) or 410 status code
What would your thoughts be on this?
-
Definitely review George's comment as you need to figure out why they're being crawled. As Andrea said, any solution takes time, I'm sorry to say. Robots.txt is not a good solution for getting pages removed that are already indexed, especially in bulk. It's better at prevention than cure.
META NOINDEX can be effective, or you could rel=canonical these pages to the appropriate non-AJAX URL - not sure exactly how the structure is set up. Those are probably the two fastest and more powerful approaches. Google parameter handling (in Webmaster Tools) is another option, but it's a bit unpredictable whether they honor it and how quickly.
You can only do mass removal if everything is in a folder, if I recall. There's no way to bulk remove unless all of the pages are structurally under one root URL.
-
I'm not sure if you're aware or not, but I think I know why Google is indexing these pages.
Right now, you are outputting URLs into your source code of your page in the form of a JavaScript function call similar to the following:
I believe this is because your page (and this function call) is programmatically created. Instead of outputting the whole URL to the page, you could output only what needs to be there.
For example:
Then change the signature of the JavaScript function so that it accepts this new input and builds the URL from your inputs:
function initSlider(price, low, high, category, subcategory, product, store, ajax, ?) {
// build URL
var URL = 'http://www.outdoormegastore.co.uk/' + category + '/' + subcategory + '/' + product + '.html?_' + store + '&' + ajax;
// continue...
}
Right now, because that URL is being outputted to the page, I think Google sees it as a URL it should follow and index. If you build this URL with the function in an external JavaScript file, I don't think it will be indexed.
Your developer(s) should know what I'm talking about.
Hope this helps!
-
If they are already indexed, it's going to take time for Google to recrawl, read the tag and get them to fall out, so patience will be key. It's not a quick thing to undo.
If the pages are all in one location, you can add a disallow robots/text to Webmaster Tools command to prevent that entire folder from being indexed, but again, it's already done so you are going to have to wait for all those pages to fall out.
-
Thanks for the quick reply! I'm desperate to get these removed as soon as possible now. I've got webmaster tools access but requesting over 5,000 pages to be removed one by one will take too long. You can't do page removal in bulk can you?
I'm going to work on the noindex option
-
OMG, that does not look good. I completely understand. The best way in my opinion would be to add a noindex meta tag on these pages and let Google crawl them. Once they re-index them with the noindex, that should take care of the problem. However, be careful since you want to make sure that noindex tag does not appear on your real pages, just the AJAX ones.
Another option might be to consider the canonical tag, but then technically these pages are not duplicate pages, they just should not exist. Are you verified and using the Google Webmaster Console ? If yes, see if you can get some of these pages excluded via the URL removal tool. The best way is to add the noindex tag in my opinion.
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
-
Best way to link to multiple location pages
I am a Magician and have multiple location pages for each county I cover. I currently have them linked off the menu under locations/ <county>and also in the footer</county> However I have heard that a link from the page is much stronger, so I am experimenting with removing the Menu & Footer link and just linking to these pages from within the content. It's not really a navigation item and most people come in through search to the right page. Am I diluting the link by having it in the Menu/Page and Footer? I read a long time ago that Google only considers the first link to a page and ignores the rest - is that the case? Thanks Roger https://www.rogerlapin.co.uk/
Technical SEO | | Rogerperk0 -
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
Technical SEO | | Tom3_151 -
What is the best way to handle Product URLs which prepopulate options?
We are currently building a new site which has the ability to pre-populate product options based on parameters in the URL. We have done this so that we can send individual product URLs to google shopping. I don't want to create lots of duplicate pages so I was wondering what you thought was the best way to handle this? My current thoughts are: 1. Sessions and Parameters
Technical SEO | | moturner
On-site product page filters populate using sessions so no parameters are required on-site but options can still be pre-populated via parameters (product?colour=blue&size=100cm) if the user reaches the site via google shopping. We could also add "noindex, follow" to the pages with parameters and a canonical tag to the page without parameters. 2. Text base Parameters
Make the parameters in to text based URLs (product/blue/100cm/) and still use "noindex, follow" meta tag and add a canonical tag to the page without parameters. I believe this is possibly the best solution as it still allows users to link to and share pre-populated pages but they won't get indexed and the link juice would still pass to the main product page. 3. Standard Parmaters
After thinking more today I am considering the best way may be the simplest. Simply using standard parameters (product?colour=blue&size=100cm) so that I can then tell google what they do in webmaster tools and also add "noindex, follow" to the pages with parameters along with the canonical tag to the page without parameters. What do you think the best way to handle this would be?0 -
Page missing from Google index
Hi all, One of our most important pages seems to be missing from the Google index. A number of our collections pages (e.g., http://perfectlinens.com/collections/size-king) are thin, so we've included a canonical reference in all of them to the main collection page (http://perfectlinens.com/collections/all). However, I don't see the main collection page in any Google search result. When I search using "info:http://perfectlinens.com/collections/all", the page displayed is our homepage. Why is this happening? The main collection page has a rel=canonical reference to itself (auto-generated by Shopify so I can't control that). Thanks! WUKeBVB
Technical SEO | | leo920 -
De-indexing millions of pages - would this work?
Hi all, We run an e-commerce site with a catalogue of around 5 million products. Unfortunately, we have let Googlebot crawl and index tens of millions of search URLs, the majority of which are very thin of content or duplicates of other URLs. In short: we are in deep. Our bloated Google-index is hampering our real content to rank; Googlebot does not bother crawling our real content (product pages specifically) and hammers the life out of our servers. Since having Googlebot crawl and de-index tens of millions of old URLs would probably take years (?), my plan is this: 301 redirect all old SERP URLs to a new SERP URL. If new URL should not be indexed, add meta robots noindex tag on new URL. When it is evident that Google has indexed most "high quality" new URLs, robots.txt disallow crawling of old SERP URLs. Then directory style remove all old SERP URLs in GWT URL Removal Tool This would be an example of an old URL:
Technical SEO | | TalkInThePark
www.site.com/cgi-bin/weirdapplicationname.cgi?word=bmw&what=1.2&how=2 This would be an example of a new URL:
www.site.com/search?q=bmw&category=cars&color=blue I have to specific questions: Would Google both de-index the old URL and not index the new URL after 301 redirecting the old URL to the new URL (which is noindexed) as described in point 2 above? What risks are associated with removing tens of millions of URLs directory style in GWT URL Removal Tool? I have done this before but then I removed "only" some useless 50 000 "add to cart"-URLs.Google says themselves that you should not remove duplicate/thin content this way and that using this tool tools this way "may cause problems for your site". And yes, these tens of millions of SERP URLs is a result of a faceted navigation/search function let loose all to long.
And no, we cannot wait for Googlebot to crawl all these millions of URLs in order to discover the 301. By then we would be out of business. Best regards,
TalkInThePark0 -
Does it matter that our cached pages aren't displaying style
We've got pages that, when I search for them in Google and click on Cache, show NO styles, nothing from the CSS. Is there any way that could effect rankings? I don't think so, but it does fall into the category of showing one thing to the bots and another to the user, which is bad. Also, could blocking /scripts in robots.txt be preventing bots from accessing the CSS? Thanks
Technical SEO | | poolguy0 -
Why won't google rank my homepage
I have a site that ranks high on the first page for it's main keyword at both Bing and Yahoo but horribly at Google. It's a domain I recently acquired and am in the process of optimizing. My goal is to improve the relevancy for the site in Google so that the site shows up better for it's main keyword. With that said I've been working on building valuable links to the page and I would like some opinions on why the homepage is not ranking for the main keyword. Instead I have a junky content page that is ranking for the term. So in the event that you have a exact match domain showing up very high in Bing and Yahoo but not in Google for the homepage, what factors would you look at? Add in the complexity that a page other than the homepage is making grounds on the exact match keyword having moved up from "not in the top 100" to the 50's, what's my best solution to ranking the homepage? The site is optimized well and most inbound links predominantly point to the homepage.
Technical SEO | | DotCar0 -
Rel canonical or 301 the Index Page?
Still a bit confused on best practice for /index.php showing up as duplicate for www.mysite.com. What do I need to do and How?
Technical SEO | | bozzie3110