Broken sitemaps vs no sitemaps at all?
-
The site I am working on is enormous. We have 71 sitemap files, all linked to from a sitemap index file.
The sitemaps are not up to par with "best practices" yet, and realistically it may be another month or so until we get them cleaned up.
I'm wondering if, for the time being, we should just remove the sitemaps from Webmaster Tools altogether. They are currently "broken", and I know that sitemaps are not mandatory. Perhaps they're doing more harm than good at this point? According to Webmaster Tools, there are 8,398,082 "warnings" associated with the sitemap, many of which seem to be related to URLs being linked to that are blocked by robots.txt.
I was thinking that I could remove them and then keep a close eye on the crawl errors/index status to see if anything changes.
Is there any reason why I shouldn't remove these from Webmaster Tools until we get the sitemaps up to par with best practices?
-
I think you can remove the sitemap since it returns so many warnings.
I don't think sitemaps have so much seo benefits but rather helps google find pages that are hard to find in your site or no accessible through regular href.
So make sure your site has a good structure and that all page can be found by browsing your site (click on links from pages to pages) and you will be fine sitemap or not.
Use linksleuth to crawl your site, if you are not sure of the accessibility of all pages.
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
-
Can I add external links to my sitemap?
Hi, I'm integrating with a service that adds 3rd-party images/videos (owned by them, hosted on their server) to my site. For instance, the service might have tons of pictures/videos of cars; and then when I integrate, I can show my users these pictures/videos about cars I might be selling. But I'm wondering how to build out the sitemap--I would like to include reference to these images/videos, so Google knows I'm using lots of multimedia. How's the most white-hat way to do that? Can I add external links to my sitemap pointing to these images/videos hosted on a different server, or is that frowned upon? Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEOdub0 -
Href lang in image or video XML sitemaps
Does anyone know if it is possible/recommended/not recommended to use href lang in image or video XML sitemaps? This had not crossed my mind until recently, but a client asked me this question and I couldn't find any information on this topic.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisKing0 -
Website URL Structure - keyword targeting on homepage vs internal pages
I have developed a few websites before where the homepage contains the content for the keywords I was targeting. This has been reasonably successful as I have found it easy enough to get links to the homepage. I am considering a new site in a totally different industry that I am thinking about structuring like this: mybrand.com (not necessarily targeting any keywords) mybrand.com/important-keyword-1/ (definitely want to target) mybrand.com/important-keyword-2 (equally important as 1st keyword) There will be several (30-ish) other pages targeting keywords but they are not as significant as the two mentioned above, more so they are about publishing informative information. The two important keywords are quite different but industry related. My questions are: should I be careful targeting keywords away from the homepage when the homepage gets the most links? Would I be better off building 2 different websites where the keyword content is captured in the homepage? Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BGu0 -
Category vs Product level URL - Does it Matter?
Is there much google juice to be had by moving a key "money making" product up the URL structure? For example, in this URL http://www.over50choices.co.uk/Funeral-Planning/Over-50-Life-Insurance.aspx will we gain any juice moving "Over-50-life-insurance" out of the "funeral planning" category and directly to the Domain eg www.over50choices/over-50-life-insurance.aspx ? The page currently ranks on page 2 and 3 for various phrases and we are looking to get to page 1 - its a very competitive set of keywords! Thanks Ash
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AshShep10 -
Total Indexed 1.5M vs 83k submitted by sitemap. What?
We recently took a good look at one of our content site's sitemap and tried to cut out a lot of crap that had gotten in there such as .php, .xml, .htm versions of each page. We also cut out images to put in a separate image sitemap. The sitemap generated 83,000+ URLs for google to crawl (this partially used the Yoast Wordpress plugin to generate) In webmaster tools in the index status section is showing that this site has a total index of 1.5 million. With our sitemap coming back with 83k and google indexing 1.5 million pages, is this a sign of a CMS gone rogue? Is it an indication that we could be pumping out error pages or empty templates, or junk pages that we're cramming into Google's bot? I would love to hear what you guys think. Is this normal? Is this something to be concerned about? Should our total index more closely match our sitemap page count?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoninjaz0 -
Google Sitemap only indexing 50% Is that a problem?
We have about 18,000 pages submitted on our Google Sitemap and only about 9000 of them are indexed. Is this a problem? We have a script that creates a sitemap on a daily basis and it is submitted on a daily basis. Am I better off only doing it once a week? Is this why I never get to the full 18,000 indexed?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
Canonical tag vs 301
What is the reason that 301 is preferred and not rel canonical tag when it comes to implementing redirect. Page rank will be lost in both cases. So, why prefer one over the other ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoug_20050 -
Controlling PageRank vs flat site architecture
Hey all. Here's the scenario. I have this pretty trusted site with a relatively high PR. The navigation menu has around 300 links. But this is because it is a CSS menu that drills down into subcategories. Now, would restricting the amount of links in this menu be beneficial? I am not worried about any subcategory pages not being crawled or indexed, but I am concerned that subcategory pages will not receive as high of PageRank if they are not linked to directly from the home page, thereby lowering the ranking potential. Even with new pages that are created they receive a PR of 5 if linked to from the home page. But I'm also thinking that toning down the menu size would be beneficial by funneling more PageRank to category pages and increasing the likelihood of ranking for some core head/middle terms. I have seen sites that externalize the menu in JavaScript files and disallow it in Robots.txt to prevent too much PageRank from linking out, but SEO isn't really a one-solution-fits-all in my experience. I may try a test. Externalizing the menu may also increase the relevance for pages because I won't have a bunch of other content on the page not relevant to that page's specific keywords. Anyone with experience in this arena? I would love to hear your input. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JeremyNelson580