Single URL not indexed
-
Hi everyone!
Some days ago, I noticed that one of our URLs (http://www.access.de/karriereplanung/webinare) is no longer in the Google index.
We never had any form of penalty, link warning etc. Our traffic by Google is constantly growing every month. This single page does not have an external link pointing to it - only internal links.
The page has been indexed all the time. The HTTP status code is 200, there is no noindex or something in the code. I submitted the URL on GWMT to let Google send it to the index. It was crawled successfully by Google, sent to the index 5 days ago - nothing happened, still not indexed.
Do you have any suggestions why this page is no longer indexed? It is well linked internally and one click away from the home page. There is still the PR of 5 showing, I always thought that pages with PR are indexed.......
-
Hi Nick,
first of all, thanx for your responses.
I already did the "fetch as Googlebot" thing 5 days ago. The page was successfully crawled and has been sent to the index successfully, according to Google Webmaster Tools. But in these 5 days, nothing changed.
I like your suggestions with the extra text. We will add some and do the "fetch as Googlebot" again and see what happens.
And you are absolutely right when it comes to the "value" of this page. It didn't send that much traffic, just a little. It is no big deal for us if this page doesn't get back into the index - but as someone doing SEO I want to figure out the problem Google seems to have with this page - just to test and learn for future problems
-
Replying to myself because I just noticed something I was wrong about.
I thought that the first box at the top was an excerpt of the page it links to, but it looks like it IS actually unique.
So you probably don't need to add anything, though expanding on that text in the first box might be a good idea.
Try to get a link to that page and see if that helps.
-
The thing is those words do appear elsewhere on the site, and Google can probably figure out that what is on this particular page is excerpts and links to the originals.
This normally isn't a huge problem, though. Lots of sites and blogs have category and tag pages that fit that description and ARE indexed (though many are not).
Before messing around with adding text which you may not really need to add, try doing a Fetch as Googlebot of the page in Google Webmaster Tools and hit the submit button when the fetch is complete. It may be that the page just got dropped by accident. If it doesn't return to the index after a few days, try adding a little totally unique content. Just a sentence or two about what these links are should be enough. I have done this on a few sites with lots of thin tag or category pages and it doesn't take a lot of text to get them into the index.
Partner link pages are also typically thin, but they may be indexed anyway if the links are useful, or ignored if it is simply a link exchange page that doesn't really have any value other than swapping links (which isn't much value). Like most things related to Google search, there isn't always a specific thing that will make the difference.
What you may want to consider is whether or not you want or need that page to appear in search, and if you think it could or should actually rank well for anything. If it doesn't matter, I wouldn't be too concerned unless there are many pages on the site that are not indexed.
-
Quite strange - I see someone visiting this URL in the Google-Analytics real-time-report.
Traffic source is direct, and Google labels this site as "/empty". Any ideas why?
-
Hi Nick,
I knwo the page is not full of content - but if you count the words, they are almost 300. And we do not have pages with the same content or links on our domain.
It could be a solution to add more text, but what about pages with partner links, for example? They normally have no content and lots of external links - so they should also be seen an "thin pages"?!
-
It may be worth generating and submitting an XML sitemap, with this page relatively high up in the map, and submitting it to Google. This then might prompt Google to crawl the page and index it.
ScreamingFrog is a free tool that generates an XML sitemap for you, while there are also free generators out there as well with just a quick google search.
-
Hi Tom,
well, honestly, we do not have a sitemap...
And no, there are no other pages with similar content on our domain.
As you said it: quite odd!
-
It may have been dropped because it was seen as "thin" content. Since most of the page is excerpts from and links to other pages, it is likely being ignored - especially if there are other pages that have the same excerpts and links. If you can add unique, some descriptive text to the page, it may do better.
And about the PageRank: The PR you can see in the Toolbar or other PR checks is usually very out of date. It could be that prior to your page's disappearance, it had a high PR and really does not now. While the visible PR can be used to get a pretty good idea of how Google ranks a page, I wouldn't give it much thought. Plenty of low PR pages rank very well for whatever search terms they are targeting, and lots of high PR pages don't rank very well.
-
That is quite odd - checked all those things from my end and found the same, but still not indexed.
My only other check at this stage would be to ask if its in the .xml sitemap that you have submitted in Google Webmaster Tools? And whether or not this page features similar content to any other pages on your site?
You've probably checked both already, but thought I'd ask just to be sure.
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
-
How to index Backlink Fast
hi, From the past some month i am facing the problem in indexing backlinks, please share the method to index backlink in google fast
Technical SEO | | vijay231 -
Redirect_to in URLs?
I've never seen this before. I'm assuming that it's not SEO friendly and that these should be 301s or 302s instead? http://ksa-beta.motory.com/ar/login/?redirect_to=http://ksa-beta.motory.com/ar/cars-for-sale-search/results/central/riyadh/ford/explorer/2010/ford-explorer-2010-1038353 http://ksa-beta.motory.com/ar/login/?redirect_to=http://ksa-beta.motory.com/ar/account/my-saved-searches/
Technical SEO | | KatherineWatierOng0 -
Which URL would you choose?
1 – www.company.com/subfolder/subfolder/keyword-keyword-product (I’m able to keyword match with this url) or 2. www.company.com/subfolder/subfolder/product (no url keyword match) What would you choose? A url which is "short" but still relevant, or, a url which is more descriptive allowing “keyword” match? Be great to get your feedback guys. Many thanks Gary
Technical SEO | | GaryVictory0 -
High DA url rewrite to your url...would it increase the Ranking of a website?
Hi, my client use a recruiting management tool called njoyn.com. The url of his site look like: www.example.njoyn.com. Would it increase his ranking if I use this Url above that point to njoyn domain wich has a high DA, and rewrite it to his site www.example.com? If yes how? Thanks
Technical SEO | | bigrat950 -
URL Structure
I'm going through the process of redesigning our website, and the URL structure was brought up. We currently have our URLs structured as domain.com/keyword. It seems that some people think setting your URLs up to look like: domain.com/directory/keyword makes more sense from a user's perspective, and from a search engine's perspective. With our directories labeled as services, solutions, clients - I see no value in adding directories as it dilutes the keyword and brings the keyword further away from the domain. Are there situations where adding a directory before the page in the URL makes sense? If anyone has data showing the difference between the two that'd be great! Thanks, Brian
Technical SEO | | PrasoonGoel0 -
Should I change or redirect this URL?
Happy Friday everyone! I just noticed that one of our Attorney Profile's url's is wrong. We used to have someone named "Dana Fortugno" as our Family Law attorney, but when he left, (over two years ago) we hired "Scott Finelli." The person who setup the site, just changed the information on the page not url. So instead of it saying "http://www.kempruge.com/scott-finelli-jd-llm/;" it says "http://www.kempruge.com/dana-fortugno-jd-llm/." I'm considering taking all the content on the page with the wrong url, copying it to a new page with the correct URL and 301 redirecting (what would now be a blank page) to the new page with the correct URL. Is this the best way to handle this? Also, I don't believe there are many SEO concerns regarding the pages specifically. The profile pages aren't what we rank for in any of our Family Law related keywords. I am worried about having a completely blank page that just 301 redirects as looking bad to google, but not sure if it would? As always, thank you for your time and any assistance you can provide. Ruben
Technical SEO | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Duplicate pages in Google index despite canonical tag and URL Parameter in GWMT
Good morning Moz... This is a weird one. It seems to be a "bug" with Google, honest... We migrated our site www.three-clearance.co.uk to a Drupal platform over the new year. The old site used URL-based tracking for heat map purposes, so for instance www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html ..could be reached via www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=menu or www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=sidebar and so on. GWMT was told of the ref parameter and the canonical meta tag used to indicate our preference. As expected we encountered no duplicate content issues and everything was good. This is the chain of events: Site migrated to new platform following best practice, as far as I can attest to. Only known issue was that the verification for both google analytics (meta tag) and GWMT (HTML file) didn't transfer as expected so between relaunch on the 22nd Dec and the fix on 2nd Jan we have no GA data, and presumably there was a period where GWMT became unverified. URL structure and URIs were maintained 100% (which may be a problem, now) Yesterday I discovered 200-ish 'duplicate meta titles' and 'duplicate meta descriptions' in GWMT. Uh oh, thought I. Expand the report out and the duplicates are in fact ?ref= versions of the same root URL. Double uh oh, thought I. Run, not walk, to google and do some Fu: http://is.gd/yJ3U24 (9 versions of the same page, in the index, the only variation being the ?ref= URI) Checked BING and it has indexed each root URL once, as it should. Situation now: Site no longer uses ?ref= parameter, although of course there still exists some external backlinks that use it. This was intentional and happened when we migrated. I 'reset' the URL parameter in GWMT yesterday, given that there's no "delete" option. The "URLs monitored" count went from 900 to 0, but today is at over 1,000 (another wtf moment) I also resubmitted the XML sitemap and fetched 5 'hub' pages as Google, including the homepage and HTML site-map page. The ?ref= URls in the index have the disadvantage of actually working, given that we transferred the URL structure and of course the webserver just ignores the nonsense arguments and serves the page. So I assume Google assumes the pages still exist, and won't drop them from the index but will instead apply a dupe content penalty. Or maybe call us a spam farm. Who knows. Options that occurred to me (other than maybe making our canonical tags bold or locating a Google bug submission form 😄 ) include A) robots.txt-ing .?ref=. but to me this says "you can't see these pages", not "these pages don't exist", so isn't correct B) Hand-removing the URLs from the index through a page removal request per indexed URL C) Apply 301 to each indexed URL (hello BING dirty sitemap penalty) D) Post on SEOMoz because I genuinely can't understand this. Even if the gap in verification caused GWMT to forget that we had set ?ref= as a URL parameter, the parameter was no longer in use because the verification only went missing when we relaunched the site without this tracking. Google is seemingly 100% ignoring our canonical tags as well as the GWMT URL setting - I have no idea why and can't think of the best way to correct the situation. Do you? 🙂 Edited To Add: As of this morning the "edit/reset" buttons have disappeared from GWMT URL Parameters page, along with the option to add a new one. There's no messages explaining why and of course the Google help page doesn't mention disappearing buttons (it doesn't even explain what 'reset' does, or why there's no 'remove' option).
Technical SEO | | Tinhat0 -
Wrong page version in the index
Hi, my site is currently accessible through URL with and without www. The Version with www has 10 times more Backlinks (PA 45 vs 38) but is not listet into the google Index. As far as I know there was never made a google Webmaster account or declared otherwise the version without www to be 'cannonical'. Basically I think that for SEO reasons it would be much better to declare the with www version to be cannonical and redirect the without www version to it. My questions are: Do you have an idea why the with www version is not indexed?
Technical SEO | | Naturalmente
How long does Google usually take to change the version in the index?
Do I risk my site to be thrown out of the index for some days untill the change is made? Thanks in advance.0