800,000 pages blocked by robots...
-
We made some mods to our robots.txt file. Added in many php and html pages that should not have been indexed.
Well, not sure what happened or if there was some type of dynamic conflict with our CMS and one of these pages, but in a few weeks we checked webmaster tools and to our great surprise and dismay, the number of blocked pages we had by robots.txt was up to about 800,000 pages out of the 900,000 or so we have indexed.
1. So, first question is, has anyone experienced this before? I removed the files from robots.txt and the number of blocked files has still been climbing. Changed the robots.txt file on the 27th. It is the 29th and the new robots.txt file has been downloaded, but the blocked pages count has been rising in spite of it.
2. I understand that even if a page is blocked by robots.txt, it still shows up in the index, but does anyone know how the blocked page affects the ranking? i.e. while it might still show up even though it has been blocked will google show it at a lower rank because it was blocked by robots.txt?
Our current robots.txt just says:
User-agent: *
Disallow:Sitemap: oursitemap
Any thoughts?
Thanks!
Craig
-
Hey Matt,
Thanks for taking the time to answer!
Well, the good news is, this caused us to find some issues with our sitemaps that we have now fixed and we might not have found them if this hadn't happened.
According to wmtools, however, we are still at 937,000 pages blocked... I don't know if they are actually blocked or not... Now that we have re-submitted our sitemap, hopefully we will start to see this change soon.
Thanks for the load time info. Yeah, we are aware that we could speed things up. We are always trying to do that more and more.
Hopefully we will start seeing that number go down very soon...
Thanks!
Craig
-
Hi Craig
Sorry for taking a while to come back to you but I have been very busy, however I have a couple a question -
When you first noticed the blocked pages had you made any changes to the site at that time and if so what were they?
Have you done anything that could have slowed your site down - running your homepage through a speed of load test I notice that it took over 4 secs which isn't very quick.
I once had an issue of lots of pages being de-indexed when we made an update to our sites template and the load time increased drastically. Even if this isn't the cause of the issue looking at optimizing your load time will help increase the speed at which your site is re-crawled. Google will be able to get through more in the time it allocates to crawl your site each time it visits if it is smaller and loads quicker hence speeding up your recovery.
There are lots of tools and information on optimizing load times - here is just one - http://www.webpagetest.org
-
Hey Matt,
Just sent you a PM with our site details.
Yeah, we are on SEOMoz, but nothing standing out there.
We are up to 941,364 pages blocked today. I thought I saw that it had gone down a tiny bit yesterday, but was mistaken.
Thanks for taking a look!
Craig
-
Hi Craig - you are right that the directive without a slash means allow everything - I was just trying to figure out how you could have caused this issue because Google doesn't appear to be following your directive to crawl everything hence why I asked about the layout. Have you tested your robots.txt in Google Webmaster Tools?
What is the location of your robots.txt?
What does your index status say in Google Webmaster Tools?
You can also just create an empty robots.txt file which will allow all as well or
User-agent: *
Allow:/I take it that you have this website setup as a campaign in SEOMoz - has this identified any relevant issues in the latest crawl?
Would you share your web address with us or even private message me with it so I can have a look for clues as this is very interesting!
-
Hi Matt,
Sorry for the confusion, I should have pasted that text using plain text so it wouldn't be on the same line.
I edited it as seen above. The user agent and disallow are on separate lines.
Today we are up to 940,000 blocked URLs in webmaster tools.
The reason I didn't delete robots is I read some suggestion that if you delete it, Google will think that there was a problem accessing it and continue relying on the former version for a period of time. Not sure how much truth is in that, but seemed to make enough sense not to delete it, but just correctly modify it.
Are you saying that my command above is disallowing all? From the research I have done, you have to have a slash at the end to disallow all, i.e. Disallow: /. Having Disallow: with nothing after it, is supposed to allow all, which is the goal.
From robots.txt.org:
To allow all robots complete access
User-agent: *
Disallow:Strangely, we haven't noticed an enormous traffic drop. However, this happened right at the time that we fixed some other issues that should have caused a significant improvement, so it could just be that no positive impact has been felt and things just remained the same.
Ultimately, the fact that the blocked pages keeps rising is worrisome, or says that there is a bug in Google's system.
Thanks!
Craig
-
I have experienced something similar after a site redesign the test version was put live with the robots.txt disallowing all. My site was deindexed quickly as when you block pages with a robots.txt their page content wont be indexed so won't appear in the search results. Google may index urls that are disallowed if they are linked from another page online however the rank will be lower due to the page content being ignored. Remove your robots.txt above as it is disallowing all It would appear although that command should allow all but there is no point in having robot file allowing all as this happens without. Though you would usually have disallow: / - to stop all!! Then I would resubmit an updated site map in Google Webmaster Tools and you should see your pages start to be indexed again. If you don't have a site map you can just wait for Google to start to re crawl your site. I would also check your homepage source code to make sure there isn't a robots meta tag turned on by accident saying no index no follow as I have seen this done by accident with CMS before.
have a look here on exactly how google handles robots.txt - http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=156449
One quick question - have you laid out your file exactly as above with the user agent and disallow on the same line as this might be what is causing the issue? I haven't tested it but the standard is to have them on separate lines.
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
-
Help setting up FILTERS for External Payment pages?
Hi all, I own a webshop and believe my Google Analytics is not showing true data. At the moment when a user pays for their basket, they are redirected to an external secure payment page from my PSP, then after they have paid they are redirected back to my website. How is this visitor being counted? As the PSP-URL is a different site I assume this would be treated as an exit? Can I setup FILTERS to INCLUDE this URL so GA doesn't think its an external page or is there a better way? Thanks
Reporting & Analytics | | darrenbooy0 -
Do modal pop-ups impact the Google Analytics of the host page?
We have an instance of a page where visitors can click a button to start an interactive quiz. The quiz pops up in a modal window that references another domain (the interactive content provider). Will the person completing the quiz in the modal pop-up still be counted as an active visitor on the original host page during the time they are completing the quiz?
Reporting & Analytics | | MuhammadInc0 -
Google Analytics Set-Up for site with both http & https pages
We have a client that migrated to https last September. The site uses canonicals pointing to the https version. The client IT team is reluctant to put 301 redirects from the non-secure to the secure and we are not sure why they object. We ran a screaming frog report and it is showing both URLs for the same page (http and https). The non-secure version has a canonical pointing to the secure version. For every secure page there is a non-secure version in ScreamingFrog so Google must be ignoring the canonical and still indexing the page however, when we run a site: we see that most URLs are the secure version. At that time we did not change the Google Analytics setup option to use: "https" instead of "http" BUT GA appears to be recording data correctly. Yesterday we set up a new profile and selected "https" but our question is: Does the GAnalytics http/https version make a difference if so, what difference is it?
Reporting & Analytics | | RosemaryB1 -
Does anyone know of a way to do a profile level filter to exclude all traffic if it enters the site via certain landing pages?
Does anyone know of a way to do a profile level filter to exclude all traffic if it enters the site via certain landing pages? The problem I have is that we have several pages that are served to visitors of numerous other domains but are also served to visitors of our site. We end up with inflated Google Analytics numbers because people are viewing these pages from our partners' domains but never actually entering our site. I've made an advanced segment that serves the purpose but I'd really like to filter it at the profile level so the numbers across the board are more accurate without having to apply an advanced segment to every report. The advanced segment excludes visits that hit these pages as landing pages but includes visits where people have come from other pages on our domain. I know that you can do profile filters to exclude visits to pages or directories entirely but is there a way to filter them only if they are a landing pages? Any other creative thoughts? Thanks in advance!
Reporting & Analytics | | ATIseo0 -
Why such a high page rank with so low metrics in OSE
Hi,
Reporting & Analytics | | sebastiankoch
The website is:
www.s123parka123ble.com (remove the 123) All websites I have ever seen with similar metrics in OSE have normally a PR of 2 or 3 or max 4. This one is PR 5 and I would like to know why. I also noticed that they do not redirect the urls without www. to www. Which is normally bad ... can it be good for some reason in this case? It is PR 5 since a long time I just can´t get why it is PR 5. Please have a look. Thanks!0 -
Increase number of pages crawled
Only one page is being crawled, how do I increase the number to include most of our site?
Reporting & Analytics | | NorthCoast0 -
Posting on blog comments with anchor text on high ranked pages effective?
So i've identified some blogs which have a fairly high ranking and lots of traffic. They also allow anchor text in the name field. Does it make sense for me to comment on these blogs, or does google treat these with less authority that true page links? Any advice is greatly appreciated! TIA
Reporting & Analytics | | symbolphoto0 -
Rel=nofollow link to a NoFollow, NoIndex Page?
I have a multitude of "schedule a demo" pages/forms on my site that are all identical, so I have on all of them. My question is, should I also place on the link to the "schedule a demo" pages? I know the generic rule is to never nofollow any internal links (per Matt Cutts http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVOOB_Q0MZY), but should that still apply if the link directs to a page that is noindex, nofollow? Thanks for your input in advance; don't want to run into, as Matt Cutts puts it, "a mini kerfuffle!"
Reporting & Analytics | | BethA0