Robots.txt vs noindex
-
I recently started working on a site that has thousands of member pages that are currently robots.txt'd out.
Most pages of the site have 1 to 6 links to these member pages, accumulating into what I regard as something of link juice cul-d-sac.
The pages themselves have little to no unique content or other relevant search play and for other reasons still want them kept out of search.
Wouldn't it be better to "noindex, follow" these pages and remove the robots.txt block from this url type? At least that way Google could crawl these pages and pass the link juice on to still other pages vs flushing it into a black hole.
BTW, the site is currently dealing with a hit from Panda 4.0 last month.
Thanks! Best... Darcy
-
if you add the meta noindex, follow tag , it will keep the page out of the SERP but allows pagerank to flow through them to other pages.
See this interview of Matt Cutts for more info : http://www.stonetemple.com/articles/interview-matt-cutts.shtml
-
Hi Saijo,
Thanks for the response. Do you think that would yield the benefit I'm looking for of recapturing that lost link juice?
Do you think there'd be any downside to the switcheroo from robots.txt to noindex, follow?
Best... Darcy
-
Since you said " The pages themselves have little to no unique content or other relevant search play and for other reasons still want them kept out of search. " I would use meta robots "noindex, follow"
-
HI Lesley,
Thanks for the thoughts. I don't see this as a real option for a number of reasons, including but not limited to that there are 50,000 profiles, most with very little information. The members of this site are 95% busy professionals who aren't trying to advance their career via their profile. So, there'd be some privacy concern and the potential for tens of thousands of low content/highly templated pages. Not really a search dream come true!
Also, converting it into a system where different levels of profile completeness are acknowledged would not really resonate with this community nor would it be near the top of our engineering priorities.
What I really want to get clear on is how best to keep them search invisible while not losing link value into a robots.txt'd black hole. Really just looking for confirmation if, with those goals, "noindex, follow" and remove from robots is the way to go. I'm pretty sure it is, but would like to hear more about that.
Thanks... Darcy
-
I think what I am going to say is going to sound like it is going against the grain, but it really isn't. I have noticed in some places if you want an active community, you reward your members. Look at how moz does their forum, they don't really noindex the pages, but once you hit a point they psuedo drop the nofollow off of your profile link (it could be argued whether they really do). But the point is reward your members that are active. I would set up some automatic noindex tag in the header that grabbed the users post numbers. Then you can noindex all of the spammers and have prominent members shown in the search. If it were me that is how I would do it. I have a PA of 49 on my profile in one forum I regular, I have seen the stats, it is regularly an entry page to the forum. Another member has a 64 on a 93 domain, his is used a lot more than mine for entry as well. Think of it this way, if someone is googling my name, the second result is http://screencast.com/t/jIx7a4hcWV Moz's forum. 2nd search results still get a lot of clicks.
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
-
CNAME record for WWW to Non-WWW Vs. 301?
I was just chatting with the person who set up our site on our domain hosting and they said they added in a CNAME record to transfer the www version of my site to the Non-www version. Shouldn't this be set up as a 301 redirect? I have hundreds of links built to the www version and only a few to the non-www version. Or Could I just add in a 301 in addition to the CNAME record? This is not my wheelhouse and need a little advice. Thanks in Advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | photoseo10 -
Top hierarchy pages vs footer links vs header links
Hi All, We want to change some of the linking structure on our website. I think we are repeating some non-important pages at footer menu. So I want to move them as second hierarchy level pages and bring some important pages at footer menu. But I have confusion which pages will get more influence: Top menu or bottom menu or normal pages? What is the best place to link non-important pages; so the link juice will not get diluted by passing through these. And what is the right place for "keyword-pages" which must influence our rankings for such keywords? Again one thing to notice here is we cannot highlight pages which are created in keyword perspective in top menu. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vtmoz0 -
Syndicated content with meta robots 'noindex, nofollow': safe?
Hello, I manage, with a dedicated team, the development of a big news portal, with thousands of unique articles. To expand our audiences, we syndicate content to a number of partner websites. They can publish some of our articles, as long as (1) they put a rel=canonical in their duplicated article, pointing to our original article OR (2) they put a meta robots 'noindex, follow' in their duplicated article + a dofollow link to our original article. A new prospect, to partner with with us, wants to follow a different path: republish the articles with a meta robots 'noindex, nofollow' in each duplicated article + a dofollow link to our original article. This is because he doesn't want to pass pagerank/link authority to our website (as it is not explicitly included in the contract). In terms of visibility we'd have some advantages with this partnership (even without link authority to our site) so I would accept. My question is: considering that the partner website is much authoritative than ours, could this approach damage in some way the ranking of our articles? I know that the duplicated articles published on the partner website wouldn't be indexed (because of the meta robots noindex, nofollow). But Google crawler could still reach them. And, since they have no rel=canonical and the link to our original article wouldn't be followed, I don't know if this may cause confusion about the original source of the articles. In your opinion, is this approach safe from an SEO point of view? Do we have to take some measures to protect our content? Hope I explained myself well, any help would be very appreciated, Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fabio80
Fab0 -
Canonical Vs No Follow for Duplicate Products
I am in the process of migrating a site from Volusion to BigCommerce. There is a limitation on the ability to display one product in 2 different ways. Here is the situation. One of the manufacturers will not allow us to display products to customers who are not logged in. We have convinced them to let us display the products with no prices. Then we created an Exclusive Contractor section that will allow users to see the price and be able to purchase the products online. Originally we were going to just direct users to call to make purchases like our competitors are doing. Because we have a large amount of purchasers online we wanted to manipulate the system to be able to allow online purchases. Since these products will have duplicates with no pricing I was thinking that Canonical tags would be kind of best practice. However, everything will be behind a firewall with a message directing people to log in. Since this will undoubtedly create a high bounce rate I feel like I need to no follow those links. This is a rather large site, over 5000 pages. The 250 no follow URLs most likely won't have a large impact on the overall performance of the site. Or so I hope anyway. My gut tells me if these products are going to technically be hidden from the searcher they should also be hidden from the engines. Does Disallowing these URLs seem like a better way to do this than simply using the Canonical tags? Any thoughts or suggestions would be really helpful!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MonicaOConnor0 -
How to know when do use singular vs plural in anchor text and on-page copy?
I'm building out a specific section of our site and I want to make sure I target it correctly. Is there a rule of thumb when to know how to use "car" vs "cars"? (as an example) Is there a specific way to research the right approach? thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JDatSB0 -
Can URLs blocked with robots.txt hurt your site?
We have about 20 testing environments blocked by robots.txt, and these environments contain duplicates of our indexed content. These environments are all blocked by robots.txt, and appearing in google's index as blocked by robots.txt--can they still count against us or hurt us? I know the best practice to permanently remove these would be to use the noindex tag, but I'm wondering if we leave them they way they are if they can still hurt us.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Issues with Google-Bot crawl vs. Roger-Bot
Greetings from a first time poster and SEO noob... I hope that this question makes sense... I have a small e-commerce site, I have had Roger-bot crawl the site and I have fixed all errors and warnings that Volusion will allow me to fix. Then I checked Webmaster Tools, HTML improvements section and the Google-bot sees different dupe. title tag issues that Roger-bot did not. so A few weeks back I changed the title tag for a product, and GWT says that I have duplicate title tags but there is only one live page for the product. GWT lists the dupe. title tags, but when I click on each they all lead to the same live page. I'm confused, what pages are these other title tags referring to? Does Google have more than one page for that product indexed due to me changing the title tag when the page had a different URL? Does this question make sense? 2) Is this issue a problem? 3) What can I do to fix it? Any help would be greatly appreciated Jeff
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IOSC0 -
Should I robots block site directories with primarily duplicate content?
Our site, CareerBliss.com, primarily offers unique content in the form of company reviews and exclusive salary information. As a means of driving revenue, we also have a lot of job listings in ouir /jobs/ directory, as well as educational resources (/career-tools/education/) in our. The bulk of this information are feeds, which exist on other websites (duplicate). Does it make sense to go ahead and robots block these portions of our site? My thinking is in doing so, it will help reallocate our site authority helping the /salary/ and /company-reviews/ pages rank higher, and this is where most of the people are finding our site via search anyways. ie. http://www.careerbliss.com/jobs/cisco-systems-jobs-812156/ http://www.careerbliss.com/jobs/jobs-near-you/?l=irvine%2c+ca&landing=true http://www.careerbliss.com/career-tools/education/education-teaching-category-5/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CareerBliss0