Page Count in Webmaster Tools Index Status Versus Page Count in Webmaster Tools Sitemap
-
Greeting MOZ Community:
I run www.nyc-officespace-leader.com, a real estate website in New York City.
The page count in Google Webmaster Tools Index status for our site is 850. The page count in our Webmaster Tools Sitemap is 637. Why is there a discrepancy between the two?
What does the Google Webmaster Tools Index represent? If we filed a removal request for pages we did not want indexed, will these pages still show in the Google Webmaster Tools page count despite the fact that they no longer display in search results? The number of pages displayed in our Google Webmaster Tools Index remains at about 850 despite the removal request. Before a site upgrade in June the number of URLs in the Google Webmaster Tools Index and Google Webmaster Site Map were almost the same.
I am concerned that page bloat has something to do with a recent drop in ranking.
Thanks everyone!!
Alan
-
Using the noindex,follow combination is a form of advanced page sculpting, which is not truly an SEO best practice.
Here's why:
If you deem a page not worthy of being in the Google index, attempting to say "it's not worthy of indexing, but the links on it are worthy" is a mixed message.
Links to those other pages should already exist from pages you do want indexed.
By doing noindex,follow, you increase the internal link counts in artificial ways.
-
Hi Alan:
That is very clear, thanks!!
For pages with thin content, why the "no-follow" in addition to the "no-index"? My SEO firm was also of the opinion that the thin content pages be "no-indexed" however they did not suggest a "no-follow" also.
So I think I will work on improving site speed, enhancing content and no-indexing (and no following?) thin pages. If that does not induce an improvement I guess I will have to consider alternatives.
Thanks,
Alan -
As I already communicated, these are issues that MAY be causing your problems. Without direct access to Google's algorithms, there is zero guarantee that anyone could absolutely say with 100% certainty exactly what impact they are having. And without a full audit, there is no way to know what other problems you have.
Having said that, proper SEO best practices always dictates that any major SEO flaws that you know exist should be cleaned up / fixed. So - if two thirds of your listings have thin content, the best suggestion would be to work to add much more content to each of those (unique, highly relevant, trustworthy and helpful), or to consider a "noindex,nofollow" on those specific pages.
The problem then being if you noindex,nofollow that many pages, what do you have left in terms of overall site scale that Google would find worthy of high rankings? How big are your competitors? Taking away very thin pages helps reduce "low quality" signals, yet if there isn't other "high quality" volume of content you still don't solve all your problems most of the time.
200-250 words is NOT considered a strong volume of content in most cases. Typically these days it's around the 600 words + range. However that also depends on the majority of the competition for that unique type of content in that specific market.
And site speed is also something that best practices dictates needs to be as efficient as possible so if it's slow even intermittently, that would be another thing to definitely work on.
-
Hi Alan:
About maybe 220 pages of the 305 listings have thin content. Meaning less than 100 words.
Is that likely to have triggered a Panda 4.0 penalty in late May? If I add content to those pages of no-index them could that reverse the penalty if it exists. Also my building pages contain 200-250 words. Is that considered "thin"? They are less geared towards the needs of tenants leasing space and contain historical information. I intend to enhance them and display listings on them. Do you think that could help?
Do you think the site speed could be a major factor impacting performance on my site? If so, I can invest in improving speed.
Thanks, Alan
-
thanks for the GA data - so - there's very little traffic to the site so Google isn't able to get accurate page speed data consistently every day.
Note however, that back around July 6th, the site-wide average was almost 40 seconds a page. That's extremely slow. Then on the 17th, it was up around 16 seconds site-wide. So even though the little bit of data the rest of the month shows much faster speeds, those are definitely not good.
I honestly don't know however, given the very small data set, what impact site speed is having on the site. And there's just no way to know how it's impacting the site compared to other problems.
Next - thin content pages - what percentage of the listings has this problem? When I go to a sample listing such as this one I see almost no content. If a significant number of listings you have are this severely thin, that could well be a major problem.
Again though, I don't believe in randomly looking at one, two or even a few individual things as a valid basis for making a wild guess as to exact causes. SEO is not rocket science, however it is computer science. It's complex and hundreds of main factors are involved.
-
Hi Alan:
Interesting tools, URIValet.com, I never heard of it before.
I reviewed site speed on Google Analytics and its seems that intermittently download speeds seem very slow. According to "Site Speed Timings" (see attached) there has been a drop in download speed.
Is download speed a potentially more significant problem than the unknown 175 URLs?
Also, the listing do not appear elsewhere on the web. But many of them have light content. The call to action at the end of the listing is somewhat repetitive. I plan on either no-indexing listings with less than 100 words or adding to the content. The total number of listing URLs is 310. There are also 150 short building write ups URLs (like: http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/metropolitan-life-tower). These don't have more than 150 content. Could they be contributing to the issue?
Is the load time for the URLs on this site so slow that it could be affecting ranking?
Thanks,
Alan -
It would require a developer to examine the structure of the site, how pages are generated - to do an inventory audit related to pages generated, then to match that to the sitemap file. If there are a large number of pages that are duplicate content, or very thin on content, that could be a contributing factor. Since there's less than 1,000 pages indexed in Google, I don't think 175 would be enough by itself as a single factor.
There are many reasons that could be causing your problem. Overall quality is another possible factor. In a test I ran just now at URIValet.com, the page processing speed for the home page in the 1.5 mbps emulator was 13 seconds. Since Google has an ideal of under 3 seconds, if you have serious site-wide processing issues, that could also be a contributing factor. A test of a different page came back at 6 seconds, so this isn't necessarily a site-wide problem, and it may even be intermittent.
Yet if there are intermittent times when speeds are even slower, then yes, that could well be a problem that needs fixing.
So many other possible issues exist. Are the property listings anywhere else on the web, or is the content you have on them exclusive to your site?
What about your link profile? Is it questionable?
Without a full blown audit it's a guess as to what the cause of your visibility drop problems are.
-
Hi Alan:
Your hypothesis regarding the URL structure is interesting. But in this case two the URLs represent buildings and the one with "/listings/" represents a listings. SO that seems ok.
Now you mention the possibility that there may be URLs that do not appear in the site map and are getting indexed by Google. That there is a site map issue with the site. How could I determine this?
Could the additional 175 URLs that have appeared in the last two months contribute to a drop in ranking?
I am complete stumped on thus issue and have been harassing the MOZ community for two months. If you could help get the bottom of this I would be most grateful.
Thanks, Alan
-
Hi Keri:
OK. I will keep that in mind moving forward. I did not realize the duplication.
If a question does not get answered are users allowed to repost?
Thanks,
Alan
-
Hi Alan:
Thanks for your response. Actually the 1st and 3rd URL are for buildings rather than listings, so they are actually formatted correctly. All listings contain "/listings/". So I think, but I am not an expert, that the URL structure is OK.
Thanks,
Alan -
There are many reasons this can be happening.
One cause is where more URLs exist than your sitemap might even include. So the question then is whether the sitemap file is accurate and includes all the pages you want indexed.
Sometimes it's a coding or Information Architecture flaw. where content is found multiple ways.
Doing a random check, I found you have listings showing up in three different ways
- http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/listings/38-broad-street-between-beaver--manhattan-new-york
- http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/113-133-west-18th-street
- http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/inquire-about-the-ladders-137-varick-street-to-rent-office-space-in-ny
See those? One has the address as a sub-page beneath "/listings/" the 2nd version does not, and the 3rd URL is entirely different altogether. There should only be one URL structure for all property listings so this would cause me to wonder whether you have properties showing up with two different URLs.
I didn't find duplication, yet it's a flawed URL issue that leaves me wondering if it's a contributing factor.
This is just a scratching on the surface of possibilities. I did check about blog tags and blog date archives, however none of those are indexed, so they're not a cause based on my preliminary evaluation.
-
Noindexed pages should not appear in your "Index Status". I could be wrong but it doesn't make sense to appear there if the page is noindexed.
Doing a site:www.nyc-officespace-leader.com, I get 849 results. Seems normal to me. Again you would probably have to scrutinize your sitemap instead, sitemaps don't always pull all the URLs depending how on you get them.
Based on Screaming Frog, you got about 860 pages and ~200 noindexed pages. Your index status may update eventually.
Its working as is anyway, http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/blog/tag/manhattan-office-space
Does not show up in SERPs. I wouldn't use Index Status as definitive but more as directional.
-
Thanks for your response.
I am very suspicious that something is amiss. The number of URLs in MOZ's crawl of our site is about 850, almost exactly the same as is on the crawl of our site. This 850 includes no index pages.
Is it normal for Google to show the total number of pages, even if they are no-index in The Webmaster Tools Index?
I would upload the Excel file of the MOZ crawl but I don't know how to do so.
Thanks,
Alan
-
It's best to just ask the same question once, and clarify if needed in the question itself. This seems real similar to the question you asked at http://moz.com/community/q/difference-in-number-of-urls-in-crawl-sitemaps-index-status-in-webmaster-tools-normal, unless I'm missing something.
-
Index status is how many pages Google has indexed of your site.
Sitemap is different, incase your site has pages that are too deep for Google to find, sitemaps are created as a way to direct Googlebot to crawl pages that they won't necessarily find.
In your case Google indexed more pages than the amount of pages in your sitemap, which is absolutely normal.
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
-
Duplicate Page getting indexed and not the main page!
Main Page: www.domain.com/service
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ishrat-Khan
Duplicate Page: www.domain.com/products-handler.php/?cat=service 1. My page was getting indexed properly in 2015 as: www.domain.com/service
2. Redesigning done in Aug 2016, a new URL pattern surfaced for my pages with parameter "products-handler"
3. One of my product landing pages had got 301-permanent redirected on the "products-handler" page
MAIN PAGE: www.domain.com/service GETTING REDIRECTED TO: www.domain.com/products-handler.php/?cat=service
4. This redirection was appearing until Nov 2016.
5. I took over the website in 2017, the main page was getting indexed and deindexed on and off.
6. This June it suddenly started showing an index of this page "domain.com/products-handler.php/?cat=service"
7. These "products-handler.php" pages were creating sitewide internal duplicacy, hence I blocked them in robots.
8. Then my page (Main Page: www.domain.com/service) got totally off the Google index Q1) What could be the possible reasons for the creation of these pages?
Q2) How can 301 get placed from main to duplicate URL?
Q3) When I have submitted my main URL multiple times in Search Console, why it doesn't get indexed?
Q4) How can I make Google understand that these URLs are not my preferred URLs?
Q5) How can I permanently remove these (products-handler.php) URLs? All the suggestions and discussions are welcome! Thanks in advance! 🙂0 -
Client wants to remove mobile URLs from their sitemap to avoid indexing issues. However this will require SEVERAL billing hours. Is having both mobile/desktop URLs in a sitemap really that detrimental to search indexing?
We had an enterprise client ask to remove mobile URLs from their sitemaps. For their website both desktop & mobile URLs are combined into one sitemap. Their website has a mobile template (not a responsive website) and is configured properly via Google's "separate URL" guidelines. Our client is referencing a statement made from John Mueller that having both mobile & desktop sitemaps can be problematic for indexing. Here is the article https://www.seroundtable.com/google-mobile-sitemaps-20137.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB
We would be happy to remove the mobile URLs from their sitemap. However this will unfortunately take several billing hours for our development team to implement and QA. This will end up costing our client a great deal of money when the task is completed. Is it worth it to remove the mobile URLs from their main website to be in adherence to John Mueller's advice? We don't believe these extra mobile URLs are harming their search indexing. However we can't find any sources to explain otherwise. Any advice would be appreciated. Thx.0 -
Glossary index and individual pages create duplicate content. How much might this hurt me?
I've got a glossary on my site with an index page for each letter of the alphabet that has a definition. So the M section lists every definition (the whole definition). But each definition also has its own individual page (and we link to those pages internally so the user doesn't have to hunt down the entire M page). So I definitely have duplicate content ... 112 instances (112 terms). Maybe it's not so bad because each definition is just a short paragraph(?) How much does this hurt my potential ranking for each definition? How much does it hurt my site overall? Am I better off making the individual pages no-index? or canonicalizing them?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | LeadSEOlogist0 -
Our client's web property recently switched over to secure pages (https) however there non secure pages (http) are still being indexed in Google. Should we request in GWMT to have the non secure pages deindexed?
Our client recently switched over to https via new SSL. They have also implemented rel canonicals for most of their internal webpages (that point to the https). However many of their non secure webpages are still being indexed by Google. We have access to their GWMT for both the secure and non secure pages.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB
Should we just let Google figure out what to do with the non secure pages? We would like to setup 301 redirects from the old non secure pages to the new secure pages, but were not sure if this is going to happen. We thought about requesting in GWMT for Google to remove the non secure pages. However we felt this was pretty drastic. Any recommendations would be much appreciated.0 -
Is it a problem that Google's index shows paginated page urls, even with canonical tags in place?
Since Google shows more pages indexed than makes sense, I used Google's API and some other means to get everything Google has in its index for a site I'm working on. The results bring up a couple of oddities. It shows a lot of urls to the same page, but with different tracking code.The url with tracking code always follows a question mark and could look like: http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example http://www.MozExampleURL.com?another-tracking-examle http://www.MozExampleURL.com?tracking-example-3 etc So, the only thing that distinguishes one url from the next is a tracking url. On these pages, canonical tags are in place as: <link rel="canonical<a class="attribute-value">l</a>" href="http://www.MozExampleURL.com" /> So, why does the index have urls that are only different in terms of tracking urls? I would think it would ignore everything, starting with the question mark. The index also shows paginated pages. I would think it should show the one canonical url and leave it at that. Is this a problem about which something should be done? Best... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Indexed non existent pages, problem appeared after we 301d the url/index to the url.
I recently read that if a site has 2 pages that are live such as: http://www.url.com/index and http://www.url.com/ will come up as duplicate if they are both live... I read that it's best to 301 redirect the http://www.url.com/index and http://www.url.com/. I read that this helps avoid duplicate content and keep all the link juice on one page. We did the 301 for one of our clients and we got about 20,000 errors that did not exist. The errors are of pages that are indexed but do not exist on the server. We are assuming that these indexed (nonexistent) pages are somehow linked to the http://www.url.com/index The links are showing 200 OK. We took off the 301 redirect from the http://www.url.com/index page however now we still have 2 exaact pages, www.url.com/index and http://www.url.com/. What is the best way to solve this issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bryan_Loconto0 -
Indexation of content from internal pages (registration) by Google
Hello, we are having quite a big amount of content on internal pages which can only be accessed as a registered member. What are the different options the get this content indexed by Google? In certain cases we might be able to show a preview to visitors. In other cases this is not possible for legal reasons. Somebody told me that there is an option to send the content of pages directly to google for indexation. Unfortunately he couldn't give me more details. I only know that this possible for URLs (sitemap). Is there really a possibility to do this for the entire content of a page without giving google access to crawl this page? Thanks Ben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | guitarslinger0 -
Should you stop indexing of short lived pages?
In my site there will be a lot of pages that have a short life span of about a week as they are items on sale, should I nofollow the links meaning the site has a fwe hundred pages or allow indexing and have thousands but then have lots of links to pages that do not exist. I would of course if allowing indexing make sure the page links does not error and sends them to a similarly relevant page but which is best for me with the SEarch Engines? I would like to have the option of loads of links with pages of loads of content but not if it is detrimental Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | barney30120