Indexing of Search Pages
-
I have a question on indexing search pages of an ecommerce or any website. I read Google doesn't recommend this and sites shouldn't allow indexing of their search pages.
I recently attended an SEO event (BrightonSEO) and one of the talks was on search pages and how big players like eBay, Amazon do index their search pages. In fact, it is a core part of the pages that are indexed.
eBay has to do it, as their product pages are on a time frame and Amazon only allows certain category search pages to be indexed. Reviewing my competitors, they are indexing search pages and this is why they have thousands and millions of web pages indexed.
What are your thoughts? I thought search pages were too dynamic (URL strings) and they wouldn't have a unique page title, meta description or rich content to act as a well optimised page.
Am I missing a trick here?
Cyto
-
Hmm, so what it comes down to is that, you can index search pages but provided they have a purpose or add value to the end user.
For instance, A user would search by category whereas an individual product search result isn't necessary when a product page exists.
Thanks Dirk for the links, helps a lot
Cyto
-
Fantastic as always, Dirk!
-
Hi,
If you read this article (https://www.mattcutts.com/blog/search-results-in-search-results/) - the official guideline is "Use robots.txt to prevent crawling of search results pages or other auto-generated pages **that don’t add much value for users coming from search engines". **(added the bold)
The question is: what is a search result page. if you're selling LCD tv's - the page which is showing only Panasonic tv's could be considered a search result from a query on the site, but it could also be considered as a page which offers value for users searching for a Panasonic LCD tv. Idem if you look for 'jobs in Montreal' - one of the first results is http://ca.indeed.com/jobs-in-Montréal,-QC - which is the same result that you would get if you would search Montreal on http://ca.indeed.com/
If these sites didn't index these "search results pages" they would almost never show up in the SERP's. I think the important part is "adding value for the users".
On dynamic search pages (or facetted navigation) Google even made best practices (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.nl/2014/02/faceted-navigation-best-and-5-of-worst.html) - even though you could consider all these kind of pages as search results.
Hope this clarifies,
Dirk
-
I can see the issue with auctionbased e-commerce sites. But a search result page could be both dynamic and static:
domain.com/results/name-of-search-string
or
domain.com/results/?q=something
I think that optimizing a search result page would be rather difficult since it depends on a unique search which is inpredictable. However, using a static URL for a result page is no good either, as it creates a ton of pages in an index with no meaning.
I wouldn't think that any common site should index their search result 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
-
Internal pages ranking over the homepage: How to optimise to rank better at Google?
Hi, We have experienced a shift in SERP from internal pages ranking over website homepage for more than a year. Previously website homepages used to rank for the primary keyword like moz.com for "SEO". Now we can see that internal pages like moz.com/learn/seo/what-is-seo been ranking for the primary keyword "SEO". Google is picking up these "what is ABC" pages than the homepage. All our competitor sites are ranking with these internal pages which are about "what is (primary keyword)". We do have the same internal pages "what is....", but this pages is not ranking; only our homepage is ranking. Moreover we dropped more than 15 positions after this shift in SERP. How to diagnose this? Thanks
Algorithm Updates | | vtmoz0 -
Seeing some really bad sites that ranked in my niche years ago reaching 1st page
It started after the update about 4 websites form the 1st page dropped to the 2nd and 4 of the other sites just popped back to the 1st page and the bad part is that the Da and inbound links of these sites are really bad, so my question is must we just wait this out till Google realises how bad these site are and some of them haven't been updated in years links broken i can go on and on. what these sites have is just the age of the domains, but can this really be the main focus of these results?
Algorithm Updates | | johan80 -
Schema Mark up - Product Listing Pages
Hi I know you can add product schema to a product page, but can you add mark up to a product listing/category page? If so, which one would you use? I saw the item list mark up but didn't think this was relevant. Thank you
Algorithm Updates | | BeckyKey0 -
Is it bad from an SEO perspective that cached AMP pages are hosted on domains other than the original publisher's?
Hello Moz, I am thinking about starting to utilize AMP for some of my website. I've been researching this AMP situation for the better part of a year and I am still unclear on a few things. What I am primarily concerned with in terms of AMP and SEO is whether or not the original publisher gets credit for the traffic to a cached AMP page that is hosted elsewhere. I can see the possible issues with this from an SEO perspective and I am pretty sure I have read about how SEOs are unhappy about this particular aspect of AMP in other places. On the AMP project FAQ page you can find this, but there is very little explanation: "Do publishers receive credit for the traffic from a measurement perspective?
Algorithm Updates | | Brian_Dowd
Yes, an AMP file is the same as the rest of your site – this space is the publisher’s canvas." So, let's say you have an AMP page on your website example.com:
example.com/amp_document.html And a cached copy is served with a URL format similar to this: https://google.com/amp/example.com/amp_document.html Then how does the original publisher get the credit for the traffic? Is it because there is a canonical tag from the AMP version to the original HTML version? Also, while I am at it, how does an AMP page actually get into Google's AMP Cache (or any other cache)? Does Google crawl the original HTML page, find the AMP version and then just decide to cache it from there? Are there any other issues with this that I should be aware of? Thanks0 -
Dealing with Omitted Page
For my most competitive term, the wrong page ranks (and not well either). The landing page I built for it has never shown up for that term except after I include the omitted results. The page that does rank is category page page above it. All that's fine, because neither page was all that great...BUT, I have completely re-written the content for the landing page, got local area pictures, local testimonials and a video. So here's my question: Should I put all that content on the landing page that's been omitted or tweak the page that ranks and put it there? To me it makes the most sense to put the content on the page that has been omitted, but I don't know how google treats pages that have been omitted in the past. Is it going to have some sort of bias against the page, because it was omitted so many times earlier for that keyword? Or, will it be treated just like any other page, and if the content is good enough, then it will rank just fine. If anyone's dealt with this, then I'd love to hear all about it! Thanks, Ruben
Algorithm Updates | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Delay between being indexed and ranking for new pages.
I've noticed with the last few pages i've built that there's a delay between them being indexed and them actually ranking. Anyone else finding that? And why is it like that? Not much of an issue as they tend to pop up after a week or so, but I am curious. Isaac.
Algorithm Updates | | isaac6630 -
Should my canonical tags point to the category page or the filter result page?
Hi Moz, I'm working on an ecommerce site with categories, filter options, and sort options – teacherexpress.scholastic.com. Should I have canonical tags from all filter and sort options point to the category page like gap.com and llbean.com? or have all sort options point to the filtered page URL like kohls.com? I was under the impression that to use a canonical tag, the pages have to have the same content, meaning that Gap and L.L. Bean would be using canonical tags incorrectly. Using a filter changes the content, whereas using a sort option just changes the order. What would be the best way to deal with duplicate content for this site? Thanks for reading!
Algorithm Updates | | DA20130 -
After on-page is perfect, then what?
I am working on a friend's site and I've optimized his on-page stuff. It's pretty much perfect from SEOMoz analysis. I reduced his Errors from 150+ to 3 and his warnings from 50+ to 0. Notices are at 5. Now, a month has gone by and I've added 3 backlinks in what appears to be reputable sites PR7, PR7, and PR3. His site has dropped from the 2nd listing on the 2nd page to the bottom of the 2nd page now. Now, I realize other sites may be doing seo as well and trying to move to the top, but, seems peculiar. I put in a bit of work to revamp 3 of his pages as well b/c each one had over 300 html validation errors and I reduced it down to 6 or so. The competitor I'm aiming for has these stats: DA: 16 MozRank 3.14 MozTrust: 2.73 My friend's site is: DA: 19 MozRank: 2.21 MozTrust: 2.64 Subdomain metrics is 0 for everything, whereas his competitors have good stats for subdomain metrics. What is that? And what can I do to improve his ranking in Google? Is it just more backlinks? Thanks.
Algorithm Updates | | webtarget0