No index
-
Screaming frog spider does index pages on our website like:
- wp-content/plugins/woocommerce/assets/js/frontend/jquery-ui-touch-punch.min.js?ver=2.3.9
- wp-content/plugins/mailchimp-for-wp/assets/css/checkbox.min.css?ver=2.3.2
Is it a bad/good idea to set my parameters in Webmastertools and tell Google not to crawl pages that begin with wp/content?
Thanks!
-
Hi Dirk,
Good explanation, that makes sense.
Thanks!
-
Hi,
If these files are used to render the content on screen - it's not a good idea to block these files from indexing.
Official Google recommendation is to allow these files to be indexed:
"If resources like JavaScript or CSS in separate files are blocked (say, with robots.txt) so that Googlebot can’t retrieve them, our indexing systems won’t be able to see your site like an average user. We recommend allowing Googlebot to retrieve JavaScript and CSS so that your content can be indexed better. "Source: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.be/2014/05/understanding-web-pages-better.html
Rgds,
Dirk
-
I will not suggest you to apply parameters in your robots.txt/WMT unless you're quite sure that your "wp-content" does not contain any content that you want to get indexed.
If you have any problem with Screaming Frog, you may restrict it to not crawl your site. If you're on WordPress try out this plugin "WP Ban",
https://lesterchan.net/portfolio/programming/php/#wordpress-wp-banHope this helps!
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
-
Redirect indexed lightbox URLs?
Hello all, So I'm doing some technical SEO work on a client website and wanted to crowdsource some thoughts and suggestions. Without giving away the website name, here is the situation: The website has a dedicated /resources/ page. The bulk of the Resources are industry definitions, all encapsulated in colored boxes. When you click on the box, the definition opens in a lightbox with its own unique URL (Ex: /resources/?resource=augmented-reality). The information for these colored lightbox definitions is pulled from a normal resources page (Ex: /resources/augmented-reality/). Both of these URLs are indexed, leading to a lot of duplicate indexed content. How would you approach this? **Things to Consider: ** -Website is built on Wordpress with a custom theme.
Technical SEO | | Alces
-I have no idea how to even find settings for the lightbox (will be asking the client today).
-Right now my thought is to simply disallow the lightbox URL in robots.txt and hope Google will stop crawling and eventually drop from the index.
-I've considered adding the main resource page canonical to the lightbox URL, but it appears to be dynamically created and thus there is no place to access (outside of the FTP, I imagine?). I'm most rusty with stuff like this, so figured I'd appeal to the masses for some assistance. Thanks! -Brad0 -
Google indexing .com and .co.uk site
Hi, I am working on a site that is experiencing indexation problems: To give you an idea, the website should be www.example.com however, Google seems to index www.example.co.uk as well. It doesn’t seem to honour the 301 redirect that is on the co.uk site. This is causing quite a few reporting and tracking issues. This happened the first time in November 2016 and there was an issue identified in the DDOS protection which meant we would have to point www.example.co.uk to the same DNS as www.example.com. This was implemented and made no difference. I cleaned up the htaccess file and this made no difference either. In June 2017, Google finally indexed the correct URL, but I can’t be sure what changed it. I have now migrated the site onto https and www.example.co.uk has been reindexed in Google alongside www.example.com I have been advised that the http needs to be removed from DDOS which is in motion I have also redirected http://www.example.co.uk straight to https://www.example.com to prevent chain redirects I can’t block the site via robot.txt unless I take the redirects off which could mean that I lose my rankings. I should also mention that I haven't actually lost any rankings, it's just replaced some URLs with co.uk and others have remained the same. Could you please advise what further steps I should take to ensure the correct URL’s are indexed in Google?
Technical SEO | | Niki_10 -
What would cause a sudden drop in indexed sitemap pages?
I have made no changes to my site for awhile and on 7/14 I had a 20% drop in indexed pages from the sitemap. However my total indexed pages has stayed the same. What would cause that?
Technical SEO | | EcommerceSite0 -
Micro-site homepage not being indexed
http://www.reebok.com/en-US/reebokonehome/ This is a homepage for an instructor network micro-site on Reebok.com The robots.txt file was excluding the /en-US/ directory, we've since removed that exclusion, and resubmitted this URL for indexing via Google Webmaster but we are still not seeing it in the index. Any advice would be very helpful, we may be missing some blocking issue or perhaps we just need to wait longer?
Technical SEO | | PatrickDugan0 -
What to do with 302 redirects being indexed
Hi there, Our site's forums include permalinks that for some reason uses an intermediary URL that 302 redirects to the URL with the permalink anchor. For example: http://en.tradimo.com/learn/chart-analysis/time-frames/ In the comments, there is a permalink to the following URL; en.tradimo.com/co/50c450005f2b949e3200001b/ (there is no content here, and never has been). This URL 302 redirects to the following final URL: http://en.tradimo.com/learn/chart-analysis/time-frames/?offset=0&limit=20#50c450005f2b949e3200001b The problem is, Google is indexing the redirect URL (en.tradimo.com/co/50c450005f2b949e3200001b/) and showing duplicate content even though we are using the nofollow tag on these links. Ideally, we would directly use the last link rather than redirecting. Alternatively, I'd say a 301 redirect would be preferable. But if both aren't available, is there a way to get these pages out of the index? Is the canonical tag the best way? I really wish I could just add /co/ to the robots.txt file, but I think they would still be in the index, right? Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | etruvian0 -
Problem with indexing
Hello, we've changed our CMS recently, everything seems to work well, but for some reason google, and other crawlers can't see or index other pages than main. There is no restriction in robots, nor any other visible issue. Please help if you can. Website: http://www.design-glassware.com/
Technical SEO | | divan0 -
Does Google index XML files?
Does Google or other search engines include XML files in their index? More specifically, I am wondering how Google knows the difference between an xml filetype and an RSS feed.
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Getting Google to index new pages
I have a site, called SiteB that has 200 pages of new, unique content. I made a table of contents (TOC) page on SiteB that points to about 50 pages of SiteB content. I would like to get SiteB's TOC page crawled and indexed by Google, as well as all the pages it points to. I submitted the TOC to Pingler 24 hours ago and from the logs I see the Googlebot visited the TOC page but it did not crawl any of the 50 pages that are linked to from the TOC. I do not have a robots.txt file on SiteB. There are no robot meta tags (nofollow, noindex). There are no 'rel=nofollow' attributes on the links. Why would Google crawl the TOC (when I Pinglered it) but not crawl any of the links on that page? One other fact, and I don't know if this matters, but SiteB lives on a subdomain and the URLs contain numbers, like this: http://subdomain.domain.com/category/34404 Yes, I know that the number part is suboptimal from an SEO point of view. I'm working on that, too. But first wanted to figure out why Google isn't crawling the TOC. The site is new and so hasn't been penalized by Google. Thanks for any ideas...
Technical SEO | | scanlin0