On-site Search - Revisited (again, *zZz*)
-
Howdy Moz fans!
Okay so there's a mountain of information out there on the webernet about internal search results... but i'm finding some contradiction and a lot of pre-2014 stuff. Id like to hear some 2016 opinion and specifically around a couple of thoughts of my own, as well as some i've deduced from other sources. For clarity, I work on a large retail site with over 4 million products (product pages), and my predicament is thus - I want Google to be able to find and rank my product pages. Yes, I can link to a number of the best ones by creating well planned links via categorisation, silos, efficient menus etc (done), but can I utilise site search for this purpose?
-
It was my understanding that Google bots don't/can't/won't use a search function... how could it? It's like expeciting it to find your members only area, it can't login! How can it find and index the millions of combinations of search results without typing in "XXXXL underpants" and all the other search combinations? Do I really need to robots.txt my search query parameter? How/why/when would googlebot generate that query parameter?
-
Site Search is B.A.D - I read this everywhere I go, but is it really? I've read - "It eats up all your search quota", "search results have no content and are classed as spam", "results pages have no value"
I want to find a positive SEO output to having a search function on my website, not just try and stifle Mr Googlebot. What I am trying to learn here is what the options are, and what are their outcomes? So far I have -
_Robots.txt - _Remove the search pages from Google
_No Index - _Allow the crawl but don't index the search pages.
_No Follow - _I'm not sure this is even a valid idea, but I picked it up somewhere out there.
_Just leave it alone - _Some of your search results might get ranked and bring traffic in.
It appears that each and every option has it's positive and negative connotations. It'd be great to hear from this here community on their experiences in this practice.
-
-
Hopefully that helps you some I know we ran into a similar situation for a client. Good luck!
-
Great idea! This has triggered a few other thoughts too... cheers Jordan.
-
I would recommend using screaming frog to crawl only product level pages and export them to a csv or excel doc then copy and past your xml sitemap into an excel sheet. Then from there I would clean up the xml sitemap and sort it by product level pages and just compare the two side by side and see what is missing.
The other option would be to go into google webmaster tools or search console and look at Google Index -> index status and then click the advanced tab and just see what is indexed and what all is being blocked by the robots.txt.
-
@jordan & @matt,
I had done this, this was my initial go-to idea and implementation, and I completely agree this is a solution.
I guess I was hoping to answer the question "can Google even use site search?". as this would answer whether the parameter even needs excluding from robots.txt (I suspect they somehow do, as there wouldn't be this much noise about it otherwise).
That leaves the current situation - Does restricting google from searching my internal search results hinder it's ability to find and index my product pages? I'd argue it does, as since implementing this 6 months ago, the site index status has gone from 5.5m to 120k.
However, this could even be a good thing, as it lowers the Googlebot activity requirement, and should focus on the stronger pages... but the holy grail I am trying to achieve here is to get all my products indexed so I can get a few hits a month from each, i'm not trying to get the search results indexed.
-
Agree with Jordan - block the parameter for search in robots.txt and forget it. It won't bring search traffic in, it shouldn't get crawled but if it does, it's always a negative.
-
I cant speak for everyone but generally we like to robots.txt the search pages. I would imagine since you are working on a large retail site you would want to ensure your other pages get indexed properly so I would imagine blocking the search pages with a robots.txt would suffice. I would also look for some common reoccuring searches through the site search to possibly build content around as well.
I hope that helps some.
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
-
Best way to go about merging 2 sites with significant search volume?
Hi everyone! A client of ours ('Company A') recently acquired another company ('Company B') - both brands carry weight within their industry. Company A's brand name currently registers over 6,500 searches per month, while Company B's brand name draws about 2,500 searches per month. While Company B is smaller, their search volume isn't insignificant. The powers that be plan to discontinue Company B's site at an unspecified date in the future, but it's on the backburner. We'd obviously like to transfer as much of their current ranking as possible, but we also don't want to confuse users. There's additional search volume for term variations such as 'Company B jobs' & 'Company B locations' that we'd like to capture for as long as there's still volume there. Would a microsite with Company B's look & feel (to make it easier to house pages built to capture careers/locations searches) justify its inherent cost, or would it be just as valuable to build a series of landing pages on Company A's site? (Obviously assuming that valid redirects would be in place once Company B's site is taken down.) Thanks in advance!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wilcoxcm0 -
If I put a piece of content on an external site can I syndicate to my site later using a rel=canonical link?
Could someone help me with a 'what if ' scenario please? What happens if I publish a piece of content on an external website, but then later decide to also put this content on my website. I want my website to rank first for this content, even though the original location for the content was the external website. Would it be okay for me to put a rel=canonical tag on the external website's content pointing to the copy on my website? Or would this be seen as manipulative?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RG_SEO1 -
Site Migration of 4 sites into 1?
Hi Guys, I have a massive project involving a migration of 4 sites into 1. 4 sites include: **www.MainSite.com ** www.E-commerce.com www.Membership.com www.ResearchStudy.com Goal of this project is to have 1-4 regrouped into Main Site I will be following the best practice from this post https://moz.com/blog/web-site-migration-guide-tips-for-seos which has an awesome checklist. I am actually about to start Phase 3: URL redirect mapping. Because all of these sites have hundreds of duplicates, I figured I should first resolve the Main Site dup issues before creating the URL redirect mapping but what about the other domains (2,3,4) though? Should I first resolve the Dup issues on those ones as well or it is not necessary since they will be pointing into the Main Site new domain? I want to make sure I don't overwork the programming team and myself. Thanks For sharing your expertise and any tips on how should I move forward with this.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0 -
What this site is doing? Does it look like cloaking to you?
Hi here, I was studying our competitors SEO strategies, and I have noticed that one of our major competitors has setup something pretty weird from a SEO stand point for which I would like to know your thoughts about because I can't find a clear explanation for it. Here is the deal: the site is musicnotes.com, and their product pages are located inside the /sheetmusic/ directory, so if you want to see all their product pages indexed on Google, you can just type in Google: site:musicnotes.com inurl:/sheetmusic/ Then you will get about 290,000 indexed pages. No, here is the tricky part: try to click on one of those links, then you will get a 302 redirect to a page that includes a meta "noindex, nofollow" directive. Isn't that pretty weird? Why would they want to "nonidex, nofollow" a page from a 302 redirect? And how in the heck the redirecting page is still in the index?!! And how Google can allow that?! All this sounds weird to me and remind me spammy techniques of the 90s called "cloaking"... what do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Site rankings down
Our site is over 10 years old and has consistently ranked highly in google.co.uk for over 100 key phrases. Until the middle of April, we were 7th for 'nuts and bolts' and 5th for 'bolts and nuts' - we have been around these positions for 5-6 years easily now. Our rankings dropped mid-April, but now (presumably as a result of Penguin 2.0), we've seen larger decreases across the board. We are now 5th page on 'nuts and bolts', and second page on 'bolts and nuts'. Can anyone please shed any light on this? Although we'd fallen some before Penguin 2.0, we've fallen quite a bit further since. So I'm wondering if it's that. We do still rank well on our more specialised terms though - 'imperial bolts', 'bsw bolts', 'bsf bolts', we're still top 5. We've lost out with the more generic terms. In the past we did a bit of (relevant) blog commenting and obtained some business directory links, before realising the gain was tiny if at all. Are those likely to be the issue? I'm guessing so. It's hard to know which to get rid of though! Now, I use social media sparingly, just Facebook, Twitter and G+. The only linkbuilding I do now is by sending polite emails to people who run classic car clubs that would use our bolts, stuff like that. I've had a decent response from that, and a few have become customers directly. Here's our link profile if anyone would be kind enough as to have a look: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=www.thomassmithfasteners.com Also, SEOMOZ says we have too many links on our homepage (107) - the dropdown navigation is the culprit here. Should I simply get rid of the dropdown and take users to the categories? Any advice here would be appreciated before I make changes! If anyone wants to take a look at the site, the URL is in the link profile above - I'm terrified of posting links anywhere now! Thanks for your time, and I'd be very grateful for any advice. Best Regards, Stephen
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | stephenshone1 -
Can a Hosting provider that also hosts adult content sites negatively affect our SEO rankings on a non-adult site hosted on same platform?
We're considering moving a site to a host that also offers hosting for adult websites. Can this have a negative affect on SEO, if our hosting company is in any way associated with adult websites?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grapevinemktg0 -
Site dancing
Hi guys I have a site which is dancing. I mean one day is on position 20 , if I put more backlinks is falling, after rising again,, I dont know what is going on. The site is 2 years old, pr 2, authority 35. Why this is happening? Usually when he appears again is ranking higher, but today he disappear totally from rankings. Maybe return tomorrow? But anyway why is dancing? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nyanainc0