URL structure change and xml sitemap
-
At the end of April we changed the url structure of most of our pages and 301 redirected the old pages to the new ones. The xml sitemaps were also updated at that point to reflect the new url structure. Since then Google has not indexed the new urls from our xml sitemaps and I am unsure of why. We are at 4 weeks since the change, so I would have thought they would have indexed the pages by now. Any ideas on what I should check to make sure pages are indexed?
-
Hi there,
This is odd, 4 weeks is a long time and something is likely going wrong. Are you positive that your 301s have been implemented correctly? Have you received any messages in Search Console/GWT that are relevant?
I would also do as Ikkie suggests and submit prominent URLs which have yet to be indexed here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6259634?hl=en
Please let me know if these checks fail or if you'd like to PM me the URL and I'll take a closer look.
Hope this helps,
Daniel
-
It's just your sitemap index file which is showing pending??
if that is the case then, All it needs to do is addup the values of your other sitemaps (which are referenced in the index file) and show the total stats next to it.Other than that you can submit your site to be index from GWT. See the guidelines here https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6259634?hl=en
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
-
Google Pagination Changes
What with Google recently coming out and saying they're basically ignoring paginated pages, I'm considering the link structure of our new, sooner to launch ecommerce site (moving from an old site to a new one with identical URL structure less a few 404s). Currently our new site shows 20 products per page but with this change by Google it means that any products on pages 2, 3 and so on will suffer because google treats it like an entirely separate page as opposed to an extension of the first. The way I see it I have one option: Show every product in each category on page 1. I have Lazy Load installed on our new website so it will only load the screen a user can see and as they scroll down it loads more products, but how will google interpret this? Will Google simply see all 50-300 products per category and give the site a bad page load score because it doesn't know the Lazy Load is in place? Or will it know and account for it? Is there anything I'm missing?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moon-boots0 -
Changing existing URL to boost SEO
What's best practice regarding changing URLs for SEO? If the page contains great information around a particular term but the URL is not reflective of this and thus the page isn't ranking should the URL be changed? Or is it always a hard and fast no? It would seem to make sense to me if the page didn't have any backlinks already and Organic clicks were minimal. Sam
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Samsam00000 -
Changing sitemaps in console
Hi there, Does anyone have any experience submitting a completely new sitemap structure - including URLs - to google console? We've changed our sitemap plug in, so rather than /sitemap-index.xml, our main sitemap home is /sitemap.xml (as an example). Is it better to 410 the old ones or 301 redirect them to the new sitemaps? If 301, what do we do about sitemaps that don't completely correlate - what was divided into item1.xml, item2.xml is now by date so items-from-2015.xml, items-from-2016.xml and so on. On a related note, am I right in thinking that there's no longer a "delete/ remove sitemap" option on console? In which case, what happens to the old ones which will now 404? Thanks anyone for any insight you may have 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Fubra0 -
How much does URLs with CAPS and URLs with non-CAPS existing on an IIS site matter nowadays?
I work on a couple ecommerce sites that are on IIS. Both sites have return a 200 header status for the CAPS and non CAPS version of the URLs. While I suppose it would be ok if the canonicals pointed to the same version of the page, in some cases it doesn't (ie; /Home-Office canonicalizes to itself and /home-office canonicalizes to itself). I came across this article (http://www.searchdiscovery.com/blog/case-sensitive-urls-and-seo-case-matters/) that is a few years old and I'm wondering how much of an issue it is and how I would determine if it is/isn't?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | OfficeFurn0 -
Sitemap generator which only includes canonical urls
Does anyone know of a 3rd party sitemap generator that will only include the canonical url's? Creating a sitemap with geo and sorting based parameters isn't the most ideal way to generate sitemaps. Please let me know if anyone has any ideas. Mind you we have hundreds of thousands of indexed url's and this can't be done with a simple text editor.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | recbrands0 -
Should I change Permalinks?
I have a site that is doing well in rankings, and its also been accepted in to Google news. I have around 800 article live on the site. My current permalink structure is - /%year%/%monthnum%/%postname%/ What I am wondering, would it be better to change it to - /%postname%/ The reason I ask is that most of the well ranking sites and sites built by SEO companies all seem to have the /%postname%/ Will I get a benefit from changing this? I know that I could republish content have the /%postname%/ permalinks. Are there any other benefits? If the is a benefit, I'd perefr to change it as soon as possible before the site grows even more Thanks in advance for anyone who can help
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnPeters0 -
Which is best structure for Multiple XML Sitemap?
I have read such a great blog posts on Multiple XML Sitemaps on following websites before a week. SEOmoz Distilled Google Webmaster Central Blog Search Engine Land SEO Inc I have created multiple XML sitemaps for my eCommerce website with following structure and submitted to Google webmaster tools. http://www.vistastores.com/main_sitemap.xml http://www.vistastores.com/products_sitemap.xml But, I am not satisfy with my second XML sitemap because it contain more than 7K+ product page URLs and looks like very slow crawling by Google! I want to separate my XML sitemap with following structure. With Root Level Category http://www.vistastores.com/outdoor_sitemap.xml http://www.vistastores.com/furniture_sitemap.xml http://www.vistastores.com/kitchen_dining_sitemap.xml http://www.vistastores.com/home_decor_sitemap.xml OR::: End Level Category http://www.vistastores.com/table_lamps_sitemap.xml http://www.vistastores.com/floor_lamps_sitemap.xml . . . . . . . etc.... So, Which is best structure for Multiple XML Sitemap?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CommercePundit0 -
Are there any disadvantages of switching from xml sitemaps to .asp sitemaps in GWT
I have been using multiple xml sitemaps for products for over 6 months and they are indexing well with GMT. I have been having this manually amended when a product becomes obsolete or we no longer stock it. I now have the option to automate the sitemaps from a SQL feed but using .asp sitemaps that I would submit the same way in GWT. I'd like your thoughts on the Pro's and cons of this, pluses for me is realtime updates, con's I percieve GMT to prefer xml files. what do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | robertrRSwalters0