Robots.txt Disallowed Pages and Still Indexed
-
Alright, I am pretty sure I know the answer is "Nothing more I can do here." but I just wanted to double check. It relates to the robots.txt file and that pesky "A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt". Typically people want the URL indexed and the normal Meta Description to be displayed but I don't want the link there at all. I purposefully am trying to robots that stuff outta there.
My question is, has anybody tried to get a page taken out of the Index and had this happen; URL still there but pesky robots.txt message for meta description? Were you able to get the URL to no longer show up or did you just live with this?Thanks folks, you are always great!
-
And don't forget to remove disallow in robots.txt first, if you want to remove it from index. Because if you add meta nofollow while the page is disallowed it won't go anywhere, crawler will not check it and it will stay indexed.
Allow > Add meta noindex > wait for it to be deindexed > Disallow
-
Hi Chris,
This is a common misconception about the robots.txt file. It's not intended to remove URLs from the index, only to prevent crawling of URLs/folders/parameters/etc.
Here's a quote straight from the Search Console Help site: "You should not use robots.txt as a means to hide your web pages from Google Search results."
You can temporarily remove that URL using Search Console. To permanently remove it, you'll need to add a meta robots noindex tag, the only sure-fire way to prevent indexation. Here's what that tag looks like:
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
-
Block session id URLs with robots.txt
Hi, I would like to block all URLs with the parameter '?filter=' from being crawled by including them in the robots.txt. Which directive should I use: User-agent: *
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mat_C
Disallow: ?filter= or User-agent: *
Disallow: /?filter= In other words, is the forward slash in the beginning of the disallow directive necessary? Thanks!1 -
Magento 1.9 SEO. I have product pages with identical On Page SEO score in the 90's. Some pull up Google page 1 some won't pull up at all. I am searching for the exact title on that page.
I have a website built on Magento 1.9. There are approximately 290,000 part numbers on the site. I am sampling Google SERP results. About 20% of the keywords show up on page 1 position 5 thru 10. 80% don't show up at all. When I do a MOZ page score I get high 80's to 90's. A page score of 89 on one part # may show up on page one, An identical page score on a different part # can't be found on Google. I am searching for the exact part # in the page title. Any thoughts on what may be going on? This seems to me like a Magento SEO issue.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CTOPDS0 -
Do uncrawled but indexed pages affect seo?
It's a well known fact that too much thin content can hurt your SEO, but what about when you disallow google to crawl some places and it indexes some of them anyways (No title, no description, just the link) I am building a shopify store and it's imposible to change the robots.txt using shopify, and they disallow for example, the cart. Disallow: /cart But all my pages are linking there, so google has the uncrawled cart in it's index, along with many other uncrawled urls, can this hurt my SEO or trying to remove that from their index is just a waste of time? -I can't change anything from the robots.txt -I could try to nofollow those internal links What do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cuarto7150 -
Redirected Old Pages Still Indexed
Hello, we migrated a domain onto a new Wordpress site over a year ago. We redirected (with plugin: simple 301 redirects) all the old urls (.asp) to the corresponding new wordpress urls (non-.asp). The old pages are still indexed by Google, even though when you click on them you are redirected to the new page. Can someone tell me reasons they would still be indexed? Do you think it is hurting my rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | phogan0 -
Should we show(to google) different city pages on our website which look like home page as one page or different? If yes then how?
On our website, we show events from different cities. We have made different URL's for each city like www.townscript.com/mumbai, www.townscript.com/delhi. But the page of all the cities looks similar, only the events change on those different city pages. Even our home URL www.townscript.com, shows the visitor the city which he visited last time on our website(initially we show everyone Mumbai, visitor needs to choose his city then) For every page visit, we save the last visited page of a particular IP address and next time when he visits our website www.townscript.com, we show him that city only which he visited last time. Now, we feel as the content of home page, and city pages is similar. Should we show these pages as one page i.e. Townscript.com to Google? Can we do that by rel="canonical" ? Please help me! As I think all of these pages are competing with each other.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sanchitmalik0 -
Using Meta Header vs Robots.txt
Hey Mozzers, I am working on a site that has search-friendly parameters for their faceted navigation, however this makes it difficult to identify the parameters in a robots.txt file. I know that using the robots.txt file is highly recommended and powerful, but I am not sure how to do this when facets are using common words such as sizes. For example, a filtered url may look like www.website.com/category/brand/small.html Brand and size are both facets. Brand is a great filter, and size is very relevant for shoppers, but many products include "small" in the url, so it is tough to isolate that filter in the robots.txt. (I hope that makes sense). I am able to identify problematic pages and edit the Meta Head so I can add on any page that is causing these duplicate issues. My question is, is this a good idea? I want bots to crawl the facets, but indexing all of the facets causes duplicate issues. Thoughts?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | evan890 -
Rel=next/prev for paginated pages then no need for "no index, follow"?
I have a real estate website and use rel=next/prev for paginated real estate result pages. I understand "no index, follow" is not needed for the paginated pages. However, my case is a bit unique: this is real estate site where the listings also show on competitors sites. So, I thought, if I "no index, follow" the paginated pages that would reduce the amount of duplicate content on my site and ultimately support my site ranking well. Again, I understand "no index, follow" is not needed for paginated pages when using rel=next/prev, but since my content will probably be considered fairly duplicate, I question if I should do anyway.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
Best possible linking on site with 100K indexed pages
Hello All, First of all I would like to thank everybody here for sharing such great knowledge with such amazing and heartfelt passion.It really is good to see. Thank you. My story / question: I recently sold a site with more than 100k pages indexed in Google. I was allowed to keep links on the site.These links being actual anchor text links on both the home page as well on the 100k news articles. On top of that, my site syndicates its rss feed (Just links and titles, no content) to this page. However, the new owner made a mess, and now the site could possibly be seen as bad linking to my site. Google tells me within webmasters that this particular site gives me more than 400K backlinks. I have NEVER received one single notice from Google that I have bad links. That first. But, I was worried that this page could have been the reason why MY site tanked as bad as it did. It's the only source linking so massive to me. Just a few days ago, I got in contact with the new site owner. And he has taken my offer to help him 'better' his site. Although getting the site up to date for him is my main purpose, since I am there, I will also put effort in to optimizing the links back to my site. My question: What would be the best to do for my 'most SEO gain' out of this? The site is a news paper type of site, catering for news within the exact niche my site is trying to rank. Difference being, his is a news site, mine is not. It is commercial. Once I fix his site, there will be regular news updates all within the niche we both are in. Regularly as in several times per day. It's news. In the niche. Should I leave my rss feed in the side bars of all the content? Should I leave an achor text link on the sidebar (on all news etc.) If so: there can be just one keyword... 407K pages linking with just 1 kw?? Should I keep it to just one link on the home page? I would love to hear what you guys think. (My domain is from 2001. Like a quality wine. However, still tanked like a submarine.) ALL SEO reports I got here are now Grade A. The site is finally fully optimized. Truly nice to have that confirmation. Now I hope someone will be able to tell me what is best to do, in order to get the most SEO gain out of this for my site. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | richardo24hr0