Client wants to remove mobile URLs from their sitemap to avoid indexing issues. However this will require SEVERAL billing hours. Is having both mobile/desktop URLs in a sitemap really that detrimental to search indexing?
-
We had an enterprise client ask to remove mobile URLs from their sitemaps. For their website both desktop & mobile URLs are combined into one sitemap. Their website has a mobile template (not a responsive website) and is configured properly via Google's "separate URL" guidelines.
Our client is referencing a statement made from John Mueller that having both mobile & desktop sitemaps can be problematic for indexing. Here is the article https://www.seroundtable.com/google-mobile-sitemaps-20137.html
We would be happy to remove the mobile URLs from their sitemap. However this will unfortunately take several billing hours for our development team to implement and QA. This will end up costing our client a great deal of money when the task is completed.Is it worth it to remove the mobile URLs from their main website to be in adherence to John Mueller's advice? We don't believe these extra mobile URLs are harming their search indexing. However we can't find any sources to explain otherwise.
Any advice would be appreciated. Thx.
-
Hey Paul
Did you get any response after tweeting Google? Thx.
-
Paul
That was an excellent response. I also appreciate you going out of your way to hit up Google directly about this as well.Yes we believe that this it is completely unnecessary to employ valuable resources to resolve a very minor issue. However our client would is going to ask us to back our argument.
Thanks again
-
As usual, Mueller's answers can be problematic because they're actually kind of vague. (e.g. his use of "if you use one of the other methods, make sure to follow those instructions separately" in that seroundtable article) Because the question asked in that article is specifically about responsive sites, non m. separate URL versions.
Here's the best I can give you... On that guidelines page you ,inked, Google specifically provides instructions for how to either include the mobile-URL versions of pages in the rel-alternate tag or by annotating the desktop sitemap to include rel-alternate info for the mobile URLS.
It does not make any mention of saying "or you can simply include the mobile URLs in the sitemap as well." Google's usually pretty good about telling us when there is more than one alternate method, while indicating which one they prefer. in this vase, I have to assume the conspicuous absence of any mention of including mobile URLs separately means it shouldn't be done.
Still conjecture, but does that make sense?
I'd definitely say it's imperative that the rel-alternate/rel-canonical treatment must be in place. Beyond that, I suspect it's a crawl budget/crawl efficiency issue, not an actual "indexing will break if mobile URLs are in sitemap" situation. As such, I wouldn't want to prioritise an expensive solution to this over whatever other more high-impact projects might be awaiting funding.
Just for the hell of it, I'll tweet at the Google guys to see if I can get a direct response to "will it cause harm" and let you know if I hear back.
I know this is just another perspective, not anything definitive, but hope it helps?
Paul
-
-
Thanks Thomas. The challenge we have is providing our client with a reputable source (not saying your not credible..lol) that states this is a negligible issue.
-
I don't believe that having the mobile urls in the sitemap is causing any issue. Due to the fact that these urls presumably can be crawled anyway on the mobile subdomain. I can't see any negative for having these urls on a sitemap.
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
-
Load Balancer issues on Search Console
The top linked domains in search console are coming from our load balancer setup. Does anyone know how to remove these as unique sites pointing back to our primary domain? I was told Google is smart enough to ignore these as duplicate domains but if that was the case, why would they be listed as the top linked domains in search console? Most concerned....
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DonFerrari21690 -
How to solve this issue and avoid duplicated content?
My marketing team would like to serve up 3 pages of similar content; www.example.com/one, www.example.com/two and www.example.com/three; however the challenge here is, they'd like to have only one page whith three different titles and images based on the user's entry point (one, two, or three). To avoid duplicated pages, how would suggest this best be handled?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JoelHer0 -
Sever SERP Issues on Teem.com (Long Post)
I work for Teem.com. Here is the story:We used to be Eventboard.io and we enjoyed strong rankings and a healthy organic presence. We changed our name, our website, and expanded upon on our product offerings and launched Teem.com. A lot of content was very similar from Eventboard.io. We had 11 of our big keywords ranking in the top 3 positions. We launched the new website in early October of 2016.Here is what we have done: We setup a network of 301 redirects for the homepage, company pages, events page, blog posts, and each and every long tail page. Everything from the old site had a new place to live on the new site with very similar content. This list was then passed to our server/it folk to implement (we run a StaticPress site so we don't control those from within WordPress). Both the old and new site are WordPress websites. Setup a site domain move through Google Search Console Combed through Teem.com to take care of SEO issues using various tools. We know there are still some issues (speed, etc.) that aren't helping us, but we are in a good state overall in terms of technical SEO. Deep dive into the domain name history, backlinks, internal linking (which could be better). Developed more long-tail content (more coming). Here is what is weird: We have almost no organic traffic (or traction) since our rebrand. We understood we would be hit hard as the domain name was changed, the content changed, and the CMS was revamped. The only real organic search traffic we get is branded to our old name (which is luckily the name of one of our products): Eventboard. We rank well for this and see high conversion from this keyword. We rank very well for "conference room displays" on Bing for our long tail and home page, but we show up at position 23 for our iTunes app page on Google and 33 for the long tail page. We dominate in bing for our company name "Teem" and finally show up Google for our Facebook page in position 13th. Our website is way way down the list (beyond page 5) for the exact company name with super low competition. Site performance has been good, user feedback has been good, site uptime has been great. No red flags here. No blaring errors in search console besides maybe a few 404 pages that are cleaned up every few weeks. We have no idea what to do. Have engaged with multiple SEO agencies. Been told over and over to be patient because of the changes we have made, but we still see no progress 6 months later.We think the issue might be related to something misfiring with our 301 redirects, based on some referral information.Any insight would be greatly, greatly appreciated. We are stumped. Thanks for any help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brycedmorgan0 -
Sitemap indexing
Hi everyone, Here's a duplicate content challenge I'm facing: Let's assume that we sell brown, blue, white and black 'Nike Shoes model 2017'. Because of technical reasons, we really need four urls to properly show these variations on our website. We find substantial search volume on 'Nike Shoes model 2017', but none on any of the color variants. Would it be theoretically possible to show page A, B, C and D on the website and: Give each page a canonical to page X, which is the 'default' page that we want to rank in Google (a product page that has a color selector) but is not directly linked from the site Mention page X in the sitemap.xml. (And not A, B, C or D). So the 'clean' urls get indexed and the color variations do not? In other words: Is it possible to rank a page that is only discovered via sitemap and canonicals?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Adriaan.Multiply1 -
What's the best possible URL structure for a local search engine?
Hi Mozzers, I'm working at AskMe.com which is a local search engine in India i.e if you're standing somewhere & looking for the pizza joints nearby, we pick your current location and share the list of pizza outlets nearby along with ratings, reviews etc. about these outlets. Right now, our URL structure looks like www.askme.com/delhi/pizza-outlets for the city specific category pages (here, "Delhi" is the city name and "Pizza Outlets" is the category) and www.askme.com/delhi/pizza-outlets/in/saket for a category page in a particular area (here "Saket") in a city. The URL looks a little different if you're searching for something which is not a category (or not mapped to a category, in which case we 301 redirect you to the category page), it looks like www.askme.com/delhi/search/pizza-huts/in/saket if you're searching for pizza huts in Saket, Delhi as "pizza huts" is neither a category nor its mapped to any category. We're also dealing in ads & deals along with our very own e-commerce brand AskMeBazaar.com to make the better user experience and one stop shop for our customers. Now, we're working on URL restructure project and my question to you all SEO rockstars is, what can be the best possible URL structure we can have? Assume, we have kick-ass developers who can manage any given URL structure at backend.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | _nitman0 -
Url structure for multiple search filters applied to products
We have a product catalog with several hundred similar products. Our list of products allows you apply filters to hone your search, so that in fact there are over 150,000 different individual searches you could come up with on this page. Some of these searches are relevant to our SEO strategy, but most are not. Right now (for the most part) we save the state of each search with the fragment of the URL, or in other words in a way that isn't indexed by the search engines. The URL (without hashes) ranks very well in Google for our one main keyword. At the moment, Google doesn't recognize the variety of content possible on this page. An example is: http://www.example.com/main-keyword.html#style=vintage&color=blue&season=spring We're moving towards a more indexable URL structure and one that could potentially save the state of all 150,000 searches in a way that Google could read. An example would be: http://www.example.com/main-keyword/vintage/blue/spring/ I worry, though, that giving so many options in our URL will confuse Google and make a lot of duplicate content. After all, we only have a few hundred products and inevitably many of the searches will look pretty similar. Also, I worry about losing ground on the main http://www.example.com/main-keyword.html page, when it's ranking so well at the moment. So I guess the questions are: Is there such a think as having URLs be too specific? Should we noindex or set rel=canonical on the pages whose keywords are nested too deep? Will our main keyword's page suffer when it has to share all the inbound links with these other, more specific searches?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | boxcarpress0 -
Cleaning up /index.html on home page
All, What is the best way to deal with a home page that has the /index.html at the end of it? 301 redirect to the .com home page? Just want to make sure I'm not missing something. Thanks in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JSOC0 -
Mobile site version - Is it a duplication issue?
There is a blog www.blogname.com and someone creates 2 mobile versions: iphone.blogname.com mobile.blogname.com they are the perfect copy of www.blogname.com (articles, tags, links, etc etc) How Google will manage them? Right now, my article gets backlink by three sites www.blogname.com iphone.blogname.com mobile.blogname.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Greenman0