Facets Being Indexed - What's the Impact?
-
Hi
Our facets are from what I can see crawled by search engines, I think they use javascript - see here http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/lockers
I want to get this fixed for SEO with an ajax solution - I'm not sure how big this job is for developers, but they will want to know the positive impact this could have & whether it's worth doing.
Does anyone have any opinions on this?
I haven't encountered this before so any help is welcome
-
I think I'd have to request these. I know it's something I need to look at, but I;m not sure how high a priority I should put on it.
Do you think it would make a huge difference if they were stopped from being crawled?
-
Hey Becky, I definitely question if they're being crawled at all. Do you have access to your server logs at all? If so, you could then use Screaming Frog's Log Analyser (https://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/log-file-analyser/) to parse through them and find if Googlebot is indeed hitting those pages. It would be worth the investigation!
-
I am confused as to whether they're even being crawled if Google ignores everything after the #
Perhaps they're being crawled but not indexed...
-
Thanks, I'll do that as a starting point
-
It's a really interesting question and I wonder if they are being crawled. The link destination on them in the right sidebar goes to /#, which shouldn't let the search engines crawl these links.
Are you seeing these parameters in Search Console or your log files? That is where I would look to see if they are actually being hit by Googlebot.
If they are, then you should remove that anchor link and let the checkboxes activate the facets. Not sure how easy this is to do technically, but it's the right way to do it.
-
Hi John,
Yeh I'm just trying to understand it all
Yes that's what I mean with the facet link you've shown.I just want to ensure I'm not wasting Googlebot's time crawling facets which don't need to be crawled.
I'm not so worried about the duplicate pages as there's a canonical, but I don't think these facets are SEO friendly - I'm trying to work out how to make them SEO friendly
-
Hey Becky, I see you posting a bunch about your technical SEO and internal linking/indexation discoveries. Great to see that you're digging in deep!
When you say a "facet", do you mean a link like this - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/multipurpose-storage-lockers#facet:-70000000000000105744949554832109109&productBeginIndex:0&orderBy:5&pageView:grid& ?
If that's the case, that page has a canonical on it back to the base of http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/multipurpose-storage-lockers, but you should take a look in your server logs (this is a good place to start - https://builtvisible.com/log-file-analysis/) to see if these are being hit by Googlebot.
Just trying to figure out what you're asking so I can try to help!
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
-
Canonical URL's searchable in Google?
Hi - we have a newly built site using Drupal, and Drupal likes to create canonical tags on pretty much everything, from their /node/ url's to the URL Alias we've indicated. Now, when I pull a moz crawl report, I get a huge list of all the /node/ plus other URL's. That's beside the point though... Question: when I directly enter one of the /node/ url's into a google search, a result is found. Clicking on it redirects to the new URL, but should Google even be finding these non-canonical URL's?? I don't feel like I've seen this before.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jenny10 -
Google's 'related:' operator
I have a quick question about Google's 'related:' operator when viewing search results. Is there reason why a website doesn't produce related/similar sites? For example, if I use the related: operator for my site, no results appear.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ecomteam_handiramp.com
https://www.google.com/#q=related:www.handiramp.com The site has been around since 1998. The site also has two good relevant DMOZ inbound links. Any suggestions on why this is and any way to fix it? Thank you.0 -
Someone asked me: What's the latest in SEO?
Hi, I'm wondering how others would respond to this question. "What's the latest in SEO?" Someone random asked me this on a plane that does not know much about digital marketing, but has someone else do for their business. I told them the google algortithm is constantly changing and it's always new, that there are about 500 changes a year (thought that was close to right) and then got down to some basic principals. I'm asking how you might answer as I could see someone asking me this within my organization as well. Thanks for any tips on a great answer or resources. Laura
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lauramrobinson321 -
Is it a good or bad idea (in Google's eyes) to add a forum to my website?
I have an active website with many users adding dozens of comments on the many pages of the site daily. I'm am wondering if it would be good for the overall ranking strength of the site if I were to add a forum to it (in a subdirectory, like forum.mysite.com). On one hand, I can see the forum posts as thin content, which Google wouldn't care for. On the other hand, I see the additional user engagement on the site, which I think Google would like. I know the benefits it can have to the users, but for this question, all I want to know is if this would be seen by Google as a plus or a minus for my site, assuming the forum succeeded in becoming popular. I don't want to do anything that will diminish the value of my site in Google's eyes. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bizzer0 -
What's the best way to deal with deleted .php files showing as 404s in WMT?
Disclaimer: I am not a developer During a recent site migration I have seen a bit of an increase in WMT of 404 errors on pages ending .php. Click on the link in WMT and it just shows as File Not Found - no 404 page. There are about 20 in total showing in webmaster tools and I want to advise the IT department what to do. What is the best way to deal with this for on-page best practice? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blaze-Communication0 -
How to get a site out of Google's Sandbox
Hi I am working on a website that is ranking well in bing for the domain name / exact url search but appears no where in Google or Yahoo. I have done the site search in Google and it is indexed so I am presuming it is in the sandbox. The website was originally developed in India and I do not know whether it had some history of bad backlinks. The website itself is well optimised and I have checked all pages in Moz - getting a grade A. Webmaster Tools is not showing any manual actions - I was wondering what I could do next?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AllieMc0 -
301's, Mixed-Case URLs, and Site Migration Disaster
Hello Moz Community, After placing trust in a developer to build & migrate our site, the site launched 9 weeks ago and has been one disaster after another. Sadly, after 16 months of development, we are building again, this time we are leveled-up and doing it in-house with our people. I have 1 topic I need advice on, and that is 301s. Here's the deal. The newbie developer used a mixed-case version for our URL structure. So what should have been /example-url became /Example-Url on all URLs. Awesome right? It was a duplicate content nightmare upon launch (among other things). We are re-building now. My question is this, do we bite the bullet for all URLs and 301 them to a proper lower-case URL structure? We've already lost a lot of link equity from 301ing the site the first time around. We were a PR 4 for the last 5 years on our homepage, now we are a PR 3. That is a substantial loss. For our primary keywords, we were on the first page for the big ones, for the last decade. Now, we are just barely cleaving to the second page, and many are 3rd page. I am afraid if we 301 all the URLs again, a 15% reduction in link equity per page is really going to hurt us, again. However, keeping the mixed-case URL structure is also a whammy. Building a brand new site, again, it seems like we should do it correctly and right all the previous wrongs. But on the other hand, another PR demotion and we'll be in line at the soup kitchen. What would you do?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yogitrout10 -
301 Redirect All Url's - WWW -> HTTP
Hi guys, This is part 2 of a question I asked before which got partially answered; I clicked question answered before I realized it only fixed part of the problem so I think I have to post a new question now. I have an apache server I believe on Host Gator. What I want to do is redirect every URL to it's corresponding alternative (www redirects to http). So for example if someone typed in www.mysite.com/page1 it would take them to http://mysite.com/page1 Here is a code that has made all of my site's links go from WWW to HTTP which is great, but the problem is still if you try to access the WWW version by typing it, it still works and I need it to redirect. It's important because Google has been indexing SOME of the URL's as http and some as WWW and my site was just HTTP for a long time until I made the mistake of switching it now I'm having a problem with duplicate content and such. Updated it in Webmaster Tools but I need to do this regardless for other SE's. Thanks a ton! RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.yourdomain.com [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://yourdomain.com/$1 [L,R=301]
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DustinX0