Changes in Sitemap Indexation in GWT?
-
I've noticed some significant changes in the number and percentage of indexed URLs for the sitemaps we've been submitting to Google. I've been tracking these numbers directly from Google Webmaster Tools>Site Configuration>Sitemaps. We've made some changes that could be causing the changes we're seeing, but I want to confirm that this wasn't just a change in the way Google reports the indexation.
Has anyone else noticed major changes, greater than a 30% change, in the indexation of your sitemaps in the past week?
Thanks,
Joe
-
Hey Joe,
I noticed the same thing (large drop in indexed number/percentage of pages) a few days ago and thought that was related to a ranking drop I have experienced. All I did was resubmit all (tag, category, posts) sitemaps via GWT and the next day Google had almost 100% of my submitted URLs back in the index. However, that didn't fix my apparent Google penalty issue so I'm still searching for a solution:
http://www.seomoz.org/q/help-with-diagnosing-google-penalty
Oh, this was with a wordpress site utilizing Yoast's WP SEO plugin to create XML sitemaps.
-
I use the same manual approach, manually dumping into Excel on a regular basis. I'll usually increase the frequency if we are making changes that should effect indexation.
-
Just the past week i am not too sure. Out of curiosity, how do you track your indexed pages? Right now i dump manually into excel for historical records and tracking, which lends to not doing it more than every month or two. You just eyeballing weekly and notice changes?
-
Sorry I forgot to specify that this has been over the past week.
Thanks for the reply, Ryan.
-
What time frame are you talking here?
Edit: I manage about 25 different sites, and I have seen a large fluctuation (increase for the most part) since April/May.I have seen upwards of 50%. Most of my flucuation i think was due do some good site/url structure and SEO work i did a while ago, and i gather that panda & google have liked some of the changes (about freakin time). It has not been due to an increased content.
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 Search Console Not Indexing Pages
Hi there! I have a problem that I was hoping someone could help me with. On google search console, my website does not seem to be indexed well. In fact, even after rectifying problems that Moz's on-demand crawl has pointed out, it still does not become "valid". There are some of the excluded pages that Google has pointed out. I have rectified some of the issues but it doesn't seem to be helping. However, when I submitted the sitemap, it says that the URLs were discoverable, hence I am not sure why they can be discovered but are not deemed "valid". I would sincerely appreciate any suggestions or insights as to how can I go about to solve this issue. Thanks! Screenshot+%28341%29.png Screenshot+%28342%29.png Screenshot+%28343%29.png
Algorithm Updates | | Chowsey0 -
How is this possible? #2 ranking with NO on-page keywords, no backlinks, no sitemap...
Hi everybody. I have a question ... I'm totally stumped. This question is being asked today (November 16th, 2015) just after Google updated something in their algorithm. Nobody seems to know what they did. and it has something to do with the new "Rank Brain" system they're now using. My niche is Logo Design Software (https://www.thelogocreator.com). I had the keywords "logo creator" on the page roughly 7 times. After Google updated, I lost about 10 spots and as of this writing, I've dropped to #15. So, maybe I over optimized. fine. Noticing that for the keyword "logo creator" ... NONE of the top 14 spots actually have "logo creator" in their page title and NONE of them have more that 2 instances (if any) of the keyword "logo creator" on the actual page. So I removed ALL instances of my keyword "logo creator" from my home page - used the Webmaster's Fetch Tool and moved up a few spots instantly. So what the heck? And the #2 spot for that keyword is www.logomakr.com - they have NO words at all on their pages, no blog, no sitemap and far fewer links than anybody in the top 10. Can anybody reading this shed some light? Marc Marc Sylvester
Algorithm Updates | | Laughingbird
Laughingbird Software0 -
Delay between being indexed and ranking for new pages.
I've noticed with the last few pages i've built that there's a delay between them being indexed and them actually ranking. Anyone else finding that? And why is it like that? Not much of an issue as they tend to pop up after a week or so, but I am curious. Isaac.
Algorithm Updates | | isaac6630 -
Is it possible that Google may have erroneous indexing dates?
I am consulting someone for a problem related to copied content. Both sites in question are WordPress (self hosted) sites. The "good" site publishes a post. The "bad" site copies the post (without even removing all internal links to the "good" site) a few days after. On both websites it is obvious the publishing date of the posts, and it is clear that the "bad" site publishes the posts days later. The content thief doesn't even bother to fake the publishing date. The owner of the "good" site wants to have all the proofs needed before acting against the content thief. So I suggested him to also check in Google the dates the various pages were indexed using Search Tools -> Custom Range in order to have the indexing date displayed next to the search results. For all of the copied pages the indexing dates also prove the "bad" site published the content days after the "good" site, but there are 2 exceptions for the very 2 first posts copied. First post:
Algorithm Updates | | SorinaDascalu
On the "good" website it was published on 30 January 2013
On the "bad" website it was published on 26 February 2013
In Google search both show up indexed on 30 January 2013! Second post:
On the "good" website it was published on 20 March 2013
On the "bad" website it was published on 10 May 2013
In Google search both show up indexed on 20 March 2013! Is it possible to be an error in the date shown in Google search results? I also asked for help on Google Webmaster forums but there the discussion shifted to "who copied the content" and "file a DMCA complain". So I want to be sure my question is better understood here.
It is not about who published the content first or how to take down the copied content, I am just asking if anybody else noticed this strange thing with Google indexing dates. How is it possible for Google search results to display an indexing date previous to the date the article copy was published and exactly the same date that the original article was published and indexed?0 -
Domain Change: Leave The Old Domain Homepage Up
We are going to be redesigning our website and switching to a new domain. I think we will set up a permanent 301 redirect from each page of the old domain to a page on the new domain. We would like to leave the old domain homepage up with all content removed and have a link pointing to the new domain. Is there any SEO harm to leaving the old domain homepage up? Thank you! Jessie
Algorithm Updates | | JessieT0 -
Changing in website design reduce traffic? I don't think so.
HI, Around the month of Nov I was working on the website. Due to some reasons I have to change the design of website. I saw my traffic going down and down(70 - 100/day) so roll back it on previous one. after that it improve little bit but not as on previously. (traffic 250 - 300/day). Question: All Urls, content and links are same then how that can effect on the traffic. We have removed all the errors that was shown in the seomoz report.But traffic is still the issue here. We are working on SEO area enough and try to recover from it. Your suggestion may be helpful for us.So I am looking forward for your answers. how i can over come with it. Thanks Regards
Algorithm Updates | | lucidsoftech0 -
Phantom Indexed: 301 Redirected Old URL Shows in Google Search Result!
Today, I have read about Phantom Indexed in Google search result. Because, I was searching about 301 redirect due to indexing of 301 redirected old URLs in Google search result rather than new landing pages. I've added my comment on jennita's blog post about 301 redirect. I would like to paste similar question over here! I have 301 redirected following 3 domains to new website... http://www.lampslightingandmore.com/ To http://www.vistastores.com/table-lamps http://www.vistapatioumbrellas.com/ To http://www.vistastores.com/patio-umbrellas http://www.spiderofficechairs.com/ To http://www.vistastores.com/office-chairs I have done it before 3 months but, Google still shows me home page URL in search result rather than new landing page. You can check following search results to know more about it. For LampsLightingandMore ~ On second or third page::: For VistaPatioUmbrellas ~ On second or third page::: For SpiderOfficeChairs ~ On Second or third page::: I come to know about Phantom Indexed after raised my comment over there. So, why should not start discussion on it. Because, It's all about branding and who'll love to hang old address in front of new home.
Algorithm Updates | | CommercePundit0 -
Should I block non-informative pages from Google's index?
Our site has about 1000 pages indexed, and the vast majority of them are not useful, and/or contain little content. Some of these are: -Galleries
Algorithm Updates | | UnderRugSwept
-Pages of images with no text except for navigation
-Popup windows that contain further information about something but contain no navigation, and sometimes only a couple sentences My question is whether or not I should put a noindex in the meta tags. I think it would be good because the ratio of quality to low quality pages right now is not good at all. I am apprehensive because if I'm blocking more than half my site from Google, won't Google see that as a suspicious or bad practice?1
