What's wrong with this sitemap?
-
I'm stumped: https://reelgood.com/sitemap.xml
-
Have you seen any further improvement on the indexing front, Cat?
Paul
-
Hi Cath,
If you've uploaded recently to Search Console those sitemap, give it a little more time. It usually takes many weeks in order to index a big site like this.
You might try by manyally request to index an URL and its links. This can be done in the option: Fetch as Google, then ask to index and follow its links.Also, There could be some other issue in your URL structure and/or internal linking. Tried to crawl your site with Screaming Frog, starting from the root domain and from a random url and couldn't get more than roughly 1300 HTML pages.
I know that having a sitemap is a way to ensure that every URL is seen by google but if you dont have a good internal linking it makes it more difficult for GoogleBot.My advise, again, be patient and wait a little longer. In my experience it could take over 8 weeks to index a site that size.
Hope it helped.
Best luck.
GR. -
Thanks, Paul, much appreciated. Yes, this all makes sense, but I'm still stumped as to why our site isn't being indexed. I thought I had narrowed it down to the sitemap as the cause, but seems that's not right.
In Google Search Console, it shows 121,000 URLs submitted but only 20,000 URLs indexed.
-
There's nothing wrong with it, Cat, but it's actually what's called a sitemap index. Its job is to contain a list of the specific sitemaps for different sections of the website. The search engines crawl that index, which then points them to where each of the individual sitemaps is located, which they then crawl from there.
This is actually a preferred method for handling large sitemaps and ideally for breaking out the site into subsections so you can better monitor how well the crawlers are dealing with the different sections.
You only need to submit the sitemap index to Google Search Console and Bing Webmaster Tools. You'll see once it's been processed that you can click on the sitemap index link and it will load a page showing the status of all the sub-sitemaps automatically.
That make sense?
Paul
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
-
Should I remove 'local' landing pages? Could these be the cause of traffic drop (duplicate content)?
I have a site that has most of it's traffic from reasonably competitive keywords each with their own landing page. In order to gain more traffic I also created landing pages for counties in the UK and then towns within each county. Each county has around 12 towns landing pages within the county. This has meant I've added around 200 extra pages to my site in order to try and generate more traffic from long tail keywords. I think this may have caused an issue in that it's impossible for me to create unique content for each town/country and therefore I took a 'shortcut' buy creating unique content for each county and used the same content for the towns within it meaning I have lots of pages with the same content just slightly different page titles with a variation on town name. I've duplicated this over about 15 counties meaning I have around 200 pages with only about 15 actual unique pages within them. I think this may actually be harming my site. These pages have been indexed for about a year an I noticed about 6 months ago a drop in traffic by about 50%. Having looked at my analytics this town and county pages actually only account for about 10% of traffic. My question is should I remove these pages and by doing so should I expect an increase in traffic again?
On-Page Optimization | | SamCUK0 -
Sitemap include all site links or just ones we want indexed?
Got a quick sitemap question. We have a clients site built in opencart and are getting ready to submit the sitmap. The default sitemap setting generates urls right off of the root. For example site.com/product. These urls are also accessible through the site itself. We prefer to give the site some depth and have structured the products so the urls are site.com/category/product. All of the product pages have canonicals including the category so we should not have to worry about duplicate content on the /product page vs the /category/product page. My question is both types of product pages are included in the sitemap at the moment. Since we don't want google to index the /product urls should we leave them off of the sitemap even though they are readily accessible from the frontend(though not linked)? Or just leave them and let the canonical tag be used in directing google as to which urls to index. Thanks in advance.
On-Page Optimization | | Whebb0 -
Same titles in Webmasters' tools
Hello, In webmasters' tools I get a message saying I have 505 pages html improvements that are possible because 505 of my titles are used on two pages. Actually, webmasters' tools is tripping since the doubles they find are: www.example.com and www.example.com/ Anyways, I have indexation problems and I was wondering if this could be the case and how to solve that. Thanks for your help;
On-Page Optimization | | EndeR-0 -
Google Doesn't Display A Right Page Title
For some reason Google Displays a wrong page title of some of my pages. E.g. page http://www.imoney.my/home-loan The title in the search reach results says "Home Loan - iMoney", but the one I've set up is <title></span><span class="webkit-html-tag">Housing Loan: Compare Mortgages of All Malaysian Banks @iMoney.my</span><span class="webkit-html-tag"></title> Even when I preview it on the preview tool, it shows the full title, but when I google - again the short one. Does anyone know what the reason for that is?
On-Page Optimization | | imoney0 -
What's the best way to tackle duplicate pages in a blog?
We installed a WP blog on a website and the below result is just an example. All of them lead to the same content. What's the best way to resolve it? http://www.calmu.edu/blog/
On-Page Optimization | | Sangeeta
http://www.calmu.edu/blog/calmu-business-spotlight-veev/
http://www.calmu.edu/blog/category/business-buzz/0 -
SERP - Hi How come I get different results on page one of Google with the same query from my colleague who sits next to me? We are both logged out of Google and it’s on google.co.uk thanks in advance Daniel
Hi How come I get different results on page one of Google with the same query from my colleague who sits next to me? We are both logged out of Google and it’s on google.co.uk thanks in advance Daniel
On-Page Optimization | | ds80 -
Does a page's url have any weight in Google rankings?
I'm sure this question must have been asked before but I can't find it. I'm assuming that the title tag is far more important than the page's url. Is that correct? Does the url have any relevance to Google?
On-Page Optimization | | rdreich490 -
Keyword cannabilization ... I just cant face 301'ing good, well aged pages
Hi Mozzers Ive read a little about your views on cannabilization and would like to run my situation by you. I have 2 pages lets say (a) and (b) that rank ok for a main keyword. However (a) desite being nice and old is not ageing well and is starting to slip a little - its getting harder to spread the link juice so Ive been thinking should I ditch page (a) and focus solely on page (b) for this keyword. Page (b) seems to be getting better serp value right now. What I find hard is that page (a) has been around a while (6 years) and I cant bring myself to 301 it assuming thats what you would normally do to avoid cannabilization. But at the end of the day its a business page and if its failing - yet could inject even more bounce into page (b) it must be worth considering. What is the best way forward here..? Im not sure how quick any transition of link juice would take ? Also what to do with the unique content on page (a)? Seems such a shame to just ditch it. Cheers fella's Morch
On-Page Optimization | | Morch0