Difficulty with Indexing Pages - Desperate for Help!
-
I have a website with product pages that use the same URL, but load different data based on what's passed to them with GET. I am using a Wordpress website, but all of the page information is retrieved from a database using PHP and displayed with PHP.
Somehow these pages are not being indexed by Google.
I have done the following:
1. Created a site map pointing to each page.
2. Defined URL parameters in Search Console for these type of pages.
3. Created a product schema using schema.org, and tested it without errors.
I have requested re-indexing repeatedly and these pages and images on the pages are still not being indexed! Does anybody have any suggestions?
-
Hey, David Butler . . . you are probably the only person who has looked at this issue, so I want to thank you again for your input.
I wanted to follow up about this. Since I am using Wordpress for the website, I used Wordpress's rewrite_rule function.
After confirming that it was working correctly, I deleted the old sitemaps and created new ones, then submitted them to Google.
Shortly after this, the pages were successfully indexed.
So from this experience I get the impression that using URL parameters doesn't necessary work -- I certainly am not going to use them in the future.
I am going to mark this issue as resolved.
-
Hi jacleaves,
I'm interested to see how this works out for you!
Please post an update after you've finished your work
Cheers,
David
-
Hey, David Butler,
I am at a loss when it comes to canonical tags -- I am trying to understand how to use them. However, in this case I thought it was set up correctly.
To better explain the website . . . all of the product pages use the same URL, which is http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/.
I programmed the pages to retrieve info from a database and display specific product information based on the parameters passed to them (?mfgID=A-1&catID=4). I cannot change the URL's to be anything different, as they are not actually different pages.
What I had read is that the canonical url should not include the URL parameters, so that is why they were just going to the same page. I created URL parameters in Google Search Console because I thought that would take care of this issue. However it is not.
So . . . what I have done (after reading your post) is gone ahead and changed the canonical URL to include the URL parameters.
Is that how I'm supposed to handle it in this type of a situation?
I am updating this response . . . after further investigation I can take care of changing the URL to something more search-engine friendly by using mod rewrite. I'll test it out.
-
Hi jacleaves,
The problem here is with your canonical tags (more info on canonical tags here).
This page: http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/?mfgID=A-1&catID=4
Has a canonical tag pointing to: http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/
The same thing is happening on all of your product pages.
I would change all of your product pages to use "SEO-friendly" URLs and have a self-referring canonical tag.
Eg. your example page: http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/?mfgID=A-1&catID=4
Would become: http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/a-1-standard-climber-vinyl-playset
And the canonical tag would point to: http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/a-1-standard-climber-vinyl-playsetCheers,
David
-
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for your quick response!
Here's one page:
http://amishdirectplaysets.com/playset-details/?mfgID=A-1&catID=4
My issue is none of the individual product pages are being indexed.
In response to your starting suggestions:
1. I am not blocking any resources.
2. I am not using noindex.
3. Page is being rendered successfully.
One more thing . . . I mis-spoke about how the content is generated. The content on this page is generated by PHP and NOT Javascript. So that is a non-issue. (I corrected this in my initial question.)
I appreciate your feedback. Please let me know if you are able to determine what else I could be missing!
-
Hi jacleaves!
Without your website URL it will be difficult to diagnose the problem as there are a few potential technical issues here. My main worries would be whether you're blocking indexation somehow and the fact you're displaying your content using JavaScript.
I'd start here:
- Check you're not blocking crawlers in your robots.txt file
- Check you're not using the noindex tag
I'd also try using fetch and render in Google Search Console (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6066468?hl=en) for your site pages to see how Google sees them. If googlebot isn't seeing your content, that's a strong hint there's a JavaScript crawling problem.
Also, strap yourself in and read this - https://www.elephate.com/blog/ultimate-guide-javascript-seo/ - it's THE guide for JavaScript SEO.
Let us know how you get on and we'll go from there!
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
-
How will canonicalizing an https page affect the SERP-ranked http version of that page?
Hey guys, Until recently, my site has been serving traffic over both http and https depending on the user request. Because I only want to serve traffic over https, I've begun redirecting http traffic to https. Reviewing my SEO performance in Moz, I see that for some search terms, an http page shows up on the SERP, and for other search terms, an https page shows. (There aren't really any duplicate pages, just the same pages being served on either http or https.) My question is about canonical tags in this context. Suppose I canonicalize the https version of a page which is already ranked on the SERP as http. Will the link juice from the SERP-ranked http version of that page immediately flow to the now-canonical https version? Will the https version of the page immediately replace the http version on the SERP, with the same ranking? Thank you for your time!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JGRLLC0 -
Alternative HTML Structure for indexation of JavaScript Single Page Content
Hi there, we are currently setting up a pure html version for Bots on our site amazine.com so the content as well as navigation will be fully indexed by google. We will show google exactly the same content the user sees (except for the fancy JS effects). So all bots get pure html and real users see the JS based version. My questions are first, if everyone agrees that this is the way to go or if there are alternatives to this to get the content indexed. Are there best practices? All JS-based websites must have this problem, so I am hoping someone can share their experience. The second question regards the optimal number of content pieces ('Stories') displayed per page and the best method to paginate. Should we display e.g. 10 stories and use ?offset in the URL or display 100 stories to google per page and maybe use rel=”next”/"pref" instead. Generally, I would really appreciate any pointers and experiences from you guys as we haven't done this sort of thing before! Cheers, Frank
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FranktheTank-474970 -
Why would one of our section pages NOT be indexed by Google?
One of our higher traffic section pages is not being indexed by Google. The products that reside on this section page ARE indexed by Google and are on page 1. So why wouldn't the section page be even listed and indexed? The meta title is accurate, meta description is good. I haven't received any notices in Webmaster Tools. Is there a way to check to see if OTHER pages might also not be indexed? What should a small ecom site do to see about getting it listed? SOS in Modesto. Ron
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yatesandcojewelers0 -
My indexed pages count is shrinking in webmaster tools. Is this normal ?
I noticed that our total # of indexed pages dropped recently by a substantial amount (see chart below) Is this normal? http://imgur.com/4GWzkph Also, 3 weeks after this started dropping, we got a message on increased # of crawl errors and found that a site update was causing 300+ new 404s. could this be related ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | znotes0 -
Software to monitor indexed pages
Dear SEO moz, As a SEO marketer on a pretty big website I noticed a HUGE amount of dropping pages indexed by google. We did not do anything to block googleblot in the past 6 months, but since November the number of indexed pages decreased from 3.4 milion (3,400.000) to 7 hundred thousand (700,000). Obviously I want to know which pages are de-indexed. Does anyone you know a tool which can do this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JorisHas1 -
Why Does Ebay Allow Internal Search Result Pages to be Indexed?
Click this Google query: https://www.google.com/search?q=les+paul+studio Notice how Google has a rich snippet for Ebay saying that it has 229 results for Ebay's internal search result page: http://screencast.com/t/SLpopIvhl69z Notice how Sam Ash's internal search result page also ranks on page 1 of Google. I've always followed the best practice of setting internal search result pages to "noindex." Previously, our company's many Magento eCommerce stores had the internal search result pages set to be "index," and Google indexed over 20,000 internal search result URLs for every single site. I advised that we change these to "noindex," and impressions from Search Queries (reported in Google Webmaster Tools) shot up on 7/24 with the Panda update on that date. Traffic didn't necessarily shoot up...but it appeared that Google liked that we got rid of all this thin/duplicate content and ranked us more (deeper than page 1, however). Even Dr. Pete advises no-indexing internal search results here: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/duplicate-content-in-a-post-panda-world So, why is Google rewarding Ebay and Sam Ash with page 1 rankings for their internal search result pages? Is it their domain authority that lets them get away with it? Could it be that noindexing internal search result pages is NOT best practice? Is the game different for eCommerce sites? Very curious what my fellow professionals think. Thanks,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | M_D_Golden_Peak
Dan0 -
Best practice for removing indexed internal search pages from Google?
Hi Mozzers I know that it’s best practice to block Google from indexing internal search pages, but what’s best practice when “the damage is done”? I have a project where a substantial part of our visitors and income lands on an internal search page, because Google has indexed them (about 3 %). I would like to block Google from indexing the search pages via the meta noindex,follow tag because: Google Guidelines: “Use robots.txt to prevent crawling of search results pages or other auto-generated pages that don't add much value for users coming from search engines.” http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769 Bad user experience The search pages are (probably) stealing rankings from our real landing pages Webmaster Notification: “Googlebot found an extremely high number of URLs on your site” with links to our internal search results I want to use the meta tag to keep the link juice flowing. Do you recommend using the robots.txt instead? If yes, why? Should we just go dark on the internal search pages, or how shall we proceed with blocking them? I’m looking forward to your answer! Edit: Google have currently indexed several million of our internal search pages.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HrThomsen0 -
Why are so many pages indexed?
We recently launched a new website and it doesn't consist of that many pages. When you do a "site:" search on Google, it shows 1,950 results. Obviously we don't want this to be happening. I have a feeling it's effecting our rankings. Is this just a straight up robots.txt problem? We addressed that a while ago and the number of results aren't going down. It's very possible that we still have it implemented incorrectly. What are we doing wrong and how do we start getting pages "un-indexed"?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MichaelWeisbaum0