Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Url shows up in "Inurl' but not when using time parameters
-
Hey everybody,
I have been testing the Inurl: feature of Google to try and gauge how long ago Google indexed our page. SO, this brings my question.
If we run inurl:https://mysite.com all of our domains show up.
If we run inurl:https://mysite.com/specialpage the domain shows up as being indexed
If I use the "&as_qdr=y15" string to the URL, https://mysite.com/specialpage does not show up.
Does anybody have any experience with this? Also on the same note when I look at how many pages Google has indexed it is about half of the pages we see on our backend/sitemap. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
TY!
-
There are several ways to do this, some are more accurate than others. If you have access to the site which contain the web-page on Google Analytics, obviously you could filter your view down to one page / landing page and see when the specified page first got traffic (sessions / users). Note that if a page existed for a long time before it saw much usage, this wouldn't be very accurate.
If it's a WordPress site which you have access to, edit the page and check the published date and / or revision history. If it's a post of some kind then it may displays its publishing date on the front-end without you even having to log in. Note that if some content has been migrated from a previous WordPress site and the publishing dates have not been updated, this may not be wholly accurate either.
You can see when the WayBack Machine first archived the specified URL. The WayBack Machine uses a crawler which is always discovering new pages, not necessarily on the date(s) they were created (so this method can't be trusted 100% either)
In reality, even using the "inurl:" and "&as_qdr=y15" operators will only tell you when Google first saw a web-page, it won't tell you how old the page is. Web pages do not record their age in their coding, so in a way your quest is impossible (if you want to be 100% accurate)
-
So, then I will pose a different question to you. How would you determine the age of a page?
-
Oh ty! Ill try that out!
-
Not sure on the date / time querying aspect, but instead of using "inurl:https://mysite.com" you might have better luck checking indexation via "site:mysite.com" (don't put in subdomains, www or protocol like HTTP / HTTPS)
Then be sure to tell Google to 'include' omitted results (if that notification shows up, sometimes it does - sometimes it doesn't!)
You can also use Google Search Console to check indexed pages:
- https://d.pr/i/oKcHzS.png (screenshot)
- https://d.pr/i/qvKhPa.png (screenshot)
You can only see the top 1,000 - but it does give you a count of all the indexed pages. I am pretty sure you could get more than 1k pages out of it, if you used the filter function repeatedly (taking less than 1k URLs from each site-area at a time)
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
-
What to do with "trendy" content that is no longer relevant?
Hi all, My company is in the fashion/jewelry industry and we regularly create short content describing the latest trends in jewelry. We do not include any sort of date reference on the content, which means that a searcher who gets to our site has no way of knowing if this is a trend from 2008 or 2016. Does anyone have any experience with the best way to handle this? I want to remain relevant for our customers. It seems like a big disservice to our customers to show them a "trend" which trended 5 years ago. Is there a benefit to keeping this content around or would it be better to cycle it off the site after 6 months or so? Thanks for any advice or experience you have! R.
On-Page Optimization | | FireMountainGems1 -
Is using hyphens in a URL to separate words good practice?
Hi guys, I have a client who wants to use a hyphen to separate two words in the URL to make each work stand out. Is is good or bad practice to use a hyphen in a URL and will it affect rankings? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | StoryScout0 -
URL Path. What is better for SEO
Hello Moz people, Is it better for SEO to have a URL path like this: flowersite.com/anniversary_flowers/dozen_roses OR flowersite.com/dozen_roses Is it better to have the full trail of pages in the URL?
On-Page Optimization | | CKerr0 -
How to Structure URL's for Multiple Locations
We are currently undergoing a site redesign and are trying to figure out the best way to structure the URL's and breadcrumbs for our many locations. We currently have 60 locations nationwide and our URL structure is as follows: www.mydomain.com/locations/{location} Where {location} is the specific street the location is on or the neighborhood the location is in. (i.e. www.mydomain.com/locations/waterford-lakes) The issue is, {location} is usually too specific and is not a broad enough keyword. The location "Waterford-Lakes" is in Orlando and "Orlando" is the important keyword, not " Waterford Lakes". To address this, we want to introduce state and city pages. Each state and city page would link to each location within that state or city (i.e. an Orlando page with links to "Waterford Lakes", "Lake Nona", "South Orlando", etc.). The question is how to structure this. Option 1 Use the our existing URL and breadcrumb structure (www.mydomain.com/locations/{location}) and add state and city pages outside the URL path: www.mydomain.com/{area} www.mydomain.com/{state} Option 2 Build the city and state pages into the URL and breadcrumb path: www.mydomain.com/locations/{state}/{area}/{location} (i.e www.mydomain.com/locations/fl/orlando/waterford-lakes) Any insight is much appreciated. Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | uBreakiFix0 -
Will "internal 301s" have any effect on page rank or the way in which an SE see's our site interlinking?
We've been forced (for scalability) to completely restructure our website in terms of setting out a hierarchy. For example - the old structure : country / city / city area Where we had about 3500 nicely interlinked pages for relevant things like taxis, hotels, apartments etc in that city : We needed to change the structure to be : country / region / area / city / cityarea So as patr of the change we put in place lots of 301s for the permanent movement of pages to the new structure and then we tried to actually change the physical on-page links too. Unfortunately we have left a good 600 or 700 links that point to the old pages, but are picked up by the 301 redirect on page, so we're slowly going through them to ensure the links go to the new location directly (not via the 301). So my question is (sorry for long waffle) : Whilst it must surely be "best practice" for all on-page links to go directly to the 'right' page, are we harming our own interlinking and even 'page rank' by being tardy in working through them manually? Thanks for any help anyone can give.
On-Page Optimization | | TinkyWinky0 -
Is there a tool that will "grade" content?
Does anybody know of a tool that can "grade" content for Panda compliance. For example, it might look at: • the total number of words on the page • the average number of words in sentences • grammar • spelling • repetitious words and/or phrases • Readability—using algorithms such as: Flesch Kincaid Reading Ease Flesch Kincaid Grade Level Gunning Fog Score Coleman Liau Index Automated Readability Index (ARI) For the last 5 months I've been writing and rewriting literally 100s of catalog descriptions—adhering to the "no duplicate content" and "adding value" rubrics—but in an extremely informal style. I would like to know if I'm at least meeting Google Panda's minimum standards.
On-Page Optimization | | RScime250 -
"And" vs "&"
I blog for hotels and I am wondering whether it is best to have on a wordpress tagline the name of the hotel such as Holiday Inn and Suites vs Holiday Inn & Suites. In Google AdWords, the "and" keyword always beats out the "&" word in exact search. The "&" just always looks cleaner. Also, when I refer to the hotel within a blog post, should I use the "and" or "&" in the name? Please help me understand which is best for seo. Thank you!
On-Page Optimization | | lwilkins0 -
Avoiding "Duplicate Page Title" and "Duplicate Page Content" - Best Practices?
We have a website with a searchable database of recipes. You can search the database using an online form with dropdown options for: Course (starter, main, salad, etc)
On-Page Optimization | | smaavie
Cooking Method (fry, bake, boil, steam, etc)
Preparation Time (Under 30 min, 30min to 1 hour, Over 1 hour) Here are some examples of how URLs may look when searching for a recipe: find-a-recipe.php?course=starter
find-a-recipe.php?course=main&preperation-time=30min+to+1+hour
find-a-recipe.php?cooking-method=fry&preperation-time=over+1+hour There is also pagination of search results, so the URL could also have the variable "start", e.g. find-a-recipe.php?course=salad&start=30 There can be any combination of these variables, meaning there are hundreds of possible search results URL variations. This all works well on the site, however it gives multiple "Duplicate Page Title" and "Duplicate Page Content" errors when crawled by SEOmoz. I've seached online and found several possible solutions for this, such as: Setting canonical tag Adding these URL variables to Google Webmasters to tell Google to ignore them Change the Title tag in the head dynamically based on what URL variables are present However I am not sure which of these would be best. As far as I can tell the canonical tag should be used when you have the same page available at two seperate URLs, but this isn't the case here as the search results are always different. Adding these URL variables to Google webmasters won't fix the problem in other search engines, and will presumably continue to get these errors in our SEOmoz crawl reports. Changing the title tag each time can lead to very long title tags, and it doesn't address the problem of duplicate page content. I had hoped there would be a standard solution for problems like this, as I imagine others will have come across this before, but I cannot find the ideal solution. Any help would be much appreciated. Kind Regards5