Robot.txt pattern matching
-
Hola fellow SEO peoples!
Site: http://www.sierratradingpost.com
robot: http://www.sierratradingpost.com/robots.txt
Please see the following line: Disallow: /keycodebypid~*
We are trying to block URLs like this:
http://www.sierratradingpost.com/keycodebypid~8855/for-the-home~d~3/kitchen~d~24/
but we still find them in the Google index.
1. we are not sure if we need to specify the robot to use pattern matching.
2. we are not sure if the format is correct. Should we use Disallow: /keycodebypid*/ or /*keycodebypid/ or even /*keycodebypid~/?
What is even more confusing is that the meta robot command line says "noindex" - yet they still show up. <meta name="robots" content="noindex, follow, noarchive" />
Thank you!
-
ok, so not sure sure this was shared. Matt Cutts talking on this same subject.
| | <cite class="kvm">www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2giR-WKUfY</cite> |
-
John, The article was a real eye-opener!Thanks again!
-
Somehow Google is finding these pages, but you're disallowing the Googlebot from reading the page, so it doesn't know anything about the meta noindex tag on the page. If you have meta noindex tags on all of these pages, you can remove that line in your robots.txt preventing bots from reading these pages, and as Google crawls these pages, they should remove them from their SERPs.
-
Great point! I will remember that. However I have both the disallow line in the robots.txt file and I also have the noindex meta command. Yet Google shows 3000 of them!?!?!?!
http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.sierratradingpost.com+keycodebypid
-
Well done John!!!
-
Hi,
then you have the robots.txt and the meta tag. I think its better the metatag (http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/robotstxt)
Have you WebMaster Tools in your web? you can test your robots.txt file (http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=156449)
-
Here's a good SEOMoz post about this: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/robot-access-indexation-restriction-techniques-avoiding-conflicts. What's most likely happening is that the disallow in robots.txt is preventing the bots from indexing the page, so they're not going to find the meta noindex tag. If people link to one of these pages externally, the disallow in robots.txt does not prevent the page from appearing in search results.
The robots.txt syntax you're using now looks correct to me for what you're trying to do.
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 to stop robots.txt restricting access to sitemap?
I'm working on a site right now and having an issue with the robots.txt file restricting access to the sitemap - with no web dev to help, I'm wondering how I can fix the issue myself? The robots.txt page shows User-agent: * Disallow: / And then sitemap: with the correct sitemap link
Technical SEO | | Ad-Rank0 -
Are robots.txt wildcards still valid? If so, what is the proper syntax for setting this up?
I've got several URL's that I need to disallow in my robots.txt file. For example, I've got several documents that I don't want indexed and filters that are getting flagged as duplicate content. Rather than typing in thousands of URL's I was hoping that wildcards were still valid.
Technical SEO | | mkhGT0 -
'External nofollow' in a robots meta tag? (advertorial links)
I believe this has never worked? It'd be an easy way of preventing any penalties from Google's recent crackdown on paid links via advertorials. When it's not possible to nofollow each external link individually, what are people doing? Nofollowing and/or noindexing the whole page?
Technical SEO | | Alex-Harford0 -
Blocked by robots
my client GWT has a number of notices for "blocked by meta-robots" - these are all either blog posts/categories/or tags his former seo told him this: "We've activated following settings: Use noindex for Categories Use noindex for Archives Use noindex for Tag Archives to reduce keyword stuffing & duplicate post tags
Technical SEO | | Ezpro9
Disabling all 3 noindex settings above may remove google blocks but also will send too many similar tags, post archives/category. " is this guy correct? what would be the problem with indexing these? am i correct in thinking they should be indexed? thanks0 -
Use of Robots.txt file on a job site
We are performing SEO on a large niche Job Board. My question revolves around the thought of no following all the actual job postings from their clients as they only last for 30 to 60 days. Anybody have any idea on the best way to handle this?
Technical SEO | | WebTalent0 -
Exact match subdomains
Hi, I have seen significant SEO benefits from owning exact match domains and was wondering whether exact match subdomains hold the same (or some) of these benefits? eg. halloweencostumes.co.uk vs. halloween [dot] costumes.co.uk Many thanks.
Technical SEO | | martyc0 -
What is the sense of robots.txt?
Using robots.txt to prevent search engine from indexing the page is not a good idea. so what is the sense of robots.txt? just for attracting robots to crawl sitemap?
Technical SEO | | jallenyang0 -
Robots.txt and robots meta
I have an odd situation. I have a CMS that has a global robots.txt which has the generic User-Agent: *
Technical SEO | | Highland
Allow: / I also have one CMS site that needs to not be indexed ever. I've read in various pages (like http://www.jesterwebster.com/robots-txt-vs-meta-tag-which-has-precedence/22 ) that robots.txt always wins over meta, but I have also read that robots.txt indicates spiderability whereas meta can control indexation. I just want the site to not be indexed. Can I leave the robots.txt as is and still put NOINDEX in the robots meta?0