Huge google index with un-relevant pages
-
Hi,
i run a site about sport matches, every match has a page and the pages are generated automatically from the DB. pages are not duplicated, but over time some look a little bit similar. after a match finishes it has no internal links or sitemap entry, but it's reachable by direct URL and continues to be on google index. so over time we have more than 100,000 indexed pages.
since past matches have no significance and they're not linked and a match can repeat and it may look like duplicate content....what you suggest us to do:
when a match is finished - not linked, but appears on the index and SERP
-
301 redirect the match Page to the match Category which is a higher hierarchy and is always relevant?
-
use rel=canonical to the match Category
-
do nothing....
*301 redirect will shrink my index status, some say a high index status is good...
*is it safe to 301 redirect 100,000 pages at once - wouldn't it look strange to google?
*would canonical remove the past matches pages from the index?
what do you think?
Thanks,
Assaf.
-
-
In terms of what you've written, blocking a page via robots.txt doesn't remove it from the index. It simply prevents the crawlers from reaching the page. So if you block a page via robots.txt, the page remains in the index, Google just can't go back to the page and see if anything has changed. So if you were to block the page via robots.txt, and add a noindex tag to the page, Google won't be able to see the page with the noindex tag to remove it from the index because it's blocked via robots.txt.
If you moved all of your old content to a different folder, and block that folder via robots.txt, Google won't remove those pages from the index. In order to remove them from the index, you would have to go in to Webmaster Tools and use the URL removal tool to remove that new folder from the index - if they see it's blocked via robots.txt, then and only then they'll remove the content from the index - it has to be blocked via robots.txt first in order to remove the whole folder with the URL removal tool.
I'm not sure though if this would work for the future - if you removed a folder from the index, and then added more content that was indexed previously afterwards, I'm not sure what would happen to that new content moved to that folder. Either way, Google will have to come back and recrawl the page to see that it has moved to the new folder, and then remove it from the index. So either way, the content will only be removed once Google recrawls the old content.
So I still think a better way to remove the content from the index is to add the noindex tag to the old pages. To facilitate the search engines reaching these old pages, I'd make sure there is a way the engines can get to them - make sure there is a path they can take to reach them.
Another good idea I saw on a forum post here a while ago would be to create a sitemap containing all of these old pages you have indexed and want removed. Add the noindex tag to the sitemap - using the Webmaster tools sitemap interface, you'll then be able to monitor the progress of deindexation over time - by checking how many pages on the sitemap/s of the old content are originally indexed as reported by webmaster tools, and then you can see later on how many of those pages are still indexed, this will be a good indicator for you of the progress of the deindexation.
-
Dear Mark,
*i've sent you a private message.
i'm starting to understand i've a much bigger problem.
*my index status contain 120k pages while only 2000 are currently relevant.
your suggestion is - after a match finishes pragmatically add to the page and google will remove it from it's index. it could work for relatively new pages but since very old pages don't have links OR sitemap entry it could take a very long time to clear the index cause they're rarely crawled - if at all.
- more aggressive approach would be to change this site architecture and restrict by robot.txt the folder that holds all the past irrelevant pages.
so if today a match URL is like this: www.domain.com/sport/match/T1vT2
restrict www.domain.com/sport/match/ on robots.txt
and from now on create all new matches on different folder like: www.domain.com/sport/new-match-dir/T1vT2
-
is this a good solution?
-
wouldn't google penalize me for removing a directory with 100k pages?
-
if it's a good approach, how much time it will take for google to clear all those pages from it's index?
I know it's a long one and i'll really appreciate your response.
Thanks a lot,
Assaf.
-
there are a bunch of articles out there, but each case is different - here are a few:
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/the-holy-grail-of-panda-recovery-a-1-year-case-study/45683/
You can contact me via private message here on the forum and I can try to take a more in depth look at your site if you can give me some more detailed info.
-
yes. when the 1st Panda update was rolled out i've lost 50% of the traffic from google and haven't really recovered since.
-
Are you sure you got hit by Panda before we talk about a Panda hit?
-
Thanks Mark!
any good article about how to recover from Panda?
-
Exactly - I'd build a strategy more around promoting pages that will have long lasting value.
If you use the tag noindex, follow, it will continue to spread link juice throughout the site, it's just the individual page with the tag will not be included in the search results and will not be part of the index. In order for the tag to work, they first have to crawl the page and see the tag - so it doesn't happen instantaneously - if they crawl these deeper pages once every few weeks, once a month, or even longer, it may take a while for these pages to be removed from the index.
-
Hi Mark
-
these pages are very important when they are relevant (before the match finished) - they are the source of most of our traffic which come from long tail searches.
-
some of these pages have inbound link and it would be a shame to lose all this juice.
-
would noindex remove the pages from the google index? how much time it would take? wouldn't a huge noindex also look suspicious?
-
by "evergreen pages" - you mean pages that are always relevant like League page / Sport page etc...?
Thanks,
Assaf.
-
-
Hi Assaf,
(I'm not stalking you, I just think you've raised another interesting question)
In terms of index status/size, you don't want to create a massive index of empty/low value pages - this is food for Google's Panda algorithm, and will not be good for your site in the long run. It'll get a Panda smack if it hasn't already.
To remove these pages from the index, instead of doing hundreds of thousands of 301 redirects, which your server won't like either, I'd recommend adding the noindex meta tag to the pages.
I'd put a rule in your cms that after a certain point in time, you noindex those pages. Make sure you also have evergreen pages on your site that can serve as landing pages for the search engines and which won't need to be removed after a short period of time. These are the pages you'll want to focus your outreach and link building efforts on.
Mark
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
-
Shopify Website Page Indexing issue
Hi, I am working on an eCommerce website on Shopify.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bhisshaun
When I tried Indexing my newly created service pages. The pages are not getting indexed on Google.
I also tried manual indexing of each page and submitted a sitemap but still, the issue doesn't seem to be resolved. Thanks0 -
Getting Google to index our sitemap
Hi, We have a sitemap on AWS that is retrievable via a url that looks like ours http://sitemap.shipindex.org/sitemap.xml. We have notified Google it exists and it found our 700k urls (we are a database of ship citations with unique urls). However, it will not index them. It has been weeks and nothing. The weird part is that it did do some of them before, it said so, about 26k. Then it said 0. Now that I have redone the sitemap, I can't get google to look at it and I have no idea why. This is really important to us, as we want not just general keywords to find our front page, but we also want specific ship names to show links to us in results. Does anyone have any clues as to how to get Google's attention and index our sitemap? Or even just crawl more of our site? It has done 35k pages crawling, but stopped.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | shipindex0 -
Is Google able to see child pages in our AJAX pagination?
We upgraded our site to a new platform the first week of August. The product listing pages have a canonical issue. Page 2 of the paginated series has a canonical pointing to page 1 of the series. Google lists this as a "mistake" and we're planning on implementing best practice (https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2013/04/5-common-mistakes-with-relcanonical.html) We want to implement rel=next,prev. The URLs are constructed using a hashtag and a string of query parameters. You'll notice that these parameters are ¶meter:value vs ¶meter=value. /products#facet:&productBeginIndex:0&orderBy:&pageView:grid&minPrice:&maxPrice:&pageSize:& None of the URLs are included in any indexed URLs because the canonical is the page URL without the AJAX parameters. So these results are expected. Screamingfrog only finds the product links on page 1 and doesn't move to page 2. The link to page 2 is AJAX. ScreamingFrog only crawls AJAX if its in Google's deprecated recommendations as far as I know. The "facet" parameter is noted in search console, but the example URLs are for an unrelated URL that uses the "?facet=" format. None of the other parameters have been added by Google to the console. Other unrelated parameters from the new site are in the console. When using the fetch as Google tool, Google ignores everything after the "#" and shows only the main URL. I tested to see if it was just pulling the canonical of the page for the test, but that was not the case. None of the "#facet" strings appear in the Moz crawl I don't think Google is reading the "productBeginIndex" to specify the start of a page 2 and so on. One thought is to add the parameter in search console, remove the canonical, and test one category to see how Google treats the pages. Making the URLs SEO friendly (/page2.../page3) is a heavy lift. Any ideas how to diagnose/solve this issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jason.Capshaw0 -
Why is Google ranking irrelevant / not preferred pages for keywords?
Over the past few months we have been chipping away at duplicate content issues. We know this is our biggest issue and is working against us. However, it is due to this client also owning the competitor site. Therefore, product merchandise and top level categories are highly similar, including a shared server. Our rank is suffering major for this, which we understand. However, as we make changes, and I track and perform test searches, the pages that Google ranks for keywords never seems to match or make sense, at all. For example, I search for "solid scrub tops" and it ranks the "print scrub tops" category. Or the "Men Clearance" page is ranking for keyword "Women Scrub Pants". Or, I will search for a specific brand, and it ranks a completely different brand. Has anyone else seen this behavior with duplicate content issues? Or is it an issue with some other penalty? At this point, our only option is to test something and see what impact it has, but it is difficult to do when keywords do not align with content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lunavista-comm0 -
Can I tell Google to Ignore Parts of a Page?
Hi all, I was wondering if there was some sort of html trick that I could use to selectively tell a search engine to ignore texts on certain parts of a page. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Charles_Murdock
Charles0 -
Our client's web property recently switched over to secure pages (https) however there non secure pages (http) are still being indexed in Google. Should we request in GWMT to have the non secure pages deindexed?
Our client recently switched over to https via new SSL. They have also implemented rel canonicals for most of their internal webpages (that point to the https). However many of their non secure webpages are still being indexed by Google. We have access to their GWMT for both the secure and non secure pages.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB
Should we just let Google figure out what to do with the non secure pages? We would like to setup 301 redirects from the old non secure pages to the new secure pages, but were not sure if this is going to happen. We thought about requesting in GWMT for Google to remove the non secure pages. However we felt this was pretty drastic. Any recommendations would be much appreciated.0 -
Why is our page will not being found by google?
Hi, We have a page that went live nearly 2 months ago. https://www.invoicestudio.com/Secure/InvoiceTemplate Why does google not notice it. Both site: URL's return nothing. site:www.invoicestudio.com/Secure/InvoiceTemplate site:www.invoicestudio.com/Secure This is an important page for us and do not understand why google doesn't like it. Hope you can help Thanks Andrew
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Studio330 -
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? or this is like a good example by google
Can links indexed by google "link:" be bad? Or this is like a good example shown by google. We are cleaning our links from Penguin and dont know what to do with these ones. Some of them does not look quality.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bele0