Search Results

Search found 58 results on 3 pages for 'noindex'.

Page 1/3 | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> in "Fetch as Google"

    - by Rodrigo Azevedo
    I don't know why but when I execute "fetch as Google" it returns me HTTP/1.1 200 OK Cache-Control: private Content-Type: text/html Content-Encoding: gzip Vary: Accept-Encoding Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5 Set-Cookie: ASPSESSIONIDQACRADAQ=ECAINNFBMGNDEPAEBKBLOBOP; path=/ X-Powered-By: ASP.NET Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:18:29 GMT Content-Length: 153 <meta name="robots" content="noindex"> The noindex doesn't exist. Does anybody know what could be wrong?

    Read the article

  • Using rel=canonical and noindex in a 1-n partners enviroment

    - by Telemako Mako
    We sell a whole site (domain, etc) to partners that create content that is shown together at the main site. What we want to achieve is that the main site copy is the original, but the one that is indexed is the partners copy. We want to do it this way so the search results point to the partner sites but never to the main site while the main site gets all the credit for the links. We are trying setting the main site article with a noindex, follow and a link to the partner article, and in the partner article we have a rel=canonical pointing to the main site article. Are we correct or the noindex at the main site will break the canonical reference?

    Read the article

  • Managing 404 error pages with noindex and url rewrite

    - by ZenMaster
    Currently I use custom 404 error pages, having the following meta on them : <meta content="noindex" name="robots"> My guess is this way Google will remove deleted pages faster from the index, anyone has experienced a case where it does ? Also, is it better to have the url path rewritten to the actual error page, like the url pattern: http://{mysite}/{404_error_page} or is it best to keep the old deleted page's url when serving a 404 error ?

    Read the article

  • Googlebot fetches my pages very frequent, rel-nofollow, meta-noindex or robots.txt-disallow

    - by trante
    Googlebot fetches pages in my site very frequently. And this slowens my website. I don't want Googlebot to crawl too frequent. I decreased crawl rate from Google webmaster tools. But I'm supposing to use these three tools: Adding rel="nofollow" to my inner pages. So Googlebot won't crawl and index them. Adding meta tag "noindex" so Google will remove this page from index and won't get it again. Adding Disallow: /mySomeFolder/ to robots.txt and Googlebot won't crawl that pages. I'm planning to use these methods for my 56.000 pages, except the most important 6-7 pages. Which method would you prefer and what would be disadvantages or advantages ? Or won't it change my website speed etc..

    Read the article

  • Should I set NOINDEX header for my JS, CSS and image files?

    - by Yoga
    Are there any harms if my site send NOINDEX headers for all my static assets? For image files, I refer to those valueless, e.g. background images, button images, etc. Update: more background information I have this concern is since recent Google said they also execute JS and they might fetch content via Ajax. So, for example, if I send noindex for my jQuery script, so Google would not be able to use them to load Ajax, I suppose it is not good for my site's SEO, right?

    Read the article

  • Is it a good idea to add robots "noindex" m tags deep, low content pages, e.g. product model data

    - by Cognize
    I'm considering adding robots "noindex, follow" tags to the very numerous product data pages that are linked from the product style pages in our online store. For example, each product style has a page with full text content on the product: http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE Then many data pages with technical data for each model code is linked from the product style page. http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE-1 http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE-2 http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE-3 It is these technical data pages that I intend to add the no index code to, as I imagine that this might stop these pages from cannibalizing keyword authority for more important content rich pages on the site. Any advice appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Removing existing filtered pages from Google's index: noindex / 301 / canonical to non-filtered page?

    - by Noam
    I've decided to remove some of my site's pages from the Google index to focus more of the indexed pages on higher quality pages. The pages I'm going to remove are already in the index. These removed pages are filtered pages which will continue to exist, I just don't want them in the google index because they add little quality to the same page without any filter selected. I've added in webmaster tools specification of narrow for the parameters that set these filters, but it doesn't seem this changes anything in how he handles these pages. So I'm considering three options: Adding <meta name="robots" content="noindex" /> to the html header of these filtered pages 301 to the non-filtered page that contains the most similar information and will remain in the index Canonical tag. Which I'm not sure is exactly the mainstream use case, as these aren't really the same pages. Which should I use?

    Read the article

  • Is it a good idea to add robots "noindex" meta tags to deep low content pages, e.g. product model data

    - by Cognize
    I'm considering adding robots "noindex, follow" tags to the very numerous product data pages that are linked from the product style pages in our online store. For example, each product style has a page with full text content on the product: http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE Then many data pages with technical data for each model code is linked from the product style page. http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE-1 http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE-2 http://www.shop.example/Product/Category/Style/SOME-STYLE-CODE-3 It is these technical data pages that I intend to add the no index code to, as I imagine that this might stop these pages from cannibalizing keyword authority for more important content rich pages on the site. Any advice appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Should I add rel nofollow to internal links which already have meta noindex?

    - by CamSpy
    Let's say I have a products page with listing producsts and the page has pagination. I would like the 1st page to have all the SE ranking weight so I decided to put meta noindex on the rest of the paginated pages (from page 2 to N). My common sense says that if I don't want pages to not get indexed, I shouldn't also pass link/PR juice to these pages. (Is that smart?) What happens if I set rel="nofollow" for all pagination links from page 2 to page N?

    Read the article

  • adding noindex on pagination

    - by Damodar Bashyal
    I find few conflicts on people's reactions about adding noindex on paginations. What does pro webmasters has to say about this? I am planning to add noindex meta for all paginations with a hope to increase website value, so I would like some pro's feedback on this. e.g. here: http://w3tut.org/blog 3 posts' first few paragraphs are displayed and meta is taken from first post from that page, which will cause duplicate meta issue. Also, 3 posts in a page could be unrelated to each other as well. Is it a good idea to add noindex for these pages, so full article posts get more value?

    Read the article

  • noindex, follow on list views?

    - by Fabrizio
    On one of our client's website we have lot's of list views with links to detail views. (Image a blog with the posts overview and the single pages). The detail views don't change, but the list views will change when new items come up. The pages displaying the list view don't contain any other valuable content. So my question is: Does it make sense to define meta "noindex, follow" on the list view pages (and of course "index, follow" on the detail views) to prevent search engines to point to the list views when the keyword is found in the title or teaser of the list view. By the time the visitor clicks on the list view search result it might have changed and the content is not visible anymore, whereas if he goes directly to the single view he will definitly find what he was searching for? Related question: The startpage also contains mainly a list view. Is it a bad idea to have the start page not indexed? Any SEO gurus here? :) Thanks, Fabrizio.

    Read the article

  • "X-Robots-Tag: noindex" on an HTTP 301 response

    - by Peter O.
    I understand that a resource with X-Robots-Tag: noindex forces some search engines, including Google, not to index the resource further. I also understand that an HTTP 301 response causes search engines to use the redirected URL instead of the original URL to refer to the resource. But what happens if both "X-Robots-Tag: noindex" and status code 301 occur on the same response? It's likely that the original URL will no longer be indexed, but will that cause the redirected URL to no longer be indexed too? This possibility is not mentioned in the X-Robots-Tag specification.

    Read the article

  • Can I benefit from links to pages on my site which have a `noindex` meta tag?

    - by Noam
    I'm trying to understand if/how I can benefit from people linking to pages on my site which are with pages that have a noindex meta tag. 2 actions I'm considering to perform: Remove the robots.txt disallow to these pages, to make sure inner links get the propagated link juice. Adding a canonical tag to the most similar page that doesn't have a noindex meta tag Are these valid approaches that might help? Any others I should consider?

    Read the article

  • Not index page that doesn't have relevant content?

    - by Stuck
    I have a large software website and on each application we let users add comments, reviews and so on. Each of these pages are called for example "Comments About Firefox", "Firefox Reviews" and so on. If we don't have any reviews or we for some reason KNOW that the visitor from Google would be disappointed should we add "noindex" to that page? Or should we just let Google decide if they want to rank us or not?

    Read the article

  • is there a GOTCHA - DBCC CHECKDB ('DBNAME', NOINDEX)?

    - by Deb Anderson
    I am turning on DBCC CHECKDB in our OLTP environment (SQL 2005,2008). System overhead is a very visible thing on our serversso I want them to be as efficient as it makes sense for them to be. HENCE - I want to turn on the NOINDEX option, an option I've never used before. My thoughts are these: if there is a problem with an index that is detected outside the integrity check, that I can just rebuild the index. Also the duration of the integrity checks will be drastically reduced, and the nastier corruption will be detected. What is the flaw in my plan? Thanks, Deb

    Read the article

  • Panda 4: Reducing #indexed pages. How much is enough?

    - by Noam
    I've been hit by panda 4 (40% decrease). I didn't see any change during panda 1-3. From what I've read it and when compared to my site, the change is probably due to the fact that I have over 30M pages indexed on Google, and they've starting seeing that as some sort of bad indication. Although I feel all of the pages have a unique value that Google should crawl, it seems I should make some tough calls and deduce the indexed pages according to some prioritization I will conduct. The question is what should be my target, or what factors should help me figure out a relevant target. How many pages should I try to reduce to? - 25M - 15M - 1M - 2000 Is it enough to add noindex to low priority pages or should I also remove all internal linking to them?

    Read the article

  • Should I prevent search engines indexing tag/category pages?

    - by Macha
    On my site, I currently have no special rules for search engines. It is a blog, statically generated using a Python program. When I search for some of my articles on Google, there is usually a tag or category page included in the results. Sometimes it even ranks ahead of the article itself. Obviously, as these links aren't always going to have the article on them, this aren't the results I want people to click on. So, I'm thinking of setting noindex on these pages. Is there any possible downside to doing so? Is this possible to do via robots.txt, or do I have to add it to all the relevant templates? All I can find for robots.txt are ways to stop the search engine crawling those pages, which isn't what I want - while I don't want them indexed, it's still the only surefire way to find all my blog posts.

    Read the article

  • Should I use nodindex, follow or rel canonical?

    - by webmasters
    I have a site that lists offers, promotions from other websites. Since the offers expire rather quickly I don't save them into my database. I see no point in having a page from 2010 about 30% discount on a certain brand of shoes which isn't availabe anymore. A visitor enters my website; He clicks on the "shoes" category; http://www.mysite.com/shoes/ Here he sees 20 available promotions from different online stores. He clicks on a promotion and gets to a page like this: http://www.mysite.com/shoes/promotions/prada Questions: I use the template promotions.php and list all the promotions. /promotions/prada/ /promotions/otherbrand/ .... What I do is use "noindex, follow" for the links. Is that a good idea? Or should I use rel="canonical" for the promotion page? How do you advise me to handle this from the SEO point of view?

    Read the article

  • Is Google indexing pages that has no connection with other pages? [duplicate]

    - by Grkmksk
    This question already has an answer here: How did Google find my unlinked newly created pages? 3 answers I am working on a web project that has nearly 100 thousand instant users and there is a webpage that we are using for test cases. There are no links pointing to it from other pages. It shouldn't be indexed by Google or any other search engines. "noindex" can be used in this situation, I know but I wonder if Google (or any others) indexes this page, if I don't do anything to prevent it.

    Read the article

  • What is the proper SEO handling of pages appearing in popups using IFRAMEs?

    - by Alexis Wilke
    I am working on a CMS which makes use of IFRAMEs to display some forms, for illustration, say a Search form. So the user clicks the Search button and the website reacts by opening a popup window which includes an IFRAME to the actual Search form. This means I have a "bare"¹ page with the search form. Page which, obviously, is directly accessible via its own URI. In terms of SEO, the forms have no content worthy of being indexed, so I was thinking to mark them as NOINDEX. Is that the correct way to handle such pages? From what I read on some other question, Google suggests to put links from IFRAMEs to other pages. However, I definitively do not want a user visible link to the Home page, or whatever page in link with the form, in the content of my forms because that could be misinterpreted by the user. However, if <link> tags would work too, which one should I use? (i.e. "top" would work, right? with the home page in there?) ¹ By bare I mean that the normal theme is not show, it will be a plain white background with just and only the simplest form.

    Read the article

  • Google won't display site

    - by Markasoftware
    My website (markasoftware.getenjoyment.net) doesn't seem to be indexed properly by Google (I haven't tried other search engines). When I type in the URL of my site it appears right at the top of the list like it should. When I type in the entire contents of the title, however, the site doesn't appear! The title is quite long (Thermonuclear War Game Online: Thermonuclear War By Mark) and it has little (if any) competition. Have I been punished by Google for some reason, or is it something else? I have received zero hits from search engines. Can someone tell me why my site down't appear?

    Read the article

  • SEO Help with Pages Indexed by Google

    - by Joe Majewski
    I'm working on optimizing my site for Google's search engine, and lately I've noticed that when doing a "site:www.joemajewski.com" query, I get results for pages that shouldn't be indexed at all. Let's take a look at this page, for example: http://www.joemajewski.com/wow/profile.php?id=3 I created my own CMS, and this is simply a breakdown of user id #3's statistics, which I noticed is indexed by Google, although it shouldn't be. I understand that it takes some time before Google's results reflect accurately on my site's content, but this has been improperly indexed for nearly six months now. Here are the precautions that I have taken: My robots.txt file has a line like this: Disallow: /wow/profile.php* When running the url through Google Webmaster Tools, it indicates that I did, indeed, correctly create the disallow command. It did state, however, that a page that doesn't get crawled may still get displayed in the search results if it's being linked to. Thus, I took one more precaution. In the source code I included the following meta data: <meta name="robots" content="noindex,follow" /> I am assuming that follow means to use the page when calculating PageRank, etc, and the noindex tells Google to not display the page in the search results. This page, profile.php, is used to take the $_GET['id'] and find the corresponding registered user. It displays a bit of information about that user, but is in no way relevant enough to warrant a display in the search results, so that is why I am trying to stop Google from indexing it. This is not the only page Google is indexing that I would like removed. I also have a WordPress blog, and there are many category pages, tag pages, and archive pages that I would like removed, and am doing the same procedures to attempt to remove them. Can someone explain how to get pages removed from Google's search results, and possibly some criteria that should help determine what types of pages that I don't want indexed. In terms of my WordPress blog, the only pages that I truly want indexed are my articles. Everything else I have tried to block, with little luck from Google. Can someone also explain why it's bad to have pages indexed that don't provide any new or relevant content, such as pages for WordPress tags or categories, which are clearly never going to receive traffic from Google. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • WordPress > Cannot get custom meta settings to change once set...

    - by Scott B
    The script below adds a custom meta box to the WordPress page editor interface. It lists two specific categories, "noindex" and "nofollow", which my custom theme automatically installs when the theme is activated. It works fine for selecting and assigning the categories to the page. However, if the user unchecks either of them, the settings do not stick. Once selected, they cannot be removed from the page, regardless if they are unchecked when the page is saved. <?php function my_post_categories_meta_box() { add_meta_box('categorydiv', __('Page Options'), 'post_categories_meta_box_modified', 'page', 'side', 'core'); } function post_categories_meta_box_modified($post) { $noindexCat = get_cat_ID('noindex'); $nofollowCat = get_cat_ID('nofollow'); if(in_category("noindex")){ $noindexChecked = " checked='checked'";} if(in_category("nofollow")){ $nofollowChecked = " checked='checked'";} ?> <div id="categories-all" class="ui-tabs-panel"> <ul id="categorychecklist" class="list:category categorychecklist form-no-clear"> <li id='category-<?php echo $noindexCat ?>' class="popular-category"><label class="selectit"><input value="<?php echo $noindexCat ?>" type="checkbox" name="post_category[]" id="in-category-<?php echo $noindexCat ?>"<?php echo $noindexChecked ?> /> noindex</label></li> <li id='category-<?php echo $nofollowCat ?>' class="popular-category"><label class="selectit"><input value="<?php echo $nofollowCat ?>" type="checkbox" name="post_category[]" id="in-category-<?php echo $nofollowCat ?>"<?php echo $nofollowChecked ?> /> nofollow</label></li> </ul> </div> <?php } add_action('admin_menu', 'my_post_categories_meta_box'); ?>

    Read the article

  • WordPress Custom Category Picker in Page Editor

    - by Scott B
    The 3 lines of code below will add a Category selector widget to the WordPress page editor. add_action('admin_menu', 'my_post_categories_meta_box'); function my_post_categories_meta_box() { add_meta_box('categorydiv', __('Categories'), 'post_categories_meta_box', 'page', 'side', 'core'); } I would like to slightly modify this in order to limit the number of categories that are listed to two: get_cat_ID('nofollow'), get_cat_ID('noindex') In other words, I only want the two categories, nofollow and noindex listed in this box.

    Read the article

  • Pagination, Duplicate Content, and SEO

    - by Iamtotallylost
    Please consider a list of items (forum comments, articles, shoes, doesn't matter) which are spread over multiple pages. Different sort orders are supported (by date, by popularity, by price, etc). So, an URL might look like this (I use the query style here to simplify things): /items?id=1234&page=42&sort=popularity /items?id=1234&page=5&sort=date Now, in terms of SEO, I think I should be worried about duplicate content. After all, each item appears at least as many times as there are sort orders. I've seen Matt Cutts talking about the rel=canonical link tag, but he also said that the canonical page should have very similar content. But this is not the case here because page #1 in a non-canonical sort order might have completely different items than page #1 in the canonical sort order. For a given non-canonical page, there is no clear canonical page listing all the same items, so I think rel=canonical won't help here. Then I thought about using the noindex meta tag on all pages with non-canonical sort order, and not using it on all pages with canonical sort order. However, if I use that method, what will happen with backlinks that are going to non-canonical pages -- will they still spread their page rank juice, even though the first page googlebot (or any other crawler) is going to encounter is marked as "noindex"? Can you please comment on my problem and what you think is the best solution? If you think you have a better solution, please consider that 1) I do not want to use Javascript for this, 2) I do not want all the items to be on one page. Thank you.

    Read the article

1 2 3  | Next Page >