100K Webmaster Central Not Found Links?
-
http://screencast.com/t/KLPVGTzM I just logged into our Webmaster Central account to find that it shows 100k links that are not found? After searching through all of them they all appear to be from our search bar, with no results? Are we doing something wrong here?
-
Ya, I read through that article yesterday & see that they recommend the same setting as the Yoast plugin should be doing? Although I didn't ever get a response from me to see if there is something missing?
For now, I plan on adding this to the robots.txt file & see what results I get?
Do you know the time frame that it takes to get the updates in GWT? Will this update within a few weeks or would it take longer than that?
Thanks for all the help!
BJ
-
Hello BJ.
The robots.txt file must be on your server, in the document root.
Here is information about how to configure robots.txt
Note that is does have a warning at the end, about how you could possibly lose some link juice, but that is probably a much smaller problem than the problem you are trying to fix.
Nothing is perfect, and with the rate that google changes its mind, who knows what is the right thing to do this month.
Once you have edited robots.txt, you don't need to do anything.
- except I just had a thought - how to get google to remove those items from your webmaster tools. I think you should be able to tell them to purge those entries from GWT. Set it so you can see 500 to a page and then just cycle through and mark them fixed.
-
Sorry to open this back up after a month, in adding this to the robot.txt file is there something that needs to be done within the code of the site? Or can I simply update the robots.txt file within Google Webmaster Tools?
I was hoping to get a response from Yoast on his blog post, it seems there were a number of questions similar to mine, but he didn't ever address them.
Thanks,
BJ
-
We all know nothing lasts forever.
A code change can do all kinds of things.
Things that were important are sometimes less important, or not important at all.
Sometimes yesterdays advice no longer is true.
If you make a change, or even if you make no change, but the crawler or the indexer changes, then we can be surprised at the results.
While working on this other thread:
http://www.seomoz.org/q/is-no-follow-ing-a-folder-influences-also-its-subfolders#post-74287
I did a test and checked my logs. A nofollow meta tag and a nofollow link do not stop the crawlers from following. What it does (we think) is to not pass pagerank. That is all it does.
That is why the robots.txt file is the only way to tell the crawlers to stop following down a tree. (until there is another way)
-
Ok, I've posted a question on Yoast.com blog to see what other options we might have? Thanks for the help!
-
It is because Roger ignores those META tags.
Also, google often ignores them too.
The robots.txt file is a much better option for those crawlers.
There are some crawlers that ignore the robots file too, but you have no control over them unless you can put their IPs in the firewall or add code to ignore all of their requests.
-
Ok, I just did a little more research into this, to see how Yoast was handling this within the plugin & came across this article: http://yoast.com/example-robots-txt-wordpress/
In the article he stats that this is already included within the plugin on search pages:
I just confirmed this, by doing this search on my site & looking at the code: http://www.discountqueens.com/?s=candy
So this has always been in place. Why would I still have the 100K not found links still showing up?
-
We didn't have these errors showing up previously, so that's why I was really suspicious? Also we have Joost De Valk's SEO plugin installed on our site & I thought there was an option to turn off the searches from being indexed?
-
Just to support Alan Gray's response, I'll say it's very important to block crawlers from your site search, because it not only throws errors (bots try to guess what to put in a search box), but also because any search results that get into the index will cause content conflicts, dilute ranking values, and worst case scenario, potentially create the false impression that you have a lot of very thin content / near duplicate content pages.
-
the search bar results are good for searchers but not for search engines. You can stop all search engines and Roger (the seomoz crawler) from going into those pages by adding an entry to your robots.txt file. Roger only responds to his own section of the robots file, so anything you make global will not work for him.
User-agent: rogerbot Disallow: /search/*
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
-
Redirect inbound links to youtube?
I have a website that's been going for 10 years or so, doesn't get huge traffic but it's fairly consistent. About 5 years ago I put the same content on youtube- instructional how to videos. The website offers slightly better content because there are images to accompany the step by step text below the videos. The text is more or less the same on youtube and my website. Recently, youtube has started to vastly out-perform my website. For every page/video on my website, there is a youtube page. They're basically competing against each other. Over the years I have accrued a fair number of links to my website. My question is, should I redirect my inbound links to the relevant youtube pages and sacrifice my website? Thanks! Will
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | madegood0 -
Internal links decrease dramatically
I have an unknown problem with my internal links. but after many searches on Moz community and other sites, I didn't find any answer. the question is: why homepage doesn't enough internal links like other pages? the homepage internal links decrease dramatically in 2 months but it doesn't happen to other pages in the same domain 6l6Bh D0bC1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | canadaoptimize0 -
Internal Linking
Hi, I'm doing internal anchor text links. Relative path. if I use /destination-page instead of https://website.com/destination-page will I still receive a transfer of internal Google trust to the destination page? Does google treat just the / url the same as full url??
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Scotty_Wilson0 -
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
One Way Links vs Two Way Links
Hi, Was speaking to a client today and got asked how damaging two way links are. i.e. domaina.com links to domainb.com and domainb.com links back to domaina.com. I need a nice simple layman's explanation of if/how damaging they are compared to one way links. And please don't answer with you lose link juice as I have a job explaining link juice.... I am explaining things to a non techie! Thank you!!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnW-UK0 -
Fading Text Links Look Like Spammy Hidden Links to a g-bot?
Ah, Hello Mozzers, it's been a while since I was here. Wanted to run something by you... I'm looking to incorporate some fading text using Javascript onto a site homepage using the method described here; http://blog.thomascsherman.com/2009/08/text-slideshow-or-any-content-with-fades/ so, my question is; does anyone think that Google might see this text as a possible dark hat SEO anchor text manipulation (similar to hidden links)? The text will contain various links (4 or 5) that will cycle through one another, fading in and out, but to a bot the text may appear initially invisible, like so; style="display: none;"><a href="">Link Here</a> All links will be internal. My gut instinct is that I'm just being stupid here, but I wanted to stay on the side of caution with this one! Thanks for your time 🙂 http://blog.thomascsherman.com/2009/08/text-slideshow-or-any-content-with-fades
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeterAlexLeigh0 -
Should I remove paid links?
I recently added about 20 paid links from directories but have since seen a 10% drop in traffic. I did also delete about 1000 pages of content that had no inbound links and were duplicated on other sites on the web and replaced the content with new content supplied by a client but still duplicated on other sites on the web, old URLs no longer valid or linked to, new content on new URLs. Assuming the drop in traffic had nothing to do with the content change mentioned above, should I remove the paid links in an attempt to recover? I don't think the old content was bringing in much traffic as it appeared elsewhere on more authoritive sites than mine.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mulith0 -
Links on Google Notebook
I have used OSE to look at links of a competitors site and notice they have dozens for links from Google Notebook pages eg http://www.google.pl/notebook/public/05275990022886032509/BDQExDQoQs8r3ls4j This page has a PA of 48 Is this a legitimate linking strategy?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seanmccauley0