Is a site map necessary or recommended?
-
We have a website that has been up for the past 4 years without a site map.
Google is indexing it. Do we need a site map? Do you recommend we create one and submit it to goggle and bing?
The site is www.logobids.com
Thank you.
-
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the tip. I checked and our .xml sitemap has 55 pages and Google is indexing 53. not sure what the 2 missing pages are or how to find out, but I imagine the difference may have to do with blog archives or something along those lines. At any rate, I'm reassured by this. Thanks again.
Gina
-
Hi Gina,
If you use Google Webmaster Tools you can see how many pages you submitted on your sitemap and how many Google has indexed under Optimization > Sitemaps.
It will also list if you have an issues with your xml sitemap.
Hope this helps.
Mike
-
I would say that the sitemap is not needed per say, however, it is good practice to have one, whether it be for client navigation around a site or to assist Google with the root navigation of the website.
From the earlier days in my SEO career I was taught to always incorporate a few standard items as basic procedure as they once you are used to the routine you cannot do any harm if even Google no longer needs then, these were things like sitemap.html, sitemap.xml and robot.txt.
It seems like Google is no longer taking a sitemap for the same purpose as it used to as the technology is advancing, so it now seems like personal preference.
A little bit like the old:
"Which should you do first, On-page SEO or Off-page SEO?" debate.
Hope this helps.
-
It's not needed per se, but then if you have a large website and you think about the user and you want them to be easily able to find sections of your website, it can't hurt to have a HTML sitemap.
As for XML sitemap, the only reason I consider doing them to make sure if there are any issues of indexability, I know. So that I can act on that information and do something. Otherwise for a large scale website with over hundreds and thousands of pages, how'd you know if you have a section of your site not indexed for whatever reasons ?
-
This is a strong indicator something is up and deserves deeper investigation.
Perhaps you have content duplication issues, low value content (Panda), spammy back links (Penguin) or other indexing issue. See if there is a pattern to the missing pages, perhaps one of the directories is the cause. How old is the site and how is the domain trust/authority coming along?
-
I'm jumping in here with an offshoot question for Mike. (or anyone else with an idea)
You suggest "If you Google site:logobids.com you can see which of your pages Google has indexed."
I just tried that and only 10 out of 40+ pages on our site are coming up. We have both an html site map and an xml site map on our site. There isn't any noindex code on the site other than for blog comments.
Any idea why Google isn't showing them all?
Thanks!!
-
A stale or poorly created sitemap can hurt in the following ways:
- long lived 404 pages - deleted pages continue to be indexed if not removed from the sitemap
- use up Google indexing allowance - if 404 and low value pages are included, Googlebot will use up valuable indexing allowance on them vs covering more of your important content.
- links to private areas - depending on how the map is created, the tool may not be smart enough to not include administration or community pages that you don't want in the index.
- inclusion of noindex pages - a couple methods (such as a robot.txt update after a sitemap is created) will include noindex pages which a technical problem. I'm not 100% sure of the impact but I could see this being a quality indicator.
- create distracting work - maintaining sitemaps, particularly semi-manual ones from Xenu etc., suck time better spent improving your indexability or earning back links.
However, all of these are easily avoidable with a solid approach and/or good server side tools.
-
Thank you for the responses. It seems like it is something that cant hurt the site or the indexing. The sacrifice is my time, other than that it has nothing but upsides and no downside.
I think we will go forward with creating the site map and submitting to Google.
-
I don't have a site map on any of my sites. Never any problem getting indexed or ranking. None.
-
I may get chastised for this but I believe the value of sitemaps is over stated.
All things being equal, I feel they are crutches and band-aids for poor webdesign/production.
Your site should:
- be easily indexed by all engines
- expose all pages with in four-five links of the home page(s)
- utilize thoughtful linking to promote important content in an organic manner
- expose new content on a high value, frequently indexed page (ie the home page) long enough to be found
- be consistent enough that the site will seem similar after one or two passes by Googlebot.
I like sitemaps when big structural changes occur as the sites heal faster. They're good when a lots of pages are only exposed via a long pagination scheme. I also use them to break down parts of a site to expose problem areas (IE when a sitemap has 50 links but Google only indexes 25 of them)
But, they can be detrimental if they are not maintained properly. If anything changes in the structure, it should be immediately reflected in the sitemap. Lots of automated ones don't consider the robot.txt file which can cause problems.
For SEOs, adding a sitemap is an easy way to ensure everything is at least looked at without having to touch the actual site.
Advice: yes, use them but only if you can use them properly or can't fix current indexing issues. Over the long haul however, you should force yourself to think of it as not there.
-
A sitemap is like a map with driving directions for Google. Sure they can probably find their way through your site, but with a map they can get through more efficiently and make sure to look at all of your pages.
It is not required for a site to get indexed.
If you entire site is indexed, you don't "need" a sitemap; however, it is good practice to have one.
Say you add a new page and want it to get indexed quickly by Google, you would just update your sitemap and submit it to Google. It alerts them you have made changes and to reindex your site.
If you Google site:logobids.com you can see which of your pages Google has indexed.
Hope this helps.
Mike
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
-
News site and duplicate/cannibalism/old
Hey everybody. I am working with a handful of medical news websites and some of these sites are rather large. I am noticing/suspecting there is some cannibalism going on here. How do news sites deal with this? Do they noindex the old stuff? Update the old stuff instead of writing a new piece all together? Curious what to do!
On-Page Optimization | | HashtagHustler0 -
Site name in page title - leave it or remove it?
Hi all, Recently came across some authority blog (quicksprout to be precise) which stated that apart from main page, contact page, about us and some other generic pages, site name should be removed as it might produce duplicate content. example "How to blog | Example Site name" This mostly is the issue with tags and categories pages as it shows on Moz issues. Is that really a problem and site name should be taken off them? Thank you.
On-Page Optimization | | Optimal_Strategies1 -
The correct way to go from PHP site to HTML site?
I have a website fully coded in PHP and I am doing a re-design over to an HTML site. I searched through the Q&A and there were some conflicting answers. Some said you will need to 301 all the pages. Others said to use the .htaccess to parse all the files as html. What is the correct way I should go about this? Thanks in advance!
On-Page Optimization | | reliabox0 -
Site structure question
I'm currently working on a very awkward custom-WP setup, in which I can't maintain the present drop-down navigation menu without having those pages under a parent or without completely recoding everything. I have two requirements, for SEO purposes I'm looking for the following structure for each targeted landing page: www.example.com/landing-page as opposed to www.example.com/sub/landing-page Of course, having my landing pages as a child, I get the latter of the two. For navigational purposes they need to fall under a specific category in a drop-down menu. With any other theme or setup this is an easy fix, but not here. What I have now is that the landing pages are currently placed under a parent category page. But, they have custom permalinks. The permalinks are setup as follows www.example.com/landing-page But, technically the exact structure is still www.example.com/sub/landing-page which then redirects to the custom permalink. So, my question is - in an attempt to get my most important landing pages close to the root for better PR and crawlability, do I still get the same benefit with my current setup? Is this structure I have, better, worse, or indifferent? Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | JayAdams320 -
Keyword optimization of main keyword across site.
My site is optimized for keyword "payment gateway" but it seems for each keyword only one page should be optimized as per good SEO. So if I've a page about Paypal then how should I spread the keywords? Here the main will be Paypal and site keyword will be payment gateway. It means site should have more Paypal than payment gateway. But can payment gateway be in 3rd or 4th position in density? Similarly how should I create other pages? How search engines determine the site authority based on keyword? ( let us ignore the external backlinks, context of them and anchor texts).
On-Page Optimization | | rag_gupta0 -
Good Internal Site Structure Idea?
Hello SEOMoz, After reading a bunch of your Site Structure articles, I've decided to make ours more flat. There are numerous pages on our site which are linked to directly from our homepage, wasting mysterious amounts of Link Juice every day. I want to remove most of these links so that the Fewer, and now more heavily weighted, Homepage Links will be more powerful... but I am worried that the pages which I am knocking down to the 3rd tier level already have high rank and are distributing this Juice to other pages. The problem is that 3 of these 9 pages are great for assisting our sales team, so I cannot take those 2 links off of the homepage...so I will be forced to Nofollow them instead. I am worried this is cutting down the number of pages on the site, also cutting out content which was previously indexed. Is this whole thing a good idea at all? And should I just leave those 2 pages alone because I can't remove the link? I'm thinking maybe I should rel=canonical it back to the homepage? I am ultimately trying to rank the homepage for the keyword "POS Software" and this is my on-site strategy for it. Maybe adding a link from those 2 pages that say "POS Software" back to the homepage is the best bet in this scenario? I am trying to learn the absolute best thing to do instead of guessing. Thanks! Derek
On-Page Optimization | | DerekM880 -
Recommended SEO company/expert
It's as simple as the title. We're a well established ecommerce company about to move away from the actinic platform on to a new magento site. Of late our long held rankings have slipped and we are looking for guidance in making up the lost ground and getting the most SEO wise from magento. Thanks is advance.
On-Page Optimization | | LadyApollo0 -
It has been recommended that we remove the number of links in our footer, should we?
We have a pretty user friendly footer with almost an entire site-map on it. It's similar to many e-commerce company footers, and I think it's useful to the user. SEO professionals have recommended that to reduce the number of links on any given page on our site we should compress our footer and only show the headers, thus removing many links. This in my opinion is a disservice to the user and makes the site not look as good, but maybe it's a good idea for SEO to get rid of so many links per page? What do you think? (pic attached) Screen_shot_2011-08-05_at_3.54.53_PM.png
On-Page Optimization | | aran0881