Robots.txt
-
Google Webmaster Tools say our website's have low-quality pages, so we have created a robots.txt file and listed all URL’s that we want to remove from Google index.
Is this enough for the solve problem?
-
Ah, it's difficult to see anything on the page because i can't read Turkish.
The only thing you should know is that every single page in a website should have unique content. So if two pages are exactly or almost exactly the same then Google will think it's duplicate content.
-
Yeah that's definitely a duplicate content issue you're facing.
However, did you know that each of your pages have this little tag right at the top of them? name="robots" content="noindex" />
...Seems like it's already done.
-
Thank You Wesley,
Here our pages but language is Turkish,
http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/detaylar/besiktas-basaksehir-ev-esyasi-tasinma-6495
http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/detaylar/ev-tasima-6503
http://www.enakliyat.com.tr/detaylar/evden-eve-nakliyat-6471
Our site is a home to home moving listing portal. Consumers who wants to move his home fills a form so that moving companies can cote prices. We were generating listing page URL’s by using the title submitted by customer. Unfortunately we have understood by now that many customers have entered same content.
-
Well now I'm confused on the problem.. If the issue is duplicate content then the answer is definitely to block them with robots and/or use a rel=canonical tag on each.
However, the Google notice you are referencing has nothing to do with duplicate content notices to my knowledge.
There is always a way to improve your content. Filling out a form auto-generates a page, per my understanding. Great. Have it auto-generate a better looking page!
-my 2 cents. hope it's helpful.
-
I agree with Jesse and Allen.
Of course the problems in Google Webmaster Tools will disappear by no-indexing it.
Low quality pages isn't a good thing for visitors either.It's difficult to give you any other advice then the very broad advise: Improve the quality of the pages.
If you could give us some links to let us know which website and which pages we're talking about then we could give you a better advice on how exactly you can improve those pages. -
Our site is a home to home moving listing portal. Consumers who wants to move his home fills a form so that moving companies can cote prices. We were generating listing page URL’s by using the title submitted by customer. Unfortunately we have understood by now that many customers have entered same content.
-
Iskender.
Our experience has been YES. Google does follow your Robots.txt file and will ignore indexing those pages. If they have a problem, the problem will disappear.
My concern is, what is causing the "Low-quality" error message? In the long run, wouldn't it be better to correct the page to improve the quality? I look at each page as a way to qualify for a greater number of keywords, hence attracting more attention for your website.
We have had several pages flagged as duplicate content, when we never wanted the duplicate page indexed anyway. Once we included the page in the Robots.txt file the flagged error disappeared.
-
Why not improve the pages, instead?
If Google says they are low quality, what makes you think any viewer will stick around? Bet the bounce rate is exceptionally high on those pages, maybe even site-wide.
Always remember to design pages for readers and not Google. If Google tells you your pages suck, they are probably just trying to help you and give you a hint that it's time to improve your site.
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
-
Robots.txt in subfolders and hreflang issues
A client recently rolled out their UK business to the US. They decided to deploy with 2 WordPress installations: UK site - https://www.clientname.com/uk/ - robots.txt location: UK site - https://www.clientname.com/uk/robots.txt
Technical SEO | | lauralou82
US site - https://www.clientname.com/us/ - robots.txt location: UK site - https://www.clientname.com/us/robots.txt We've had various issues with /us/ pages being indexed in Google UK, and /uk/ pages being indexed in Google US. They have the following hreflang tags across all pages: We changed the x-default page to .com 2 weeks ago (we've tried both /uk/ and /us/ previously). Search Console says there are no hreflang tags at all. Additionally, we have a robots.txt file on each site which has a link to the corresponding sitemap files, but when viewing the robots.txt tester on Search Console, each property shows the robots.txt file for https://www.clientname.com only, even though when you actually navigate to this URL (https://www.clientname.com/robots.txt) you’ll get redirected to either https://www.clientname.com/uk/robots.txt or https://www.clientname.com/us/robots.txt depending on your location. Any suggestions how we can remove UK listings from Google US and vice versa?0 -
Empty Meta Robots Directive - Harmful?
Hi, We had a coding update and a side-effect of that was that our directive was emptied, in other words it now reads as: on all of the site. I've since noticed that Google's cache date on all of the pages - at least, the ones I tested - have a Cached date of no later than 17 December '12 - that's the Monday after the directive was removed on mass. So, A, does anyone have solid evidence of an empty directive causing problems? Past experience, Matt Cutts, Fishkin quote, etc. And then B - It seems fairly well correlated but, does my entire site's homogenous Cached date point to this tag removal? Or is it fairly normal to have a particular cache date across a large site (we're a large ecommerce site). Our site: http://www.zando.co.za/ I'm having the directive reinstated as soon as Dev permitting. And then, for extra credit, is there a way with Google's API, or perhaps some other tool, to run an arbitrary list and retrieve Cached dates? I'd want to do this for diagnosis purposes and preferably in a way that OK with Google. I'd avoid CURLing for the cached URL and scraping out that dates with BASH, or any such kind of thing. Cheers,
Technical SEO | | RocketZando0 -
Robots.txt - What is the correct syntax?
Hello everyone I have the following link: http://mywebshop.dk/index.php?option=com_redshop&view=send_friend&pid=39&tmpl=component&Itemid=167 I want to prevent google from indiexing everything that is related to "view=send_friend" The problem is that its giving me dublicate content, and the content of the links has no SEO value of any sort. My problem is how i disallow it correctly via robots.txt I tried this syntax: Disallow: /view=send_friend/ However after doing a crawl on request the 200+ dublicate links that contains view=send_friend is still present in the CSV crawl report. What is the correct syntax if i want to prevent google from indexing everything that is related to this kind of link?
Technical SEO | | teleman0 -
Robots.txt not working?
Hello This is my robots.txt file http://www.theprinterdepo.com/Robots.txt However I have 8000 warnings on my dashboard like this:4 What am I missing on the file¿ Crawl Diagnostics Report On-Page Properties <dl> <dt>Title</dt> <dd>Not present/empty</dd> <dt>Meta Description</dt> <dd>Not present/empty</dd> <dt>Meta Robots</dt> <dd>Not present/empty</dd> <dt>Meta Refresh</dt> <dd>Not present/empty</dd> </dl> URL: http://www.theprinterdepo.com/catalog/product_compare/add/product/100/uenc/aHR0cDovL3d3dy50aGVwcmludGVyZGVwby5jb20vaHAtbWFpbnRlbmFjZS1raXQtZm9yLTQtbGo0LWxqNS1mb3ItZXhjaGFuZ2UtcmVmdWJpc2hlZA,,/ 0 Errors No errors found! 1 Warning 302 (Temporary Redirect) Found about 5 hours ago <a class="more">Read More</a>
Technical SEO | | levalencia10 -
SeoMoz robot is not able to crawl my website.
Hi, SeoMoz robot crawls only two web pages of my website. I contacts seomoz team and they told me that the problem is because of Javascript use. What is the solution to this? Should I contact my webdesign company and ask them to remove Javascript code?
Technical SEO | | ashish2110 -
Is blocking RSS Feeds with robots.txt necessary?
Is it necessary to block an rss feed with robots.txt? It seems they are automatically not indexed (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/12/taking-feeds-out-of-our-web-search.html) And, google says here that it's important not to block RSS feeds (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/10/using-rssatom-feeds-to-discover-new.html) I'm just checking!
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Using robots.txt to deal with duplicate content
I have 2 sites with duplicate content issues. One is a wordpress blog. The other is a store (Pinnacle Cart). I cannot edit the canonical tag on either site. In this case, should I use robots.txt to eliminate the duplicate content?
Technical SEO | | bhsiao0 -
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