Is robots met tag a more reliable than robots.txt at preventing indexing by Google?
-
What's your experience of using robots meta tag v robots.txt when it comes to a stand alone solution to prevent Google indexing?
I am pretty sure robots meta tag is more reliable - going on own experiences, I have never experience any probs with robots meta tags but plenty with robots.txt as a stand alone solution.
Thanks in advance, Luke
-
Hi there,
Regarding the X-Robots tag. We have had a couple of sites that were disallowed in the robots.txt have their PDF, Doc etc files get indexed. I understand the reasoning for this. I would like to remove the disallow in the robots.txt and use the X-robots tag to noindex all pages as well as PDF, Doc files etc. This is for a ngnix configuation. Does anyone know what the written x-robots tag would look like in this case?
-
Test for what works for your site.
Use tools below
- https://www.deepcrawl.com/ (will give you one free full crawl)
- https://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/ (free up to 500 URLs)
- http://urlprofiler.com/ (14 days free try)
- https://www.deepcrawl.com/blog/best-practice/noindex-disallow-nofollow/
- https://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/user-guide/general/#robots-txt
- https://www.deepcrawl.com/blog/best-practice/noindex-and-google/
So much info
https://www.deepcrawl.com/blog/tag/robots-txt/
Thomas
-
Hi Luke,
In order to exclude individual pages from search engine indices, the noindex meta tag
is actually superior to robots.txt.
But X-Robots-Tag header tag is the best but much hader to use.
Block all web crawlers from all content
User-agent: * Disallow: /
Using the
robots.txt
file, you can tell a spider where it cannot go on your site. You can not tell a search engine which URLs it cannot show in the search results. This means that not allowing a search engine to crawl an URL – called “blocking” it – does not mean that URL will not show up in the search results. If the search engine finds enough links to that URL, it will include it; it will just not know what’s on that page.If you want to reliably block a page from showing up in the search results, you need to use a meta robots
noindex
tag. That means the search engine has to be able to index that page and find thenoindex
tag, so the page should not be blocked byrobots.txt
a
robots.txt
file does. In a nutshell, what it does is tell search engines to not crawl a particular page, file or directory of your website.Using this, helps both you and search engines such as Google. By not providing access to certain, unimportant areas of your website, you can save on your crawl budget and reduce load on your server.
Please note that using the
robots.txt
file to hide your entire website for search engines is definitely not recommended.see big photo: http://i.imgur.com/MM7hM4g.png
_(…)_ _(…)_
The robots meta tag in the above example instructs all search engines not to show the page in search results. The value of the
name
attribute (robots
) specifies that the directive applies to all crawlers. To address a specific crawler, replace therobots
value of thename
attribute with the name of the crawler that you are addressing. Specific crawlers are also known as user-agents (a crawler uses its user-agent to request a page.) Google's standard web crawler has the user-agent name.Googlebot
To prevent only Googlebot from crawling your page, update the tag as follows:This tag now instructs Google (but no other search engines) not to show this page in its web search results. Both the and
name
the attributescontent
are non-case sensitive.Search engines may have different crawlers for different properties or purposes. See the complete list of Google's crawlers. For example, to show a page in Google's web search results, but not in Google News, use the following meta tag:
If you need to specify multiple crawlers individually, it's okay to use multiple robots meta tags:
If competing directives are encountered by our crawlers we will use the most restrictive directive we find.
irective. This basically means that if you want to really hide something from the search engines, and thus from people using search,
robots.txt
won’t suffice.Indexer directives
Indexer directives are directives that are set on a per page and/or per element basis. Up until July 2007, there were two directives: the microformat rel=”nofollow”, which means that that link should not pass authority / PageRank, and the Meta Robots tag.
With the Meta Robots tag, you can really prevent search engines from showing pages you want to keep out of the search results. The same result can be achieved with the X-Robots-Tag HTTP header. As described earlier, the X-Robots-Tag gives you more flexibility by also allowing you to control how specific file(types) are indexed.
Example uses of the X-Robots-Tag
Using the
X-Robots-Tag
HTTP headerThe
X-Robots-Tag
can be used as an element of the HTTP header response for a given URL. Any directive that can be used in an robots meta tag can also be specified as anX-Robots-Tag
. Here's an example of an HTTP response with anX-Robots-Tag
instructing crawlers not to index a page:HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 21:42:43 GMT _(…)_ **X-Robots-Tag: noindex** _(…)_
Multiple
X-Robots-Tag
headers can be combined within the HTTP response, or you can specify a comma-separated list of directives. Here's an example of an HTTP header response which has anoarchive
X-Robots-Tag
combined with anunavailable_after
X-Robots-Tag
.HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 21:42:43 GMT _(…)_ **X-Robots-Tag: noarchive X-Robots-Tag: unavailable_after: 25 Jun 2010 15:00:00 PST** _(…)_
The
X-Robots-Tag
may optionally specify a user-agent before the directives. For instance, the following set ofX-Robots-Tag
HTTP headers can be used to conditionally allow showing of a page in search results for different search engines:HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 21:42:43 GMT _(…)_ **X-Robots-Tag: googlebot: nofollow X-Robots-Tag: otherbot: noindex, nofollow** _(…)_
Directives specified without a user-agent are valid for all crawlers. The section below demonstrates how to handle combined directives. Both the name and the specified values are not case sensitive.
- https://moz.com/learn/seo/robotstxt
- https://yoast.com/ultimate-guide-robots-txt/
- https://moz.com/blog/the-wonderful-world-of-seo-metatags
- https://yoast.com/x-robots-tag-play/
- https://www.searchenginejournal.com/x-robots-tag-simple-alternate-robots-txt-meta-tag/67138/
- https://developers.google.com/webmasters/control-crawl-index/docs/robots_meta_tag
I hope this helps,
Tom
-
If you've recently added the "noindex" meta, get the page fetched in GWT. Google can't act if it doesn't see the tag.
-
Hi Luke,
It's a pretty common misconception that the robots.txt will prevent indexing. It's only purpose is actually to prevent crawling, anything disallowed in there is still up for indexing if it's linked to elsewhere. If you want something deindexed, your best bet is the robots meta tag, but make sure you allow crawling of the URLs to give search engine bots an opportunity to see the tag.
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
-
If I use links intag instead of "ahref" tag can Google read links inside div tag?
Hi All, Need a suggestion on it. For buttons, I am using links in tag instead of "ahref". Do you know that can Google read links inside "div" tag? Does it pass rank juice? It will be great if you can provide any reference if possible.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pujan.bikroy0 -
What is best practice for "Sorting" URLs to prevent indexing and for best link juice ?
We are now introducing 5 links in all our category pages for different sorting options of category listings.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lcourse
The site has about 100.000 pages and with this change the number of URLs may go up to over 350.000 pages.
Until now google is indexing well our site but I would like to prevent the "sorting URLS" leading to less complete crawling of our core pages, especially since we are planning further huge expansion of pages soon. Apart from blocking the paramter in the search console (which did not really work well for me in the past to prevent indexing) what do you suggest to minimize indexing of these URLs also taking into consideration link juice optimization? On a technical level the sorting is implemented in a way that the whole page is reloaded, for which may be better options as well.0 -
Pages getting into Google Index, blocked by Robots.txt??
Hi all, So yesterday we set up to Remove URL's that got into the Google index that were not supposed to be there, due to faceted navigation... We searched for the URL's by using this in Google Search.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bjs2010
site:www.sekretza.com inurl:price=
site:www.sekretza.com inurl:artists= So it brings up a list of "duplicate" pages, and they have the usual: "A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more." So we removed them all, and google removed them all, every single one. This morning I do a check, and I find that more are creeping in - If i take one of the suspecting dupes to the Robots.txt tester, Google tells me it's Blocked. - and yet it's appearing in their index?? I'm confused as to why a path that is blocked is able to get into the index?? I'm thinking of lifting the Robots block so that Google can see that these pages also have a Meta NOINDEX,FOLLOW tag on - but surely that will waste my crawl budget on unnecessary pages? Any ideas? thanks.0 -
Robots.txt help
Hi Moz Community, Google is indexing some developer pages from a previous website where I currently work: ddcblog.dev.examplewebsite.com/categories/sub-categories Was wondering how I include these in a robots.txt file so they no longer appear on Google. Can I do it under our homepage GWT account or do I have to have a separate account set up for these URL types? As always, your expertise is greatly appreciated, -Reed
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | IceIcebaby0 -
Why would one of our section pages NOT be indexed by Google?
One of our higher traffic section pages is not being indexed by Google. The products that reside on this section page ARE indexed by Google and are on page 1. So why wouldn't the section page be even listed and indexed? The meta title is accurate, meta description is good. I haven't received any notices in Webmaster Tools. Is there a way to check to see if OTHER pages might also not be indexed? What should a small ecom site do to see about getting it listed? SOS in Modesto. Ron
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | yatesandcojewelers0 -
Google Not Indexing XML Sitemap Images
Hi Mozzers, We are having an issue with our XML sitemap images not being indexed. The site has over 39,000 pages and 17,500 images submitted in GWT. If you take a look at the attached screenshot, 'GWT Images - Not Indexed', you can see that the majority of the pages are being indexed - but none of the images are. The first thing you should know about the images is that they are hosted on a content delivery network (CDN), rather than on the site itself. However, Google advice suggests hosting on a CDN is fine - see second screenshot, 'Google CDN Advice'. That advice says to either (i) ensure the hosting site is verified in GWT or (ii) submit in robots.txt. As we can't verify the hosting site in GWT, we had opted to submit via robots.txt. There are 3 sitemap indexes: 1) http://www.greenplantswap.co.uk/sitemap_index.xml, 2) http://www.greenplantswap.co.uk/sitemap/plant_genera/listings.xml and 3) http://www.greenplantswap.co.uk/sitemap/plant_genera/plants.xml. Each sitemap index is split up into often hundreds or thousands of smaller XML sitemaps. This is necessary due to the size of the site and how we have decided to pull URLs in. Essentially, if we did it another way, it may have involved some of the sitemaps being massive and thus taking upwards of a minute to load. To give you an idea of what is being submitted to Google in one of the sitemaps, please see view-source:http://www.greenplantswap.co.uk/sitemap/plant_genera/4/listings.xml?page=1. Originally, the images were SSL, so we decided to reverted to non-SSL URLs as that was an easy change. But over a week later, that seems to have had no impact. The image URLs are ugly... but should this prevent them from being indexed? The strange thing is that a very small number of images have been indexed - see http://goo.gl/P8GMn. I don't know if this is an anomaly or whether it suggests no issue with how the images have been set up - thus, there may be another issue. Sorry for the long message but I would be extremely grateful for any insight into this. I have tried to offer as much information as I can, however please do let me know if this is not enough. Thank you for taking the time to read and help. Regards, Mark Oz6HzKO rYD3ICZ
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | edlondon0 -
301 redirect or Robots.txt on an interstatial page
Hey guys, I have an affiliate tracking system that works like this : an affiliate puts up a certain code on his site, for example : www.domain.com/track/aff_id This url leads to a page where the hit is counted, analysed and then 302 redirects to my sales page with the affiliates ID in the url : www.mysalespage.com/?=aff_id. However, we've noticed recently that one affiliate seems to be ranking for our own name and the url google indexed was his tracking url (domain.com/track/aff_id). Which is strange because there is absolutely nothing on that page, its just an interstatial page so that our stats tracking software can properly filter hits. To remove the affiliate's url from showing up in the serps, I've come up with 2 solutions : 1 - Change the redirect to a 301 redirect on his track page. 2 - Change our robots.txt page to block all domain.com/track/ pages from being indexed. My question is : if I 301 redirect instead of 302, will I keep the affiliates from outranking me for my own name AND pass on link juice or should I simply block google from crawling the interstatial tracking pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CrakJason0 -
Indexation of content from internal pages (registration) by Google
Hello, we are having quite a big amount of content on internal pages which can only be accessed as a registered member. What are the different options the get this content indexed by Google? In certain cases we might be able to show a preview to visitors. In other cases this is not possible for legal reasons. Somebody told me that there is an option to send the content of pages directly to google for indexation. Unfortunately he couldn't give me more details. I only know that this possible for URLs (sitemap). Is there really a possibility to do this for the entire content of a page without giving google access to crawl this page? Thanks Ben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | guitarslinger0