Images are Blocked Resources in webmasters. Anything wrong?
-
Hi all,
The images in our sub directory are hosted from a sub domain. This sub domain is blocked to robots. So, I can see all these images are shown as "Blocked Resources" in webmasters. Is anything wrong with this? If so, we also usually block robots to image files location in our website. What's the difference?
Thanks
-
You can block an entire subdomain via robots.txt, however you'll need to create a robots.txt file and place it in the root of the subdomain, then add the code to direct the bots to stay away from the entire subdomain's content.
User-agent: *
Disallow: /
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
-
Reducing cumulative layout shift for responsive images - core web vitals
In preparation for Core Web Vitals becoming a ranking factor in May 2021, we are making efforts to reduce our Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) on pages where the shift is being caused by images loading. The general recommendation is to specify both height and width attributes in the html, in addition to the CSS formatting which is applied when the images load. However, this is problematic in situations where responsive images are being used with different aspect ratios for mobile vs desktop. And where a CMS is being used to manage the pages with images, where width and height may change each time new images are used, as well as aspect ratios for the mobile and desktop versions of those. So, I'm posting this inquiry here to see what kinds of approaches others are taking to reduce CLS in these situations (where responsive images are used, with differing aspect ratios for desktop and mobile, and where a CMS allows the business users to utilize any dimension of images they desire).
Web Design | | seoelevated3 -
Fixing Render Blocking Javascript and CSS in the Above-the-fold content
We don't have a responsive design site yet, and our mobile site is built through Dudamobile. I know it's not the best, but I'm trying to do whatever we can until we get around to redesigning it. Is there anything I can do about the following Page Speed Insight errors or are they just a function of using Dudamobile? Eliminate render-blocking JavaScript and CSS in above-the-fold content Your page has 3 blocking script resources and 5 blocking CSS resources. This causes a delay in rendering your page.None of the above-the-fold content on your page could be rendered without waiting for the following resources to load. Try to defer or asynchronously load blocking resources, or inline the critical portions of those resources directly in the HTML.Remove render-blocking JavaScript: http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/2.1.1/jquery.min.js http://mobile.dudamobile.com/…ckage.min.js?version=2015-04-02T13:36:04 http://mobile.dudamobile.com/…pts/blogs.js?version=2015-04-02T13:36:04 Optimize CSS Delivery of the following: http://fonts.googleapis.com/…:400|Great+Vibes|Signika:400,300,600,700 http://mobile.dudamobile.com/…ont-pack.css?version=2015-04-02T13:36:04 http://mobile.dudamobile.com/…kage.min.css?version=2015-04-02T13:36:04 http://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/kempruge/files/kempruge_0.min.css?v=6 http://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/…mpruge/files/kempruge_home_0.min.css?v=6 Thanks for any tips, Ruben
Web Design | | KempRugeLawGroup0 -
Links not visible in "Google cache text version" but visible in "Fetch as Google" in Webmaster tool
Hi Guys, There seems some issue with the coding due to which Google is not indexing half of our menu bar links. The cached text version of http://www.99acres.com/ is not showing links present in dropdown "All India" , dropdown "Advice" and "Hot Projects" tab in blue bar on top menu whereas these links are visible in "Fetch as Google" in Google Webmaster tool. Any clue to why is there a difference between the links shown in Google webmaster and Google cache text version. Thanks in advance 🙂
Web Design | | vivekrathore0 -
Including key words in alt image attributes - stuffing etc?
I'm pretty new to all this but seem to have been getting good result by adjusting our sit to meet the seomoz on page analysis factors. I'm currently adjusting the alt image attributes for this page: www.katalysticevents.com The copy I'm writing is aimed at targeting "luxury marquee hire". It's quite hard to get the keyword into a readable image attribute which properly relates to the image. So my question is if I add say " | Luxury Marquee" onto the end of each image attribute would this get penalised and seen as keyword stuffing or something like that? My image attributes would be:
Web Design | | EdoubleD
Cocktail bar inside Giant Tipi at night | Luxury Marquee Hire Live Band on stage | Luxury Marquee Hire and so on. Thanks!!!!0 -
Redirecting Images
Hi, I'm wondering how important it is when relaunching a site on a new platform (switching to Drupal) to serve up images from the same file paths in order to ensure consistency during the changeover. I've tried to keep the questions straightforward so that this post can be useful to people in a similar situation in future: How much difference do the file paths make to SEO? Does Google care or even notice if the image file paths change? Is it worth forcing Drupal to mimic our old file paths for the sake of consistency with the old site in order to maintain rankings OR do we take the opportunity to redesign our file paths for better SEO? Any help would be much appreciated 🙂
Web Design | | Tinhat0 -
Tips for Panda-Proofing an Image Gallery
I'm currently working on a website that has a video, image and media gallery with over 9,000 items. The gallery can be found here:
Web Design | | Peter264
http://flyawaysimulation.com/images/16/microsoft-flight-simulator-x/ Every image has a page of its own. Therefore, essentially 9,000 pages of very thin content, especially the image pages with no UGC comments. Does anyone here have any tips to "panda-proof" these pages? The images still need to be indexed. What can we do here? The site also hosts videos, which of course the page the video resides on needs to stay in the index too (like youtube). Example of the video page here: http://flyawaysimulation.com/images/media/9371/fsps-3d-real-cockpit-effect-for-fsx/ Really want to hear your thoughts. Thanks in advance!0 -
Need help with image resizing (re: slow site)
I'm trying to figure out why I'm having speed issues with my site, and using google speed test to help me knock out some of the issues. One of issues deals with image resizing. I have a responsive design and so even though on the home page the normal width is 580 of the blog area, the full post can go up to 1170. So I size all of my images to 1170 wide and let CSS resize them depending on the size of the browser. (The images on the most recent post are a little bigger than this because I was testing something.) I was wondering what the best practice was in regard to what I'm trying to do. Also feel free to check out my site and let me know of any other feedback / advice you have. Thanks !:)
Web Design | | NoahsDad0 -
Image Replacement Using Cufon (Javascript)
Our agency is working with an outside developer that has designed a beautiful site. The possible problem is that they used Cufon to change a large amount of the text on the page to an image of the text in a nicer font. On some pages all of the text is replaced and on others its about 20%. The text that is replaced is identical to what is shown to the user. I realize that Google has stated that sIFR (similar to Cufon) is okay, in a limited way years ago, but I am stil a little leery of the large amount of image replacement that is happening. I am also worried about user experience, should flash not be enabled or it is slower to load. So I have a couple questions. 1. Would this amount of image replacment raise a flag to Google, especially since it is the heading tags and large chunks of the body content both? 2. I know about 2% of the site's users do not have javascript enabled. Do you have an idea of what percentage of people have issues, like slow connection speeds or slow computers, using javascript even if it is enabled?
Web Design | | DirectiveGroup0