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
-
Google Search Console indexes website for www but images for non www.
On the google search console, the website data is all showing for the www.promierproducts.com. The images however are indexed on the non www version. I'm not sure why.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MikeSab1 -
Sitemap Indexed Pages, Google Glitch or Problem With Site?
Hello, I have a quick question about our Sitemap Web Pages Indexed status in Google Search Console. Because of the drastic drop I can't tell if this is a glitch or a serious issue. When you look at the attached image you can see that under Sitemaps Web Pages Indexed has dropped suddenly on 3/12/17 from 6029 to 540. Our Index status shows 7K+ indexed. Other than product updates/additions and homepage layout updates there have been no significant changes to this website. If it helps we are operating on the Volusion platform. Thanks for your help! -Ryan rou1zMs
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rrhansen0 -
If I block a URL via the robots.txt - how long will it take for Google to stop indexing that URL?
If I block a URL via the robots.txt - how long will it take for Google to stop indexing that URL?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gabriele_Layoutweb0 -
Google does not index image sitemap
Hi, we put an image sitemap in the searchconsole/webmastertools http://www.sillasdepaseo.es/sillasdepaseo/sitemap-images.xml it contains only the indexed products and all images on the pages. We also claimed the CDN in the searchconsole http://media.sillasdepaseo.es/ It has been 2 weeks now, Google indexes the pages, but not the images. What can we do? Thanks in advance. Dieter Lang
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Storesco0 -
Mass Removal Request from Google Index
Hi, I am trying to cleanse a news website. When this website was first made, the people that set it up copied all kinds of articles they had as a newspaper, including tests, internal communication, and drafts. This site has lots of junk, but this kind of junk was on the initial backup, aka before 1st-June-2012. So, removing all mixed content prior to that date, we can have pure articles starting June 1st, 2012! Therefore My dynamic sitemap now contains only articles with release date between 1st-June-2012 and now Any article that has release date prior to 1st-June-2012 returns a custom 404 page with "noindex" metatag, instead of the actual content of the article. The question is how I can remove from the google index all this junk as fast as possible that is not on the site anymore, but still appears in google results? I know that for individual URLs I need to request removal from this link
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ioannisa
https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/removals The problem is doing this in bulk, as there are tens of thousands of URLs I want to remove. Should I put the articles back to the sitemap so the search engines crawl the sitemap and see all the 404? I believe this is very wrong. As far as I know this will cause problems because search engines will try to access non existent content that is declared as existent by the sitemap, and return errors on the webmasters tools. Should I submit a DELETED ITEMS SITEMAP using the <expires>tag? I think this is for custom search engines only, and not for the generic google search engine.
https://developers.google.com/custom-search/docs/indexing#on-demand-indexing</expires> The site unfortunatelly doesn't use any kind of "folder" hierarchy in its URLs, but instead the ugly GET params, and a kind of folder based pattern is impossible since all articles (removed junk and actual articles) are of the form:
http://www.example.com/docid=123456 So, how can I bulk remove from the google index all the junk... relatively fast?0 -
Product Pages not indexed by Google
We built a website for a jewelry company some years ago, and they've recently asked for a meeting and one of the points on the agenda will be why their products pages have not been indexed. Example: http://rocks.ie/details/Infinity-Ring/7170/ I've taken a look but I can't see anything obvious that is stopping pages like the above from being indexed. It has a an 'index, follow all' tag along with a canonical tag. Am I missing something obvious here or is there any clear reason why product pages are not being indexed at all by Google? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Update I was told 'that each of the product pages on the full site have corresponding page on mobile. They are referred to each other via cannonical / alternate tags...could be an angle as to why product pages are not being indexed.'
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RobbieD910 -
Is Google indexing Mp3 audio and MIDI music files? Can that cause any duplicate problems?
Hello, I own virtualsheetmusic.com website and we have several thousands of media files (Mp3 and MIDI files) that potentially Google can index. If that's the case, I am wondering if that could cause any "duplicate" issues of some sort since many of such media files have exact file names or same meta information inside. Any thoughts about this issue are very welcome! Thank you in advance to anyone.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
If i disallow unfriendly URL via robots.txt, will its friendly counterpart still be indexed?
Our not-so-lovely CMS loves to render pages regardless of the URL structure, just as long as the page name itself is correct. For example, it will render the following as the same page: example.com/123.html example.com/dumb/123.html example.com/really/dumb/duplicative/URL/123.html To help combat this, we are creating mod rewrites with friendly urls, so all of the above would simply render as example.com/123 I understand robots.txt respects the wildcard (*), so I was considering adding this to our robots.txt: Disallow: */123.html If I move forward, will this block all of the potential permutations of the directories preceding 123.html yet not block our friendly example.com/123? Oh, and yes, we do use the canonical tag religiously - we're just mucking with the robots.txt as an added safety net.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrwestern0