Severe rank drop due to overwritten robots.txt
-
Hi,
Last week we made a change to drupal core for an update to our website. We accidentally overwrote our good robots.txt that blocked hundreds of pages with the default drupal robots.txt. Several hours after that happened (and we didn't catch the mistake) our rankings dropped from mostly first, second place in Google organic to bottom and mid first page.
Basically I believe we flooded the index with very low quality pages at once and threw a red flag and we got de-ranked.
We have since fixed the robots.txt and have been re-crawled but have not seen a return in rank.
Would this be a safe assumption of what happened? I haven't seen any other sites getting hit in the retail vertical yet in regards to any Panda 2.3 type of update.
Will we see a return in our results anytime soon?
Thanks,
Justin
-
Your present approach is correct. Ensure all these pages are tagged as noindex for now. Remove the block from robots.txt and let Google and Bing crawl these pages.
I would suggest waiting until you are confident all the pages were removed from Google's index, then check Yahoo and Bing. If you decide that robots.txt is the best decision for your company, then you can replace the disallows after confirming your site is no longer affected by these pages.
I would also suggest that, going forward, you ensure any new pages on your site that you do not wish to index always include the appropriate meta tag. If this issue happens again then you will have a layer of protection in place.
-
We're pretty confident thus far that we have flooded the index with about 15,000 low rank URLs all at once. This has happened once in the past a few years back but we didn't flood their index, they were newer pages at the time in which were low quality and could have been seen as spam since there was no real content but adsense so we removed them with a disallow in robots.
We are adding the meta no-index to all of these pages. You're saying we should remove the disallow in robots.txt so googlebot can crawl these pages and see the meta-noindex?
We are a very large site and we're crawled often. We're a PR7 site and MOZrank DA is 79/100. We have dropped from 82.
We're hoping these URLs will be removed quickly, I don't think there is a way of removing 15k links in GWMT without setting off flags also.
-
There is no easy answer for how long it will take.
If your theory about the ranking drop being caused by these pages being added is correct, then as these pages are removed from Google's index, your site should improve. The timeline depends on the size of your site, your site's DA, the PA and links for these particular pages, etc.
If it was my site I would mark the calendar for August 1st to review the issue. I would check all the pages which were mistakenly indexed to be certain they were removed. After, I would check the rankings.
-
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for your response. Actually you are correct. We have found some of the pages that should be no follows still indexed. We are now going to use the noindex, follow meta tags on these pages because we can't afford to have theses pages indexed as they are particularly for clients/users only and are very low quality and have been flagged before.
Now, how long until we see our rank move back? Thats the real big question.
Thanks so much for your help.
Justin
-
That's a great answer Ryan... I wonder, just out of curiosity, if it wouldn't hurt to look at the cached version of the pages if they're indexed? I'd be curious to know if the date they were cached is right near when the robots.txt was changed? I know it wouldn't alter his course of action, but might add further confirmation that this caused the problem?
-
Justin,
Based on the information you provided it's not possible to determine if the robots.txt file was part of the issue. You need to investigate the matter further. Using Google enter a query in an attempt to find some of the previously blocked content. For example, let's assume your site is about SEO but you shared a blog article about your movie review of the latest Harry Potter movie. You may have used robots.txt to block that article because it is unrelated to your site's focus. Perform a search for "Harry Potter insite:mysite.com" replacing mysite.com with your main web address. If the search returns your article, then you know the content was indexed. Try this approach for several of your previously blocked areas of the website.
If you find this content in SERPs, then you need to have it removed. The best thing to do is add the "noindex, follow" tags to all these pages, then remove the block from your robots.txt file.
The problem is that with the block in place on your robots.txt file, Google cannot see the new meta tag and does not know to remove the content from it's index.
One last item to mention. Google does have a URL removal tool but that would not be appropriate in this instance. That tool is designed to remove a page which causes direct damage by being in the index. Trade secrets or other confidential information can be removed with this tool.
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
-
Will a Robots.txt 'disallow' of a directory, keep Google from seeing 301 redirects for pages/files within the directory?
Hi- I have a client that had thousands of dynamic php pages indexed by Google that shouldn't have been. He has since blocked these php pages via robots.txt disallow. Unfortunately, many of those php pages were linked to by high quality sites mulitiple times (instead of the static urls) before he put up the php 'disallow'. If we create 301 redirects for some of these php URLs that area still showing high value backlinks and send them to the correct static URLs, will Google even see these 301 redirects and pass link value to the proper static URLs? Or will the robots.txt keep Google away and we lose all these high quality backlinks? I guess the same question applies if we use the canonical tag instead of the 301. Will the robots.txt keep Google from seeing the canonical tags on the php pages? Thanks very much, V
Technical SEO | | Voodak0 -
Why is robots.txt blocking URL's in sitemap?
Hi Folks, Any ideas why Google Webmaster Tools is indicating that my robots.txt is blocking URL's linked in my sitemap.xml, when in fact it isn't? I have checked the current robots.txt declarations and they are fine and I've also tested it in the 'robots.txt Tester' tool, which indicates for the URL's it's suggesting are blocked in the sitemap, in fact work fine. Is this a temporary issue that will be resolved over a few days or should I be concerned. I have recently removed the declaration from the robots.txt that would have been blocking them and then uploaded a new updated sitemap.xml. I'm assuming this issue is due to some sort of crossover. Thanks Gaz
Technical SEO | | PurpleGriffon0 -
Killing Page Rank flow
Another SEO has told a friend to nofollow certain internal links i.e. to their own website. There are no hard feelings but this sounds like nonsense to me. Firstly, I'm sure Matt Cutts said that the link juice will not be redistributed amongst the other links (can't find the post - does anyone have the URL or confirmation?). Secondly (and this is obvious) those pages which have links to other pages in the website will have no link juice to pass back, resulting in a lower "total sum" and the inability for that PR to flow back. In short it seems silly. Any thoughts would be interesting to hear.
Technical SEO | | IPROdigital0 -
Ranking Implications due to Altering Page Names
I'm working on a very large (over 2500 pages), very old website (with pages created in the late 90s). The structure of the site is a mess (it still shows subtle sings of Frontpage!). We are trying to move to a more uniform, dynamic solution. My question is: what sort of implication will there be on search rankings if we implement 301 redirects from the very old pages (that are poorly named) to new pages which follow a uniform pattern. Some of these pages have external links pointing to them and others (most) just have internal links pointing to them which will be adjusted to the new urls. Does the age of the page have a significant implication on rankings? Is there a better way to this than 301 redirects? Thanks for the help
Technical SEO | | Bartell0 -
Incredible rank variations!
Hello, I recently received a project that has incredible SERP variation - one month in the top - next month not even in 100. I tried fixing some problems, I also found out the website owners were changing their content - taking their offers down, and so on, and I thought that was the main reason the SERP variate so often. Now I discovered a page that wasn't changed - meaning it's place in the menu and dropped down from the 4'th page to ..i have no idea where it is. The page is: www.filadelfiaturism.ro/oferte-Cazare-Romania/116/oferte-1.html - I looked for the exact title and it didn't ranked at all. Could someone give me some advice?
Technical SEO | | A.Popoviciu0 -
My site ranking
Hello, I have a website and working more than 1 year ago,I worked hard last year and paid alot to make guys write articles from my website to other forums so my keywords rank high and got good visitors, then I get in much care in SEO and found SEOMoz with is very nice,when I downloaded the tool bar it was a shock to find my website is almost zero although the big effort I had, I can do more but I need to guide what I exactly need to improve my website,I almost read alot of the beginner PDF and got good information to work with and can hire people to help too. I did a real big work sharing my subjects and i can see them in top#5 google but for other sites and now i found I am still zero 😞 adding my links inside also didnt help or counted. attached the statistics of the website and the competitors site to let me know which important things to take care to jump over. would be very thankful for detailed help, Best Regards 1_01308477251.png 1_01308477465.png
Technical SEO | | nesr_20200 -
Is robots.txt a must-have for 150 page well-structured site?
By looking in my logs I see dozens of 404 errors each day from different bots trying to load robots.txt. I have a small site (150 pages) with clean navigation that allows the bots to index the whole site (which they are doing). There are no secret areas I don't want the bots to find (the secret areas are behind a Login so the bots won't see them). I have used rel=nofollow for internal links that point to my Login page. Is there any reason to include a generic robots.txt file that contains "user-agent: *"? I have a minor reason: to stop getting 404 errors and clean up my error logs so I can find other issues that may exist. But I'm wondering if not having a robots.txt file is the same as some default blank file (or 1-line file giving all bots all access)?
Technical SEO | | scanlin0 -
Subdomain Robots.txt
If I have a subdomain (a blog) that is having tags and categories indexed when they should not be, because they are creating duplicate content. Can I block them using a robots.txt file? Can I/do I need to have a separate robots file for my subdomain? If so, how would I format it? Do I need to specify that it is a subdomain robots file, or will the search engines automatically pick this up? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | JohnECF0