100K Webmaster Central Not Found Links?
-
http://screencast.com/t/KLPVGTzM I just logged into our Webmaster Central account to find that it shows 100k links that are not found? After searching through all of them they all appear to be from our search bar, with no results? Are we doing something wrong here?
-
Ya, I read through that article yesterday & see that they recommend the same setting as the Yoast plugin should be doing? Although I didn't ever get a response from me to see if there is something missing?
For now, I plan on adding this to the robots.txt file & see what results I get?
Do you know the time frame that it takes to get the updates in GWT? Will this update within a few weeks or would it take longer than that?
Thanks for all the help!
BJ
-
Hello BJ.
The robots.txt file must be on your server, in the document root.
Here is information about how to configure robots.txt
Note that is does have a warning at the end, about how you could possibly lose some link juice, but that is probably a much smaller problem than the problem you are trying to fix.
Nothing is perfect, and with the rate that google changes its mind, who knows what is the right thing to do this month.
Once you have edited robots.txt, you don't need to do anything.
- except I just had a thought - how to get google to remove those items from your webmaster tools. I think you should be able to tell them to purge those entries from GWT. Set it so you can see 500 to a page and then just cycle through and mark them fixed.
-
Sorry to open this back up after a month, in adding this to the robot.txt file is there something that needs to be done within the code of the site? Or can I simply update the robots.txt file within Google Webmaster Tools?
I was hoping to get a response from Yoast on his blog post, it seems there were a number of questions similar to mine, but he didn't ever address them.
Thanks,
BJ
-
We all know nothing lasts forever.
A code change can do all kinds of things.
Things that were important are sometimes less important, or not important at all.
Sometimes yesterdays advice no longer is true.
If you make a change, or even if you make no change, but the crawler or the indexer changes, then we can be surprised at the results.
While working on this other thread:
http://www.seomoz.org/q/is-no-follow-ing-a-folder-influences-also-its-subfolders#post-74287
I did a test and checked my logs. A nofollow meta tag and a nofollow link do not stop the crawlers from following. What it does (we think) is to not pass pagerank. That is all it does.
That is why the robots.txt file is the only way to tell the crawlers to stop following down a tree. (until there is another way)
-
Ok, I've posted a question on Yoast.com blog to see what other options we might have? Thanks for the help!
-
It is because Roger ignores those META tags.
Also, google often ignores them too.
The robots.txt file is a much better option for those crawlers.
There are some crawlers that ignore the robots file too, but you have no control over them unless you can put their IPs in the firewall or add code to ignore all of their requests.
-
Ok, I just did a little more research into this, to see how Yoast was handling this within the plugin & came across this article: http://yoast.com/example-robots-txt-wordpress/
In the article he stats that this is already included within the plugin on search pages:
I just confirmed this, by doing this search on my site & looking at the code: http://www.discountqueens.com/?s=candy
So this has always been in place. Why would I still have the 100K not found links still showing up?
-
We didn't have these errors showing up previously, so that's why I was really suspicious? Also we have Joost De Valk's SEO plugin installed on our site & I thought there was an option to turn off the searches from being indexed?
-
Just to support Alan Gray's response, I'll say it's very important to block crawlers from your site search, because it not only throws errors (bots try to guess what to put in a search box), but also because any search results that get into the index will cause content conflicts, dilute ranking values, and worst case scenario, potentially create the false impression that you have a lot of very thin content / near duplicate content pages.
-
the search bar results are good for searchers but not for search engines. You can stop all search engines and Roger (the seomoz crawler) from going into those pages by adding an entry to your robots.txt file. Roger only responds to his own section of the robots file, so anything you make global will not work for him.
User-agent: rogerbot Disallow: /search/*
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
-
Poor internal linking?
Hi guys, Have a large e-commerce site 10,000 pages as a client and they are currently not getting much organic traffic to their level 3 sub-category pages, the URLs are like: https://www.domain.com.au/category/s...-category-type These pages have been on-page optimised, category content added, yet hardly any traffic. However the site level 1, level 2 pages do quite well. So this suggests this might be an internal linking issue? The site is definitely not penalized and as enough authority for these level 3 pages to rank. Any ideas would be very much appreciated! Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bridhard80 -
Rel=canonical and internal links
Hi Mozzers, I was musing about rel=canonical this morning and it occurred to me that I didnt have a good answer to the following question: How does applying a rel=canonical on page A referencing page B as the canonical version affect the treatment of the links on page A? I am thinking of whether those links would get counted twice, or in the case of ver-near-duplicates which may have an extra sentence which includes an extra link, whther that extra link would count towards the internal link graph or not. I suspect that google would basically ignore all the content on page A and only look to page B taking into account only page Bs links. Any thoughts? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | unirmk0 -
How Do You Do Link Building??
I am starting to use the Moz pro tools like optimizing on page SEO for keywords and looking for opportunities. I know link building is a huge part for getting rankings on keywords in google search. Where do I start and how do I do the link building process for specific keywords I can rank for?? Thank you in advance for your help.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wickerparadise1 -
H3 Tags - Should I Link to my content Articles- ? And do I have to many H3 tags/ Links as it is ?
Hello All, On my ecommerce landing pages, I currently have links to my products as H3 Tags. I also have useful guides displayed on the page with links useful articles we have written (they currently go to my news section). I am wondering if I should put those article links as additional H3 tags as well for added seo benefit or do I have to many tags as it is ?. A link to my Landing Page I am talking about is - http://goo.gl/h838RW Screenshot of my h1-h6 tags - http://imgur.com/hLtX0n7 I enclose screenshot my guides and also of my H1-H6 tags. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. thanks Peter
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PeteC120 -
Link Research Tools - Detox Links
Hi, I was doing a little research on my link profile and came across a tool called "LinkRessearchTools.com". I bought a subscription and tried them out. Doing the report they advised a low risk but identified 78 Very High Risk to Deadly (are they venomous?) links, around 5% of total and advised removing them. They also advised of many suspicious and low risk links but these seem to be because they have no knowledge of them so default to a negative it seems. So before I do anything rash and start removing my Deadly links, I was wondering if anyone had a). used them and recommend them b). recommend detoxing removing the deadly links c). would there be any cases in which so called Deadly links being removed cause more problems than solve. Such as maintaining a normal looking profile as everyone would be likely to have bad links etc... (although my thinking may be out on that one...). What do you think? Adam
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NaescentAdam0 -
Should I report unnatural links via Webmasters?
We have a client who fired their last SEO firm for backlinking. The company has the actual emails and evidence that it found. On July 19, 2012, they received a notice in Webmasters that "unnatural links" had been detected to their site. The notice states that they should request reinclusion, but Matt Cutts is saying something different: https://plus.google.com/u/3/109412257237874861202/posts/gik49G9c5LU My client wants to ensure that they are NOT impacted, so should they notify Google anyways? The notice in Webmasters reads: Dear site owner or webmaster of…. We’ve detected that some of your site’s pages may be using techniques that are outside Google’s Webmaster Guidelines. Specifically, look for possibly artificial or unnatural links pointing to your site that could be intended to manipulate PageRank. Examples of unnatural linking could include buying links to pass PageRank or participating in link schemes. We encourage you to make changes to your site so that it meets our quality guidelines. Once you’ve made these changes, please submit your site for reconsideration in Google’s search results. If you find unnatural links to your site that you are unable to control or remove, please provide the details in your reconsideration request. If you have any questions about how to resolve this issue, please see our Webmaster Help Forum for support. Sincerely, Google Search Quality Team
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dknewmedia0 -
Penalized for "Unnatural Links" on Webmaster Tools
Has anyone ever logged in to Google Webmaster tools and seen a message about them seeing unnatural links (as a warning) Our homepage lost all its rankings. I will submit a reconsideration request. We don't engage in link buying practices (some directories, thats all.) Any feedback, please? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | PaulDylan0 -
Sitewide blog link and Article links
Hi Guys I just wanted to give you all a heads up on something I adjusted recently that worked really well and wanted to ask for your own experiences on this. 1. We have a blog that adds regular content and within the blog we link from the keyword we are targeting. Standard stuff right ! We were struggling for movement on a keyword so I removed the links from the articles and added a link on the site wide blogroll. The link on the blogroll included the keyword but was a longer descriptive link. Low and behold we got a first page listing when the changed it.The change in ranking was made a few days later. I have always been given the impression that site wide isn't that great ? So explain this one . Of course there are many other factors etc 🙂 What are your experiences and thoughts on what happened here ?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | onlinemediadirect0