How do I use the Robots.txt "disallow" command properly for folders I don't want indexed?
-
Today's sitemap webinar made me think about the disallow feature, seems opposite of sitemaps, but it also seems both are kind of ignored in varying ways by the engines.
I don't need help semantically, I got that part. I just can't seem to find a contemporary answer about what should be blocked using the robots.txt file.
For example, I have folders containing site comps for clients that I really don't want showing up in the SERPS. Is it better to not have these folders on the domain at all?
There are also security issues I've heard of that make sense, simply look at a site's robots file to see what they are hiding. It makes it easier to hunt for files when they know the directory the files are contained in. Do I concern myself with this?
Another example is a folder I have for my xml sitemap generator. I imagine google isn't going to try to index this or count it as content, so do I need to add folders like this to the disallow list?
-
Hi,
Usin;
User-agent: *
Disallow: /folder/subfolderis fine, however if you have information stored in your website that you certainly want crawled make sure it is in your site map and use ...
User-agent: *
allow: /folder/subfolderadding a no follow attribute to all of your pages wont be practical, if a spam crawler ignores the robots.txt it will ignore your no follow attribute. If anything new occurs with robots.txt check large website's robots.txt as they always update to new trends i.e
Hope this helps:)
-
Hi Jay,
There's actually a recent similar discussion at http://www.seomoz.org/q/what-reasons-exist-to-use-noindex-robots-txt regarding deciding what to block via robots.
For site comps for clients, you could also password-protect those to help hide them, or do a different domain that you have entirely excluded in robots. I've also seen services like Basecamp used for posting comps. It all depends on how much you want to hide the comps.
You do want your sitemap itself to be crawled, but I'm presuming this is in the root directory so that shouldn't be a problem. Folders like your sitemap generator and other purely-framework folders can certainly be disallowed. Blocking the files that list the version of your website (if you're using a CMS) can help prevent people from searching for opportunities to hack that version and finding your site.
Also, just do a site:domain.com search on your domain, see what's indexed, see what content from there you don't want indexed, and use that as a starting point.
Are you running on a content management system, or a custom site? For a CMS, here are example robots.txt files for several popular CMSs. http://www.stayonsearch.com/robots-txt-guide
-
You may also want to think about slapping a robots noindex on the individual pages as well.
-
You can type the following syntax:
after User-agent: *
Disallow: /foldername/subfoldername
also, you can name your sitemaps in the robots.txt file.
They can be defined as
Sitemap: http://www.yourdomain.com/sitemap.xml
If you have multiple sitemaps, you can have multiple sitemaps listed.
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
-
Organic search traffic has dropped by 35% since 18 September, we don't know why.
Organic traffic to our website has dropped 35% since 18 September 2017 to date. From 1 January to 18 September 2017 organic traffic was up by just under 1% over all (Google up by 1.32%). Paid search traffic over the same time has remained steady. There is nothing we can think of that we've done that has caused the drop. We had an issue with Google page speed test failing when running a test but we resolved this issue on 20 November and in that time we've seen an even greater drop (44% in the last week). The drop is seen across the 3 main search engines, not just Google, which points toward something we've done, but as mentioned, we can't think of any significant change we made in September that would have such negative effects. There is little difference across devices. Is anyone aware of a significant event in September in the search engine world that may have influenced our organic traffic? Any help gratefully received.
Technical SEO | | imaterus0 -
Little confused regarding robots.txt
Hi there Mozzers! As a newbie, I have a question that what could happen if I write my robots.txt file like this... User-agent: * Allow: / Disallow: /abc-1/ Disallow: /bcd/ Disallow: /agd1/ User-agent: * Disallow: / Hope to hear from you...
Technical SEO | | DenorL0 -
I can't crawl the archive of this website with Screaming Frog
Hi I'm trying to crawl this website (http://zeri.info/) with Screaming Frog but because of some technical issue with their site (i can't find what is causing it) i'm able to crawl only the first page of each category (ex. http://zeri.info/sport/) and then it will go to crawl each page of their archive (hundreds of thousands of pages) but it won't crawl the links inside these pages. Thanks a lot!
Technical SEO | | gjergjshala0 -
"non-WWW" vs "WWW" in Google SERPS and Lost Back Link Connection
A Screaming Frog report indicates that Google is indexing a client's site for both: www and non-www URLs. To me this means that Google is seeing both URLs as different even though the page content is identical. The client has not set up a preferred URL in GWMTs. Google says to do a 301 redirect from the non-preferred domain to the preferred version but I believe there is a way to do this in HTTP Access and an easier solution than canonical.
Technical SEO | | RosemaryB
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/44231?hl=en GWMTs also shows that over the past few months this client has lost more than half of their backlinks. (But there are no penalties and the client swears they haven't done anything to be blacklisted in this regard. I'm curious as to whether Google figured out that the entire site was in their index under both "www" and "non-www" and therefore discounted half of the links. Has anyone seen evidence of Google discounting links (both external and internal) due to duplicate content? Thanks for your feedback. Rosemary0 -
Sitemap coming up in Google's index?
I apologize if this question's answer is glaringly obvious, but I was using Google to view all the pages it has indexed of our site--by searching for our company and then clicking the link that says to display more results for the site. On page three, it has the sitemap indexed as if it wee just another page of our site. <cite>www.stadriemblems.com/sitemap.xml</cite> Is this supposed to happen?
Technical SEO | | UnderRugSwept0 -
Do you get credit for an external link that points to a page that's being blocked by robots.txt
Hi folks, No one, including me seems to actually know what happens!? To repeat: If site A links to /home.html on site B and site B blocks /home.html in Robots.txt, does site B get credit for that link? Does the link pass PageRank? Will Google still crawl through it? Does the domain get some juice, but not the page? I know there's other ways of doing this properly, but it is interesting no?
Technical SEO | | DaveSottimano0 -
Robots.txt usage
Hey Guys, I am about make an important improvement to our site's robots.txt we have large number of properties on our site and we have different views for them. List, gallery and map view. By default list view shows up and user can navigate through gallery view. We donot want gallery pages to get indexed and want to save our crawl budget for more important pages. this is one example of our site: http://www.holiday-rentals.co.uk/France/r31.htm When you click on "gallery view" URL of this site will remain same in your address bar: but when you mouse over the "gallery view" tab it will show you URL with parameter "view=g". there are number of parameters: "view=g, view=l and view=m". http://www.holiday-rentals.co.uk/France/r31.htm?view=l http://www.holiday-rentals.co.uk/France/r31.htm?view=g http://www.holiday-rentals.co.uk/France/r31.htm?view=m Now my question is: I If restrict bots by adding "Disallow: ?view=" in our robots.txt will it effect the list view too? Will be very thankful if yo look into this for us. Many thanks Hassan I will test this on some other site within our network too before putting it to important one's. to measure the impact but will be waiting for your recommendations. Thanks
Technical SEO | | holidayseo0 -
Quick robots.txt check
We're working on an SEO update for http://www.gear-zone.co.uk at the moment, and I was wondering if someone could take a quick look at the new robots file (http://gearzone.affinitynewmedia.com/robots.txt) to make sure we haven't missed anything? Thanks
Technical SEO | | neooptic0