Help with pages Google is labeling "Not Followed"
-
I am seeing a number of pages that I am doing 301 redirects on coming up under the "Not Followed" category of the advanced index status in google webmasters. Google says this might be because the page is still showing active content or the redirect is not correct. I don't know how to tell if the page is still showing active content, and if someone can please tell me how to determine this it would be greatly appreciated. Also if you can provide a solution for how to adjust my page to make sure that the content is not appearing to be active, that would be amazing. Thanks in advance, here is a few links to pages that are experiencing this:
-
Hi Joshua -
If someone is linking to the www version then it doesnt pass as much juice as it would if it wasnt redirected (theres lots of info on this on the internet with varied options). Overall, most SEO's agree that an inbound link that points directly to a page without being 301 redirected has more of a positive SEO effect.
With that being said, in your case Google Webmaster Tools may be detecting this double redirect error simply because there is an external website somewhere linking to the 'www' version. You can find this using OSE or using the WMT by going to CRAWL ERRORS and looking for the sunny-isles url. Clicking on it (if its there) will show who is linking to you and from where.
BTW - when did you do the redirects, and how long since you noticed the new url wasnt indexed (and was the old URL indexed?)
-
The 301 will preserve some of the authority passed through from the www version of the link.
One note - Google sometimes has a rough time with consecutive 301s. Normally it's only a problem if there are several in a row. Here you have two. You might consider reducing that to 1...?
-
MIght as well, yes.
-
Hello Ian,
Thanks for your help as well. Question for you, I current have not set a preferred version in my google webmasters account. Do you think I should go ahead and establish the non www version as my setting?
Thanks.
-
Hello Ian,
Thanks for your help as well. Question for you, I current have not set a preferred version in my google webmasters account. Do you think I should go ahead and establish the non www version as my setting?
Thanks.
-
Hi Jared,
Thank you very much for answering my question. So if someone is linking to me from another site, but uses the www version of a url does it not help my seo?
And if this is the case, what do you recommend I do?
Thanks.
-
Hi Joshua,
It looks like you're redirecting from the 'www' version to the non 'www' version. The 301 redirect is set up just fine.
2 things to check first:
- In Google Webmaster Tools, do you have the preferred domain set to the 'www' version? That might cause this confusion.
- In robots.txt, you're blocking Google Image Bot from crawling that folder. Once, I saw an instance where that screwed up Googlebot as well, and removing the disallow fixed the problem.
Ian
-
The link you referenced has 'www' in it, is that how the link is targeted on your website? If so, its probably the double redirect that is causing the issue. Since WP is set to 'non-www' - every time there is a call for the www version of a url, WP automatically 301 redirects it to the non-www version. There is nothing wrong with this.
Its when there is a call for a 'www' version of a URL that has also been redirected, as the one you cited has, where a double redirect now takes place:
http://www.luxuryhome..../sunnyilses.html
to the 'non-ww' version:
http://luxuryhome.../sunnyisles.html
then from there to the new html file version:
http://luxuryhome.../sunny-isles.html
The header check shows a normal www to non-www redirect first (WP is doing this), and then the 301 redirect that changes the sunnyisles to sunny-isles. Both server responses seem OK so the redirects themselves seem to be working. What you want to make sure of is:
Any internal links linking to the old sunnyisles.html page do not contain 'www'. (And in any event, these links should be changed to point to the new page anyway).
Any inbound links from external sources do not reference the 'www' version.
It would be helpful if we cound see the htaccess file as well.
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
-
Can Google Crawl This Page?
I'm going to have to post the page in question which i'd rather not do but I have permission from the client to do so. Question: A recruitment client of mine had their website build on a proprietary platform by a so-called recruitment specialist agency. Unfortunately the site is not performing well in the organic listings. I believe the culprit is this page and others like it: http://www.prospect-health.com/Jobs/?st=0&o3=973&s=1&o4=1215&sortdir=desc&displayinstance=Advanced Search_Site1&pagesize=50000&page=1&o1=255&sortby=CreationDate&o2=260&ij=0 Basically as soon as you deviate from the top level pages you land on pages that have database-query URLs like this one. My take on it is that Google cannot crawl these pages and is therefore having trouble picking up all of the job listings. I have taken some measures to combat this and obviously we have an xml sitemap in place but it seems the pages that Google finds via the XML feed are not performing because there is no obvious flow of 'link juice' to them. There are a number of latest jobs listed on top level pages like this one: http://www.prospect-health.com/optometry-jobs and when they are picked up they perform Ok in the SERPs, which is the biggest clue to the problem outlined above. The agency in question have an SEO department who dispute the problem and their proposed solution is to create more content and build more links (genius!). Just looking for some clarification from you guys if you don't mind?
Technical SEO | | shr1090 -
Can view pages of site, but Google & SEOmoz return 404
I can visit and view every page of a site (can also see source code), but Google, SEOmoz and others say anything other than home page is a 404 and Google won't index the sub-pages. I have check robots.txt and HTAccess and can't find anything wrong. Is this a DNS or server setting problem? Any ideas? Thanks, Fitz
Technical SEO | | FitzSWC0 -
My blog page isn't ranking in Google
Hi, I noticed that my blog page on my site isn't in Google when i search for full URL link http://www.asggutter.com/blog/ instead i see page that isn't even working asggutter.com/sitemap.xml screen shot http://screencast.com/t/6OVFLwL8nTL How i can i fix that. Thanks
Technical SEO | | tonyklu0 -
Duplicate pages in Google index despite canonical tag and URL Parameter in GWMT
Good morning Moz... This is a weird one. It seems to be a "bug" with Google, honest... We migrated our site www.three-clearance.co.uk to a Drupal platform over the new year. The old site used URL-based tracking for heat map purposes, so for instance www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html ..could be reached via www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=menu or www.three-clearance.co.uk/apple-phones.html?ref=sidebar and so on. GWMT was told of the ref parameter and the canonical meta tag used to indicate our preference. As expected we encountered no duplicate content issues and everything was good. This is the chain of events: Site migrated to new platform following best practice, as far as I can attest to. Only known issue was that the verification for both google analytics (meta tag) and GWMT (HTML file) didn't transfer as expected so between relaunch on the 22nd Dec and the fix on 2nd Jan we have no GA data, and presumably there was a period where GWMT became unverified. URL structure and URIs were maintained 100% (which may be a problem, now) Yesterday I discovered 200-ish 'duplicate meta titles' and 'duplicate meta descriptions' in GWMT. Uh oh, thought I. Expand the report out and the duplicates are in fact ?ref= versions of the same root URL. Double uh oh, thought I. Run, not walk, to google and do some Fu: http://is.gd/yJ3U24 (9 versions of the same page, in the index, the only variation being the ?ref= URI) Checked BING and it has indexed each root URL once, as it should. Situation now: Site no longer uses ?ref= parameter, although of course there still exists some external backlinks that use it. This was intentional and happened when we migrated. I 'reset' the URL parameter in GWMT yesterday, given that there's no "delete" option. The "URLs monitored" count went from 900 to 0, but today is at over 1,000 (another wtf moment) I also resubmitted the XML sitemap and fetched 5 'hub' pages as Google, including the homepage and HTML site-map page. The ?ref= URls in the index have the disadvantage of actually working, given that we transferred the URL structure and of course the webserver just ignores the nonsense arguments and serves the page. So I assume Google assumes the pages still exist, and won't drop them from the index but will instead apply a dupe content penalty. Or maybe call us a spam farm. Who knows. Options that occurred to me (other than maybe making our canonical tags bold or locating a Google bug submission form 😄 ) include A) robots.txt-ing .?ref=. but to me this says "you can't see these pages", not "these pages don't exist", so isn't correct B) Hand-removing the URLs from the index through a page removal request per indexed URL C) Apply 301 to each indexed URL (hello BING dirty sitemap penalty) D) Post on SEOMoz because I genuinely can't understand this. Even if the gap in verification caused GWMT to forget that we had set ?ref= as a URL parameter, the parameter was no longer in use because the verification only went missing when we relaunched the site without this tracking. Google is seemingly 100% ignoring our canonical tags as well as the GWMT URL setting - I have no idea why and can't think of the best way to correct the situation. Do you? 🙂 Edited To Add: As of this morning the "edit/reset" buttons have disappeared from GWMT URL Parameters page, along with the option to add a new one. There's no messages explaining why and of course the Google help page doesn't mention disappearing buttons (it doesn't even explain what 'reset' does, or why there's no 'remove' option).
Technical SEO | | Tinhat0 -
Errors - 7300 - Duplicate Page Content..Help me..
Hi, I just received the crawl report with 7300 errors of duplicate page content. Site built using php. list of errors will be like this.. http://xxxxx.com/channels/ http://xxxxx.com/channels/?page=1 http://xxxxxx.com/channels/?page=2 I am not good in coding and using readymade script for this website. could anyone guide me to fix this issue? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | vilambara0 -
NoIndex/NoFollow pages showing up when doing a Google search using "Site:" parameter
We recently launched a beta version of our new website in a subdomain of our existing site. The existing site is www.fonts.com with the beta living at new.fonts.com. We do not want Google to crawl the new site until it's out of beta so we have added the following on all pages: However, one of our team members noticed that google is displaying results from new.fonts.com when doing an "site:new.fonts.com" search (see attached screenshot). Is it possible that Google is indexing the content despite the noindex, nofollow tags? We have double checked the syntax and it seems correct except the trailing "/". I know Google still crawls noindexed pages, however, the fact that they're showing up in search results using the site search syntax is unsettling. Any thoughts would be appreciated! DyWRP.png
Technical SEO | | ChrisRoberts-MTI0 -
Page rank 2 for home page, 3 for service pages
Hey guys, I have noticed with one of our new sites, the home page is showing page rank two, whereas 2 of the internal service pages are showing as 3. I have checked with both open site explorer and yahoo back links and there are by far more links to the home page. All quality and relevant directory submissions and blog comments. The site is only 4 months old, I wonder if anyone can shed any light on the fact 2 of the lesser linked pages are showing higher PR? Thanks 🙂
Technical SEO | | Nextman0 -
Does removing product listings help raise SERP's on other pages?
Does removing content ever make sense? We have out of stock products that are left on the site (in an out of stock section) specifically for SEO value, but I am not sure how to approach the problem from a bottom line conversion stand point. Do we leave out of stock products and hope that they turn into a conversion rate via cross selling, or do out of stock products lower the value of other pages by "stealing" link juice and pagerank from the rest of the site? (and effectively driving interest away) What is your perspective? Do you believe that any content that is related or semi-related to your main focus is beneficial, or does it only make sense to have strong content that has a higher rate of conversion and overall site engagement?
Technical SEO | | 13375auc30