Issue with Robots.txt file blocking meta description
-
Hi,
Can you please tell me why the following error is showing up in the serps for a website that was just re-launched 7 days ago with new pages (301 redirects are built in)?
A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more.
Once we noticed it yesterday, we made some changed to the file and removed the amount of items in the disallow list.
Here is the current Robots.txt file:
# XML Sitemap & Google News Feeds version 4.2 - http://status301.net/wordpress-plugins/xml-sitemap-feed/ Sitemap: http://www.website.com/sitemap.xml Sitemap: http://www.website.com/sitemap-news.xml User-agent: * Disallow: /wp-admin/ Disallow: /wp-includes/ Other notes... the site was developed in WordPress and uses that followign plugins:
- WooCommerce All-in-One SEO Pack
- Google Analytics for WordPress
- XML Sitemap
- Google News Feeds
Currently, in the SERPs, it keeps jumping back and forth between showing the meta description for the www domain and showing the error message (above).
Originally, WP Super Cache was installed and has since been deactivated, removed from WP-config.php and deleted permanently.
One other thing to note, we noticed yesterday that there was an old xml sitemap still on file, which we have since removed and resubmitted a new one via WMT. Also, the old pages are still showing up in the SERPs.
Could it just be that this will take time, to review the new sitemap and re-index the new site?
If so, what kind of timeframes are you seeing these days for the new pages to show up in SERPs? Days, weeks? Thanks, Erin ```
-
At the moment, it doesn't seem that rel=publisher is doing all that much for sites (aside from sometimes showing better info ion the knowledge graph listing on Brand searches) but personally I believe it's functionality and influence are going to be greatly expanded fairly soon, so well worth doing. As far as it contributing anything to help speed up indexing... doubt it.
P.
-
Paul,
Thanks... you hit upon my hunch, that we will just have to wait.
Much of the information in the SERPs (metadescriptions, titles and urls) are still old,even though they redirect to the new pages when I click.
Thanks for the tip... and about social media.
Do you think it will help to get the rel=publisher link to the Google+ page on the site?
Erin
-
A lot of people, especially WP users use modules that may block certain spiders crawling your site, but in your case, you don't seem to have any.
-
If you just changed the robots.txt file yesterday, my guess is you're going to have to be patient while the site gets recrawled, Erin. Any of the pages that are in the index and were cached before yesterday's robots update will still include the directive not to include the metadescription (since that's the condition they were under when they were cached.)
I suspect the pages you're seeing with metadescriptions were crawled since the robots update. Are you seeing the same page change whether it shows metadescription or not?
As far as old pages showing in the SERPs, again they'll all have to be crawled before the 301 redirects can be discovered and the SEs can begin to understand they should be dropped. (Even then it can take days to weeks for the originals to drop out.)
Another very effective way to help get the new site indexed faster is to attract some good-quality new links to the new pages. Social Media can be especially effective for this, Google+ in particular.
Paul
-
Thanks!
What do I need to look for in the .htaccess file?
Here is what is there... and the rest (not shown) are redirects:
BEGIN WordPress <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / RewriteRule ^index.php$ - [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule . /index.php [L]</ifmodule> # END WordPress
BEGIN WordPress <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / RewriteRule ^index.php$ - [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule . /index.php [L]</ifmodule> # END WordPress
-
Thanks for the tips! Let me check it out.
-
I'd also insure its not something to do with your .htacess file.
-
Make sure the pages aren't blocked with meta robots noindex tag
Fetch as Google in WMT to request a full site recrawl.
Run brokenlinkcheck.com and see if their crawler is successfully crawling or if it's blocked.
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
-
Recovering old disallow file?
Hi guys, We had aN SEO agency do a disallow request on one of our sites a while back. They have no trace of the disallow txt file and all the links they disallowed. Does anyone know if there is a way to recover this file in google webmaster tools or anyway to find which links were disallowed? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jayoliverwright0 -
Robots.txt question
I notice something weird in Google robots. txt tester I have this line Disallow: display= in my robots.text but whatever URL I give to test it says blocked and shows this line in robots.text for example this line is to block pages like http://www.abc.com/lamps/floorlamps?display=table but if I test http://www.abc.com/lamps/floorlamps or any page it shows as blocked due to Disallow: display= am I doing something wrong or Google is just acting strange? I don't think pages with no display= are blocked in real.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rbai0 -
Robots.txt and redirected backlinks
Hey there, since a client's global website has a very complex structure which lead to big duplicate content problems, we decided to disallow crawler access and instead allow access to only a few relevant subdirectories. While indexing has improved since this I was wondering if we might have cut off link juice. Since several backlinks point to the disallowed root directory and are from there redirected (301) to the allowed directory I was wondering if this could cause any problems? Example: If there is a backlink pointing to example.com (disallowed in robots.txt) and is redirected from there to example.com/uk/en (allowed in robots.txt). Would this cut off the link juice? Thanks a lot for your thoughts on this. Regards, Jochen
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Online-Marketing-Guy0 -
Search engine blocked by robots-crawl error by moz & GWT
Hello Everyone,. For My Site I am Getting Error Code 605: Page Banned by robots.txt, X-Robots-Tag HTTP Header, or Meta Robots Tag, Also google Webmaster Also not able to fetch my site, tajsigma.com is my site Any expert Can Help please, Thanx
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | falguniinnovative0 -
Robots.txt - Do I block Bots from crawling the non-www version if I use www.site.com ?
my site uses is set up at http://www.site.com I have my site redirected from non- www to the www in htacess file. My question is... what should my robots.txt file look like for the non-www site? Do you block robots from crawling the site like this? Or do you leave it blank? User-agent: * Disallow: / Sitemap: http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com/sitemap.xml Sitemap: http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com/video-sitemap.xml
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | morg454540 -
Meta Keywords: Do They Hurt Rankings
I know that Google doesn't use meta keywords, but does it hurt to have anything in there? Just wondering if I need to remove all the meta keywords that are on my site, or are they harmless to have. Also, would meta keywords ever be used by an internal search plug-in if we were to install one in the future, or do they generally look at the product title and description for that info?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | b4cab0 -
Canonical tags and product descriptions
I just wanted to check what you guys thought of this strategy for duplicate product descriptions. A sample product is a letter bracelet - a, b, c etc so there are 26 products with identical descriptions. It is going to be extremely difficult to come up with 25 new unique descriptions so with recommendation i'm looking to use the canonical tag. I can't set any to no-index because visitors will look for explicit letters. Because the titles only differ by the letter then a search for either letter bracelet letter a bracelet letter i bracelet will just return results for 'letter bracelet' due to stop words unless the searcher explicitly searches for 'letter "a" bracelet. So I reckon I can make 4 new unique descriptions. I research what are the most popular letters picking 5 from the top (excluding 'a' and 'i'). Equally share the remaining letters between those 5 and with each group set a canonical tag pointing to the primary letter of that group. Does this seem a sensible thing to do?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
Google changing the meta title for the homepage causing branding issues
A client of mine." Ross X Bute" current meta title is "Luxury designer clothing | Womens designer clothing" for the homepage. If i search for luxury designer clothing it will show the full meta title for the homepage. however if i search for the brand name.... "Ross & Bute" will show instead of the meta title. Whats the problem? Well my client a few month ago has decided to re brand the business to have a "X" to show instead of the "And". The rest of the site is branded with an "X" rather than "And" The URL www.rossandbute.com, so you can understand where google is getting this assumption from. Is there anyway to change this so it reads the the meta title in the SERPs? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Martin_Harris0