Why isn't google indexing our site?
-
Hi,
We have majorly redesigned our site. Is is not a big site it is a SaaS site so has the typical structure, Landing, Features, Pricing, Sign Up, Contact Us etc...
The main part of the site is after login so out of google's reach.
Since the new release a month ago, google has indexed some pages, mainly the blog, which is brand new, it has reindexed a few of the original pages I am guessing this as if I click cached on a site: search it shows the new site.
All new pages (of which there are 2) are totally missed. One is HTTP and one HTTPS, does HTTPS make a difference.
I have submitted the site via webmaster tools and it says "URL and linked pages submitted to index" but a site: search doesn't bring all the pages?
What is going on here please? What are we missing? We just want google to recognise the old site has gone and ALL the new site is here ready and waiting for it.
Thanks
Andrew
-
Well, links/shares are good. But of course I'm just begging the question of how you can get those.
Rand gave a great talk called "Inbound Marketing for Startups" at a Hackers & Founders meetup that was focused more on Inbound as a whole than SEO in particular, but it's full of valuable insights: http://vimeo.com/39473593 [video]
Ultimately it'll come down to some kind of a publishing/promotional strategy for your startup. Sometimes your startup is so unique/interesting that it has its own marketing baked right in - in which case you can get a lot of traction by simply doing old-school PR to get your startup in front of the right people.
Other times, you've got to build up links/authority on the back of remarkable marketing.
BufferApp is a great example of a startup that built traction off their blog. Of course, they weren't necessarily blogging as an SEO play - it was more in the aim of getting directly in front of the right audience for direct signups for their product. But they definitely built up some domain authority as a result.
I'd also take a look at the guides Mailchimp has created - they created the dual benefit of getting in front of the right audience in a positive/helpful way (which benefits the brand and drives sign-ups directly) as well as building a considerable number of inbound links, boosting their domain authority overall.
Unfortunately no quick/easy ways to build your domain authority, but things you do to build your authority can also get you immediately in front of the audience you're looking for - and SEO just becomes a lateral benefit to that.
-
Thank you all for your responses. It is strange. we are going to add a link to our g+ page and then add a post.
As a new site what is the best way to get our domain authority up so we get crailed quicker?
Thanks again
Andrew
-
I disagree. Unless the old pages have inbound links from external sites, there's not much reason to 301 them (and not much benefit). If they're serving up 404 errors, they will fall out of the index.
Google absolutely does have a way to know these new pages exist - by crawling the home page and following the links discovered there. Both of the pages in question are linked to prominently, particularly the Features page which is part of the main navigation. A sitemap is just an aid for this process - it can help move things along and help Google find otherwise obscure/deep pages, but it by no means is a necessity for getting prominent pages indexed, particularly pages that are 1-2 levels down from the home page.
-
If you didn't redirect the old URLs to the new ones when the new site went live, this will absolutely be the cause of your problem, Studio33. That, combined with having no (or misdirected) sitemap means there was essentially no way for Google to even know your site's pages existed.
Good catch Billy.
-
Hi Andrew,
-
Google has been indexing HTTPS URLs for years now without a problem, so is unlikely to be part of the issue.
-
Your domain authority on the whole may be slowing Google down in indexing new pages. Bottom line is crawl rate and depth are both functions of how authoritative/important you appear based on links/shares/etc.
-
That said, I don't see any indication as to why these two particular pages are not being indexed by Google. I'm a bit stumped here.
I see some duplication between your Features page and your Facebook timeline, but not with the invoice page.
As above, your domain authority (17) is a bit on the low side. So this could simply be a matter of Google not dedicating enough resources to crawl/index all of your pages yet. But why these two pages would be the only ones is perplexing, particularly after a full month. There are no problems with your Robots.txt, no canonical tag issues, the pages are linked to properly.
Wish I had an easy answer here. One idea, a bit of a long shot: we've seen Google index pages faster when they're linked to from Google+ posts. I see you have a Google+ business page for this website - you might try simply writing a (public) post there that includes a link over to the Features page.
As weak as that is, that's all I've got.
Best of Luck,
Mike -
-
OK - I would get a list of all of your old pages and start 301 redirecting them to your new pages asap. This could be part of your issue.
-
Hi checked XML, its there if you view source it just doesn't have a stylesheet
-
Hi thanks about 1 month. The blog page you are getting maybe the old ones,as they are working this end http://www.invoicestudio.com/Blog . What you have mentioned re the blog is part of the problem. Google has the old site and not the new.
-
Getting this on your Blog pages:
The page cannot be displayed because an internal server error has occurred.
where you aware?
Anyway - may I ask how old these pages are?
-
Thanks. I will look into the sitemap. That only went live about an hour ago whilst this thread has been going on.
-
Yeah - with no path specified the directive is ignored. (you don't have a '/' so the directive (disallow) is ignored)
however, you do direct to your xml sitemap which appears to be empty. You might want to fix that....
-
Hi no I think its fine as we do not have the forward slash after the disallow. See
http://www.robotstxt.org/robotstxt.html
I wish it was as simple as that. Thanks for your help though its appreciated.
-
Hmmm. That link shows that the way you have it will block all robots.
-
Thanks but I think Robots.txt is correct. Excert from http://www.robotstxt.org/robotstxt.html
To exclude all robots from the entire server
User-agent: * Disallow: /
To allow all robots complete access
User-agent: * Disallow:
(or just create an empty "/robots.txt" file, or don't use one at all)
-
It looks like your robots.txt file is the problem. http://www.invoicestudio.com/robots.txt has:
User-agent: * Disallow: When it should be:
User-agent: *
Allow: / -
Hi,
The specific pages are
https://www.invoicestudio.com/Secure/InvoiceTemplate
http://www.invoicestudio.com/Features
I'm not sure what other pages are not indexed.
New site has been live 1 month.
Thanks for your help
Andrew
-
Without seeing the specific pages i cant check for things such as noindex tags or robot text blocking access, i would suggest you double check these aspects. The pages will need to be accesible to Search engines when they crawl your site, so if there are no links to those pages Google will be unable to access them.
How long have they been live since the site re-launch as it may just be that they have not been crawled yet, particuarly if they are deeper pages within your site hierarchy.
Heres a link to Googles resources on crawling and indexing sites incase you have not been able to check through them yet.
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
-
Google does not want to index my page
I have a site that is hundreds of page indexed on Google. But there is a page that I put in the footer section that Google seems does not like and are not indexing that page. I've tried submitting it to their index through google webmaster and it will appear on Google index but then after a few days it's gone again. Before that page had canonical meta to another page, but it is removed now.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | odihost0 -
Sites still rank who don't seem like they should. Why?
So you've been MOZing and SEOing for years and we're all convinced of the 10x factor when it comes to content and ranking for certain search terms... right? So what do you do when some older sites that don't even produce content dominate the first page of a very important search term? They're home pages with very little content and have clearly all dabbled in pre Panda SEO. Surely people are still seeing this and wondering why?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wearehappymedia0 -
Removing Parameterized URLs from Google Index
We have duplicate eCommerce websites, and we are in the process of implementing cross-domain canonicals. (We can't 301 - both sites are major brands). So far, this is working well - rankings are improving dramatically in most cases. However, what we are seeing in some cases is that Google has indexed a parameterized page for the site being canonicaled (this is the site that is getting the canonical tag - the "from" page). When this happens, both sites are being ranked, and the parameterized page appears to be blocking the canonical. The question is, how do I remove canonicaled pages from Google's index? If Google doesn't crawl the page in question, it never sees the canonical tag, and we still have duplicate content. Example: A. www.domain2.com/productname.cfm%3FclickSource%3DXSELL_PR is ranked at #35, and B. www.domain1.com/productname.cfm is ranked at #12. (yes, I know that upper case is bad. We fixed that too.) Page A has the canonical tag, but page B's rank didn't improve. I know that there are no guarantees that it will improve, but I am seeing a pattern. Page A appears to be preventing Google from passing link juice via canonical. If Google doesn't crawl Page A, it can't see the rel=canonical tag. We likely have thousands of pages like this. Any ideas? Does it make sense to block the "clicksource" parameter in GWT? That kind of scares me.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AMHC0 -
Google's form for "Small sites that should rank better" | Any experiences or results?
Back in August of 2013 Google created a form that allowed people to submit small websites that "should be ranking better in Google". There is more info about it in this article http://www.seroundtable.com/google-small-site-survey-17295.html Has anybody used it? Any experiences or results you can share? *private message if you do not want to share publicly...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GregB1230 -
So What On My Site Is Breaking The Google Guidelines?
I have a site that I'm trying to rank for the Keyword "Jigsaw Puzzles" I was originally ranked around #60 or something around there and then all of a sudden my site stopped ranking for that keyword. (My other keyword rankings stayed) Contacted Google via the site reconsideration and got the general response... So I went through and deleted as many links as I could find that I thought Google may not have liked... heck, I even removed links that I don't think I should have JUST so I could have this fixed. I responded with a list of all links I removed and also any links that I've tried to remove, but couldn't for whatever reasons. They are STILL saying my website is breaking the Google guidelines... mainly around links. Can anyone take a peek at my site and see if there's anything on the site that may be breaking the guidelines? (because I can't) Website in question: http://www.yourjigsawpuzzles.co.uk UPDATE: Just to let everyone know that after multiple reconsideration requests, this penalty has been removed. They stated it was a manual penalty. I tried removing numerous different types of links but they kept saying no, it's still breaking rules. It wasn't until I removed some website directory links that they removed this manual penalty. Thought it would be interesting for some of you guys.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RichardTaylor0 -
Google indexing flash content
Hi Would googles indexing of flash content count towards page content? for example I have over 7000 flash files, with 1 unique flash file per page followed by a short 2 paragraph snippet, would google count the flash as content towards the overall page? Because at the moment I've x-tagged the roberts with noindex, nofollow and no archive to prevent them from appearing in the search engines. I'm just wondering if the google bot visits and accesses the flash file it'll get the x-tag noindex, nofollow and then stop processing. I think this may be why the panda update also had an effect. thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Flapjack0 -
Can't find my site on Bing, since ages
Hi Guys, Well, the problem seems normal but I guess it's not. I have tried many things, and nothing changed it, now I give it last try... ask so maybe you will help me. The problem is.. I can't find my site nowhere in Bing, I mean nowhere by not in first 20 pages for my keywords "beauty tips" and the site is: http://www.beauty-tips.net/. In my opinion it should be pretty high... maybe it's too high so I can't see it ;). I never had special problems with Bing, was easier to be there "somewhere" than in google, but with this one is totally opposite. Any ideas? Thanks for your time!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Luke220 -
DCMI and Google's rich snippets
I haven't seen any consistent information regarding DCMI tags for organic SEO in a couple of years. Webmaster Tools obviously has a rich set of instructions for microdata. Has there been any updated testing on DCMI or information above the whisper/rumor stage on whether engines will be using Dublin? As a final point, would it be worth going back to static pages that haven't been touched in a couple of years and updating them with microdata? It seems a natural for retail sites and maybe some others, but what about content heavy pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jimmyseo0