Medium sizes forum with 1000's of thin content gallery pages. Disallow or noindex?
-
I have a forum at http://www.onedirection.net/forums/ which contains a gallery with 1000's of very thin-content pages. We've currently got these photo pages disallowed from the main googlebot via robots.txt, but we do all the Google images crawler access.
Now I've been reading that we shouldn't really use disallow, and instead should add a noindex tag on the page itself.
It's a little awkward to edit the source of the gallery pages (and keeping any amends the next time the forum software gets updated).
Whats the best way of handling this?
Chris.
-
Hey Chris,
I agree that your current implementation, while not ideal, is perfectly adequate for the purposes of ensuring you don't have duplicate content or cannibalisation problems - but still allows Google to index the UCG images.
You're also preventing Googlebot from seeing the user profile pages, which is a good idea, since many of them are very thin and mostly duplicate.
So, from a pure SEO perspective, I think you've done a good job.
However... I think you should also consider the ethical implications of potentially blocking the image googlebot as well. By preventing Google from indexing all those images of young girls fawning over the vacuous runners up of a televised talent show, you would undoubtedly be doing the world a great service.
-
Hi Chris, I second Jarno's opinion in this regard. If it is going to be a huge overhead to add the page level blocking, you can rely on your current robots.txt setup. There is a small catch here though. Even if you block using robots.txt file, if Google finds a reference to the blocked content elsewhere on the Internet, then it would index the blocked content. In situations like this, page level content blocking is the way forward. So to fully restrict Google bot indexing your content, you should ideally be using the page level robots meta tag or x-robots-tag.
Here you go for more: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/156449?hl=en
Hope it helps.
Best,
Devanur Rafi.
-
Chris,
is the disallow meta update is too complicated for you to add due to software issues etc. then I feel that your current method is the right way to go. Normally you would be absolutely right for the simple reason that page level overrules the robots.txt. But if a software update overrules the rules places in your code then you have to manually add it after each and every update and i'm not sure you want to do that.
regards
Jarno
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
-
Landing page video scripts - duplicate content concerns
we are planning to create a series of short (<30 sec) videos for landing pages for our clients PPC campaigns. Since our clients all offer the same services (except in different geographical regions of the county) - we were planning to use the SAME script ( approx 85 words) with only the clients business name changed. Our question is : Would these videos be identified as 'duplicate content' - if we are only planning to use the videos on landing pages and only for PPC? -in other words are we in any danger of any kind of consequences from the engines for repeating script text across a series of landing pages featured only at PPC campaigns?
Technical SEO | | Steve_J0 -
Duplicate page errors from pages don't even exist
Hi, I am having this issue within SEOmoz's Crawl Diagnosis report. There are a lot of crawl errors happening with pages don't even exist. My website has around 40-50 pages but SEO report shows that 375 pages have been crawled. My guess is that the errors have something to do with my recent htaccess configuration. I recently configured my htaccess to add trailing slash at the end of URLs. There is no internal linking issue such as infinite loop when navigating the website but the looping is reported in the SEOmoz's report. Here is an example of a reported link: http://www.mywebsite.com/Door/Doors/GlassNow-Services/GlassNow-Services/Glass-Compliance-Audit/GlassNow-Services/GlassNow-Services/Glass-Compliance-Audit/ btw there is no issue such as crawl error in my Google webmaster tool. Any help appreciated
Technical SEO | | mmoezzi0 -
What's the best way to handle Overly Dynamic Url's?
So my question is What the best way to handle Overly Dynamic Url's. I am working on a real estate agency website. They are selling/buying properties and the url is as followed. ttp://www.------.com/index.php?action=calculator&popup=yes&price=195000
Technical SEO | | Angelos_Savvaidis0 -
Has Google stopped rendering author snippets on SERP pages if the author's G+ page is not actively updated?
Working with a site that has multiple authors and author microformat enabled. The image is rendering for some authors on SERP page and not for others. Difference seems to be having an updated G+ page and not having a constantly updating G+ page. any thoughts?
Technical SEO | | irvingw0 -
Pages noindex'ed. Submit removal request too?
We had a bunch of catalog pages "noindex,follow" 'ed. Now should we also submit removal request in WMT for these pages? Thank you! LL
Technical SEO | | LocalLocal0 -
Thin/Duplicate Content
Hi Guys, So here's the deal, my team and I just acquired a new site using some questionable tactics. Only about 5% of the entire site is actually written by humans the rest of the 40k + (and is increasing by 1-2k auto gen pages a day)pages are all autogen + thin content. I'm trying to convince the powers that be that we cannot continue to do this. Now i'm aware of the issue but my question is what is the best way to deal with this. Should I noindex these pages at the directory level? Should I 301 them to the most relevant section where actual valuable content exists. So far it doesn't seem like Google has caught on to this yet and I want to fix the issue while not raising any more red flags in the process. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | DPASeo0 -
After entire site is noindex'd, how long to recover?
A programmers 'accidentally' put "name="robots" content="noindex" />" into every single page of one of my sites (articles, landing pages, home page etc). This happened on Monday, and we just noticed today. Ugh... We've fixed the issue; how long will it take to get reindexed? Will we instantly retain our same positions for keywords? Any tips?
Technical SEO | | EricPacifico0 -
Should we use Google's crawl delay setting?
We’ve been noticing a huge uptick in Google’s spidering lately, and along with it a notable worsening of render times. Yesterday, for example, Google spidered our site at a rate of 30:1 (google spider vs. organic traffic.) So in other words, for every organic page request, Google hits the site 30 times. Our render times have lengthened to an avg. of 2 seconds (and up to 2.5 seconds). Before this renewed interest Google has taken in us we were seeing closer to one second average render times, and often half of that. A year ago, the ratio of Spider to Organic was between 6:1 and 10:1. Is requesting a crawl-delay from Googlebot a viable option? Our goal would be only to reduce Googlebot traffic, and hopefully improve render times and organic traffic. Thanks, Trisha
Technical SEO | | lzhao0