Can't get auto-generated content de-indexed
-
Hello and thanks in advance for any help you can offer me!
Customgia.com, a costume jewelry e-commerce site, has two types of product pages - public pages that are internally linked and private pages that are only accessible by accessing the URL directly. Every item on Customgia is created online using an online design tool. Users can register for a free account and save the designs they create, even if they don't purchase them. Prior to saving their design, the user is required to enter a product name and choose "public" or "private" for that design. The page title and product description are auto-generated.
Since launching in October '11, the number of products grew and grew as more users designed jewelry items. Most users chose to show their designs publicly, so the number of products in the store swelled to nearly 3000. I realized many of these designs were similar to each and occasionally exact duplicates. So over the past 8 months, I've made 2300 of these design "private" - and no longer accessible unless the designer logs into their account (these pages can also be linked to directly).
When I realized that Google had indexed nearly all 3000 products, I entered URL removal requests on Webmaster Tools for the designs that I had changed to "private". I did this starting about 4 months ago. At the time, I did not have NOINDEX meta tags on these product pages (obviously a mistake) so it appears that most of these product pages were never removed from the index. Or if they were removed, they were added back in after the 90 days were up.
Of the 716 products currently showing (the ones I want Google to know about), 466 have unique, informative descriptions written by humans. The remaining 250 have auto-generated descriptions that read coherently but are somewhat similar to one another. I don't think these 250 descriptions are the big problem right now but these product pages can be hidden if necessary.
I think the big problem is the 2000 product pages that are still in the Google index but shouldn't be. The following Google query tells me roughly how many product pages are in the index: site:Customgia.com inurl:shop-for
Ideally, it should return just over 716 results but instead it's returning 2650 results. Most of these 1900 product pages have bad product names and highly similar, auto-generated descriptions and page titles. I wish Google never crawled them.
Last week, NOINDEX tags were added to all 1900 "private" designs so currently the only product pages that should be indexed are the 716 showing on the site. Unfortunately, over the past ten days the number of product pages in the Google index hasn't changed.
One solution I initially thought might work is to re-enter the removal requests because now, with the NOINDEX tags, these pages should be removed permanently. But I can't determine which product pages need to be removed because Google doesn't let me see that deep into the search results. If I look at the removal request history it says "Expired" or "Removed" but these labels don't seem to correspond in any way to whether or not that page is currently indexed. Additionally, Google is unlikely to crawl these "private" pages because they are orphaned and no longer linked to any public pages of the site (and no external links either).
Currently, Customgia.com averages 25 organic visits per month (branded and non-branded) and close to zero sales. Does anyone think de-indexing the entire site would be appropriate here? Start with a clean slate and then let Google re-crawl and index only the public pages - would that be easier than battling with Webmaster tools for months on end?
Back in August, I posted a similar problem that was solved using NOINDEX tags (de-indexing a different set of pages on Customgia): http://moz.com/community/q/does-this-site-have-a-duplicate-content-issue#reply_176813
Thanks for reading through all this!
-
I don't think there's any harm in submitting a new/full list, even if it duplicates past lists. The URLs haven't been removed, and you did fix the tags. This isn't like disavowing links - it's more of a technical issue. Worst case, it doesn't work, from what I've seen.
-
Thanks for helping me with this.
You are correct that all the product pages are in the same folder regardless of whether they are public or private so unfortunately, removing an entire folder isn't an option at this point.
When I go to Webmaster tools and view past removal requests, each one shows as either "Expired" or "Removed". WMT only allows me to resubmit the removal request if the label is "Expired". Going back past 90 days, many are still labeled "removed" but the further back I go, more and more say "Expired". There are too many requests to try to determine whether or not each page is indexed - so I think our best bet is to re-submit every expired private product page removal request and then monitor removal. Does this make sense?
Back in August, a Moz crawl showed tons of duplicates for the designer pages (the pages where the user actually designs the jewelry). Using NOINDEX tags and removal requests (credit to Dr. Pete and Everett Sizemore) the number of designer pages in the index dropped from 5K to exactly 8 - so it worked.
Our XML sitemap is dynamic and doesn't list private product pages.
-
It honestly sounds like you're on the right track - you do need to explicitly mark those (and META NOINDEX should be fine). Could you just request removal for all private pages? Worst case, Google removes some that aren't in the index, or attempts to. Since the public/private setting can be changed, you can't really put the private pages all in one folder (real or virtual) - that would make life easier, long-term, but probably isn't useful/appropriate for your case.
I'd also recommend having a clean XML sitemap with just the public entries (updated dynamically). That won't deindex the other pages, but it's one more cue Google can use. You want all of the signals you're sending to be consistent.
I agree with Doug, though - this is really tricky, because ideally you would want people to share these pages, and if you NOINDEX then you're losing out on that. My gut feeling is that, until your site is stronger, you probably can't support 3K near duplicates (and counting). If you want to get sophisticated, though, you could dynamically NOINDEX and only noindex posts that have very little content or our obvious dupes. As people fill out or share a product, you could remove the NOINDEX.
-
Hi Doug,
Thanks for the quick response. I will do my best to answer each of your points.
In Webmaster Tools, under Index Status, it shows 1781 pages indexed, with a high of 6515 on June 2, 2013. Not sure that helps to clarify anything but it's another piece of Google data to consider.
We continually monitor WMT and Analytics. I'm addressing this issue specifically because search impressions on our product pages average less than 5 impressions/day despite continuous improvements over the last 12 months - keyword research, better page titles/product names and longer, more informative descriptions. These 500 or so product pages are vastly better today than then were 12 months ago - but impressions have not improved at all.
Every design, public or private, has social/sharing buttons. As I mentioned above, these designs can all be linked to directly from any external website.
I think the category pages are sufficient. There is some fine-tuning that could be done in terms of how products are organized within categories but overall it's pretty solid and probably not an issue.
Our initial strategy was to attract long-tail traffic with user-generated content but the problem is most users gave their products personal, irrelevant (and possibly spammy) product names. There were other problems with the user generated designs as well - like one user who designed 15 earrings that looked exactly the same except for one bead which she changed to a different color for each design. Anyway, we left all these designs public for over 12 months - as more and more designs were added to the site, organic search traffic actually fell.
-
I agree with Doug.
create better category pages - make sure each product page is under a category.
the user generated products are great and should be indexed.
-
Hey Richard,
First, note that the estimated number of pages displayed by that is an estimate which gets refined the deeper you go into the search results. On page one, they tend to be wildly inaccurate.
If you go all the way to the end (page 13) and then repeat the process with ommitted results included you still get to page 13, and a total of 123 pages. (Somewhat better than the 2k+ results.)
This is less than the 716 pages you mention so maybe you've got he opposite problem? What do you see if you check your google analytics and webmaster tools? Which pages are getting organic traffic from google? Which pages are showing in the search results (Webmaster Tools, Impressions)
What are the pages you want to appear in search and what are the keywords you're targeting?
My first thought is - if you're allowing people to design your own jewellery - are you also allowing them to easily share their creations on social, etc? Have you got embed codes so that they can put their designs on their blog etc? If you're not then I think you're missing a trick.
All of these individual items, designed by users, will (should) all be linking back to the specific category pages (or other landning page) and increasing the authority of that page. Make sure your category/landing pages have good unique content that communicates both the value proposition and the products you've got available.
If you don't have these category pages, then it might be worth looking at your site architecture/hierarchy and think about creating them.
Your individual product pages might get long-tail traffic (and having lots of different variations, described in real-people's own words might actually work to your advantage here), your category pages should be the ones targeting head terms.
I notice you've no-indexed and no-followed the product pages in question. This means that if these pages are shared, then any inbound authority/link equity/link-juice/ is just being discarded. Are you sure you want to do that?
I don't think you need to worry too much about google's index at this point and I certainly wouldn't consider deindexing the whole site.
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
-
Old URLs that have 301s to 404s not being de-indexed.
We have a scenario on a domain that recently moved to enforcing SSL. If a page is requested over non-ssl (http) requests, the server automatically redirects to the SSL (https) URL using a good old fashioned 301. This is great except for any page that no longer exists, in which case you get a 301 going to a 404. Here's what I mean. Case 1 - Good page: http://domain.com/goodpage -> 301 -> https://domain.com/goodpage -> 200 Case 2 - Bad page that no longer exists: http://domain.com/badpage -> 301 -> https://domain.com/badpage -> 404 Google is correctly re-indexing all the "good" pages and just displaying search results going directly to the https version. Google is stubbornly hanging on to all the "bad" pages and serving up the original URL (http://domain.com/badpage) unless we submit a removal request. But there are hundreds of these pages and this is starting to suck. Note: the load balancer does the SSL enforcement, not the CMS. So we can't detect a 404 and serve it up first. The CMS does the 404'ing. Any ideas on the best way to approach this problem? Or any idea why Google is holding on to all the old "bad" pages that no longer exist, given that we've clearly indicated with 301s that no one is home at the old address?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | boxclever0 -
Why some websites can rank the keywords they don't have in the page?
Hello guys, Yesterday, I used SEMrush to search for the keyword "branding agency" to see the SERP. The Liquidagency ranks 5th on the first page. So I went to their homepage but saw no exact keywords "branding agency", even in the page source. Also, I didn't see "branding agency" as a top anchor text in the external links to the page (from the report of SEMrush). I am an SEO newbie, can someone explain this to me, please? Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Raymondlee0 -
User generated content (Comments) - What impact do they have?
Hello MOZ stars! I have a question regarding user comments on article pages. I know that user generated content is good for SEO, but how much impact does it really have? For your information:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | idg-sweden
1 - All comments appears in source code and is crawled by spiders.
2 - A visitor can comment a page for up to 60 days.
3 - The amount of comments depends on the topic, we usually gets between 3-40 comments. My question:
1 - If we were to remove comments completely, what impact would it have from seo perspective? (I know you cant be certain - but please make an educated guess if possible)
2 - If it has a negative and-/or positive impact please specify why! 🙂 If anything is unclear or you want certain information don't hesitate to ask and I'll try to specify. Best regards,
Danne0 -
Created the content, yet we don't rank for it. Toxic website?
Hey everyone, I'm beginning to think our site is toxic i.e. it'll never rank properly again irrespective of what we do. I recently published some data (2 months ago) in an interactive visual called the "iPhone 5S Price Index". I outreached and got thousands of links from sites including Forbes, Gizmodo (various international versions), Washington Post, The Guardian, NY Times, etc etc. All of these results dominate the Google rankings, all with links pointing to us. YET, we're no where to be seen. What incentive are Google giving content creators, like me, to continue producing content that is obviously popular if we can't even rank for it? The traffic we received was fantastic. In one day the traffic was 40 times our average, which made me smile like a Cheshire Cat from ear-to-ear but we need to improve our rankings overall otherwise the value to us is lost. The traffic wasn't there to buy our service, they were there to see the graphic. Hopefully our brand exposure leads to future sales, but it's a pittance compared to our previous rankings income. I've had this type of success 3 times in the last few months on this site alone. Yet nothing changes. We suffered from a loss of rankings in September 2012, fighting ever since to get it back. Now I'm losing hope it is even possible. Does anyone know why our site wouldn't rank when we're undeniable the source that created the work? Also, why wouldn't the increase in domain authority (which has jumped about 10 points according to OSE) have a knock on effect for the rest of our keywords - or even let us appear within the top 100 for ones we obviously serve? We do Real Company Shit - and we're good at it. But I need these rankings back. It's driving me nuts. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | purpleindigo0 -
Robots.txt file - How to block thosands of pages when you don't have a folder path
Hello.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Unity
Just wondering if anyone has come across this and can tell me if it worked or not. Goal:
To block review pages Challenge:
The URLs aren't constructed using folders, they look like this:
www.website.com/default.aspx?z=review&PG1234
www.website.com/default.aspx?z=review&PG1235
www.website.com/default.aspx?z=review&PG1236 So the first part of the URL is the same (i.e. /default.aspx?z=review) and the unique part comes immediately after - so not as a folder. Looking at Google recommendations they show examples for ways to block 'folder directories' and 'individual pages' only. Question:
If I add the following to the Robots.txt file will it block all review pages? User-agent: *
Disallow: /default.aspx?z=review Much thanks,
Davinia0 -
Dynamic 301's causing duplicate content
Hi, wonder if anyone can help? We have just changed our site which was hosted on IIS and the page url's were like this ( example.co.uk/Default.aspx?pagename=About-Us ). The new page url is example.co.uk/About-Us/ and is using Apache. The 301's our developer told us to use was in this format: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/Default.aspx$
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GoGroup51
RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} ^pagename=About-Us$
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.domain.co.uk/About-Us/ [R=301,L] This seemed to work from a 301 point of view; however it also seemed to allow both of the below URL's to give the same page! example.co.uk/About-Us/?pagename=About-Us example.co.uk/About-Us/ Webmaster Tools has now picked up on this and is seeing it a duplicate content. Can anyone help why it would be doing this please. I'm not totally clued up and our host/ developer cant understand it too. Many Thanks0 -
Does Google crawl the pages which are generated via the site's search box queries?
For example, if I search for an 'x' item in a site's search box and if the site displays a list of results based on the query, would that page be crawled? I am asking this question because this would be a URL that is non existent on the site and hence am confused as to whether Google bots would be able to find it.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | pulseseo0 -
Need to duplicate the index for Google in a way that's correct
Usually duplicated content is a brief to fix. I find myself in a little predicament: I have a network of career oriented websites in several countries. the problem is that for each country we use a "master" site that aggregates all ads working as a portal. The smaller nisched sites have some of the same info as the "master" sites since it is relevant for that site. The "master" sites have naturally gained the index for the majority of these ads. So the main issue is how to maintain the ads on the master sites and still make the nische sites content become indexed in a way that doesn't break Google guide lines. I can of course fix this in various ways ranging from iframes(no index though) and bullet listing and small adjustments to the headers and titles on the content on the nisched sites, but it feels like I'm cheating if I'm going down that path. So the question is: Have someone else stumbled upon a similar problem? If so...? How did you fix it.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Gustav-Northclick0