How should I handle URL's created by an internal search engine?
-
Hi,
I'm aware that internal search result URL's (www.example.co.uk/catalogsearch/result/?q=searchterm) should ideally be blocked using the robots.txt file. Unfortunately the damage has already been done and a large number of internal search result URL's have already been created and indexed by Google. I have double checked and these pages only account for approximately 1.5% of traffic per month.
Is there a way I can remove the internal search URL's that have already been indexed and then stop this from happening in the future, I presume the last part would be to disallow /catalogsearch/ in the robots.txt file.
Thanks
-
Basic cleanup
From a procedural standpoint, you want to first add the noindex meta tag to the search results first. Google has to see that tag to then act on it and remove the URLs. You can also enter some of the URLs into the Webmaster tools removal tool.
Next you would want to add /catalogsearch/ to robots.txt once you see all the pages getting out of the index.
Advanced cleanup
If any of these search result URLs are ranking and are landing pages in Google. You may want to consider 301 redirecting those pages to the properly related category pages.
My 2 cents. I only use the GWT parameter handler on parameters that I have to show to the search engines. I otherwise try to hide all those URLs from Google to help with crawl efficiency.
Note that it is really important that you do the work to find what pages/urls Google has cataloged to make sure you dont delete a page that is actually generating some traffic for you. A landing page report from GA would help with this.
Cheers!
-
On top of Lesley's recommendations, both google and bing have url parameter exclusion options in webmaster tools.
-
I am guessing that you are using a system that templates pages and maybe adds a query string after the search, something like search.php?caws+cars. I would set in the header of all of the pages that use the search template a noindex, nofollow. Then I would also add it to the robots text as well to disregard the search pages. They will start dropping out of the results pages in about a week or so.
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
-
Creating a site search engine while keeping SEO factors in mind
I run and own my own travel photography business. (www.mickeyshannon.com) I've been looking into building a search archive of photos that don't necessarily need to be in the main galleries, as a lot of older photos are starting to really clutter up and take away the emphasis from the better work. However, I still want to keep these older photos around. My plan is to simplify my galleries, and pull out 50-75% of the lesser/older photos. All of these photos will still be reachable by a custom-build simple search engine that I'm building to house all these older photos. The photos will be searchable based on keywords that I attach to each photo as I add them to my website. The question I have is whether this will harm me for having duplicate content? Some of the keywords that would be used in the search archive would be similar or the same to the main gallery names. However, I'm also really trying to push my newer and better images out there to the front. I've read some articles that talk about noindexing search keyword results, but that would make it really difficult for search engines to even find the older photos, as searching for their keywords would be the only way to find them. Any thoughts on a way to work this out that benefits, or at least doesn't hurt me, SEO-wise?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | msphotography0 -
What can cause for a service page to rank in Google's Answer Box?
Hello Everyone, Have recently seen a Google result for "vps hosting" showing service page details in Answer Box. I would really like to know, what can cause a service page to appear in the Answer Box? Have attached a screenshot of result page. CaRiWtQUcAALn9n.png CaRiWtQUcAALn9n.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eukmark0 -
What's the best URL structure?
I'm setting up pages for my client's website and I'm trying to figure out the best way to do this. Which of the following would be best (let's say the keywords being used are "sell xgadget" "sell xgadget v1" "sell xgadget v2" "sell xgadget v3" etc.). Domain name: sellgadget.com Potential URL structures: 1. sellxgadget.com/v1
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zing-Marketing
2. sellxgadget.com/xgadget-v1
3. sellxgadget.com/sell-xgadget-v1 Which would be the best URL structure? Which has the least risk of being too keyword spammy for an EMD? Any references for this?0 -
When Mobile and Desktop sites have the same page URLs, how should I handle the 'View Desktop Site' link on a mobile site to ensure a smooth crawl?
We're about to roll out a mobile site. The mobile and desktop URLs are the same. User Agent determines whether you see the desktop or mobile version of the site. At the bottom of the page is a 'View Desktop Site' link that will present the desktop version of the site to mobile user agents when clicked. I'm concerned that when the mobile crawler crawls our site it will crawl both our entire mobile site, then click 'View Desktop Site' and crawl our entire desktop site as well. Since mobile and desktop URLs are the same, the mobile crawler will end up crawling both mobile and desktop versions of each URL. Any tips on what we can do to make sure the mobile crawler either doesn't access the desktop site, or that we can let it know what is the mobile version of the page? We could simply not show the 'View Desktop Site' to the mobile crawler, but I'm interested to hear if others have encountered this issue and have any other recommended ways for handling it. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | merch_zzounds0 -
Canonical URL on search result pages
Hi there, Our company sells educational videos to Nurses via subscription. I've been looking at their video search results page:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 9868john
http://www.nursesfornurses.com.au/cpd When you click on a category, the URL appears like this:
http://www.nursesfornurses.com.au/cpd?view=category&cat=9&name=Acute+Surgical+Nursing
http://www.nursesfornurses.com.au/cpd?view=category&cat=6&name=Medications Would this be an instance where i'd use the canonical tag to redirect each search results page? Bearing in mind the /cpd page is under /Nursing cpd, and that /Nursing cpd is our best performing page in search engines, would it be better to refer it to the 'Nursing CPD' rather than 'CPD' page? Any advice is very welcome,
Thanks,
John0 -
Best way to re-order page elements based on search engine users
Both versions of the page has essentially same content, but in different order. One is for users coming from Google (and google bot) and other is for everybody else. Questions: Is it cloaking? what will be the best way to re-order elements on the page: totally different style sheets for each version, or calling in different divs in a same style sheet? Is there any better way to re-order elements based on search engine? Let me make it clear again: the content is same for everyone, just in different order for visitors coming from Google and everybody else. Don't ask me the reason behind it (executive orders!!)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | StickyRiceSEO0 -
301'ing over 700 internal links to the main page
I just got a contract for a site. After I analyzed their website, I noticed that they have over 700 pages indexed. However, their internal linking structure sucks. It's basically all 700 pages in one directory. What do you recommend? I redirect all the internal structures to their new locations, or would it be better to redirect all those internal pages to their main domain name, and build a completely new seo-friendly structure? Redirecting their current pages to each individual page is gonna take a lotta time, and I don't think they're gonna pay for it. :l
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | skgppa0 -
Posing QU's on Google Variables "aclk", "gclid" "cd", "/aclk" "/search", "/url" etc
I've been doing a bit of stats research prompted by read the recent ranking blog http://www.seomoz.org/blog/gettings-rankings-into-ga-using-custom-variables There are a few things that have come up in my research that I'd like to clear up. The below analysis has been done on my "conversions". 1/. What does "/aclk" mean in the Referrer URL? I have noticed a strong correlation between this and "gclid" in the landing page variable. Does it mean "ad click" ?? Although they seem to "closely" correlate they don't exactly, so when I have /aclk in the referrer Url MOSTLY I have gclid in the landing page URL. BUT not always, and the same applies vice versa. It's pretty vital that I know what is the best way to monitor adwords PPC, so what is the best variable to go on? - Currently I am using "gclid", but I have about 25% extra referral URL's with /aclk in that dont have "gclid" in - so am I underestimating my number of PPC conversions? 2/. The use of the variable "cd" is great, but it is not always present. I have noticed that 99% of my google "Referrer URL's" either start with:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James77
/aclk - No cd value
/search - No cd value
/url - Always contains the cd variable. What do I make of this?? Thanks for the help in advance!0