Question about Syntax in Robots.txt
-
So if I want to block any URL from being indexed that contains a particular parameter what is the best way to put this in the robots.txt file?
Currently I have-
Disallow: /attachment_idWhere "attachment_id" is the parameter. Problem is I still see these URL's indexed and this has been in the robots now for over a month. I am wondering if I should just do
Disallow: attachment_id or Disallow: attachment_id= but figured I would ask you guys first.
Thanks!
-
That's excellent Chris.
Use the Remove Page function as well - it might help speed things up for you.
-Andy
-
I don't know how but I completely forgot I could just pop those URL's in GWT and see if they were blocked or not and sure enough, Google says they are. I guess this is just a matter of waiting.... Thanks much!
-
I have previously looked into both of those documents and the issue remains that they don't exactly address how best to block parameters. I could do this through GWT but just am curious about the correct and preferred syntax for the robots.txt as well. I guess I could just look at sites like Amazon or other big sites to see what the common practices are. Thanks though!
-
Problem is I still see these URL's indexed and this has been in the robots now for over a month. I am wondering if I should just do
It can take Google some time to remove pages from the index.
The best way to test if this has worked is hop into Webmaster Tools and use the Test Robots.txt function. If it has blocked the required pages, then you know it's just a case of waiting - you can also remove pages from within Webmaster Tools as well, although this isn't immediate.
-Andy
-
Hi there
Take a look at Google's resource on robots.txt, as well as Moz's. You can get all the information you need there. You can also let Google know about what URLs to exclude from it's crawls via Search Console.
Hope this helps! Good luck!
-
Im not a robots.txt expert by a long shot, but I found this, which is a little dated, which explained it to me in terms i could understand.
https://sanzon.wordpress.com/2008/04/29/advanced-usage-of-robotstxt-w-querystrings/
there is also a feature in Google Webmaster tools called URL parameters that lets you block URLs with set parameters for all sorts of reason to avoid duplicate content etc. I havn't used it myself but may be work looking into
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
-
Question on Indexing, Hreflang tag, Canonical
Dear All, Have a question. We've a client (pharma), who has a prescription medicine approved only in the US, and has only one global site at .com which is accessed by all their target audience all over the world.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jrohwer
For the rest of the US, we can create a replica of the home page (which actually features that drug), minus the existence of the medicine, and set IP filter so that non-US traffic see the duplicate of the home page. Question is, how best to tackle this semi-duplicate page. Possibly no-index won't do because that will block the site from the non-US geography. Hreflang won't work here possibly, because we are not dealing different languages, we are dealing same language (En) but different Geographies. Canonical might be the best way to go? Wanted to have an insight from the experts. Thanks,
Suparno (for Jeff)1 -
Robots.txt advice
Hey Guys, Have you ever seen coding like this in a robots.txt, I have never seen a noindex rule in a robots.txt file before - have you? user-agent: AhrefsBot User-agent: trovitBot
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | eLab_London
User-agent: Nutch
User-agent: Baiduspider
Disallow: / User-agent: *
Disallow: /WebServices/
Disallow: /*?notfound=
Disallow: /?list=
Noindex: /?*list=
Noindex: /local/
Disallow: /local/
Noindex: /handle/
Disallow: /handle/
Noindex: /Handle/
Disallow: /Handle/
Noindex: /localsites/
Disallow: /localsites/
Noindex: /search/
Disallow: /search/
Noindex: /Search/
Disallow: /Search/
Disallow: ? I have never seen a noindex rule in a robots.txt file before - have you?
Any pointers?0 -
To subdomain or to subfolder, that is the question.
Hi All, So I have a client that has two restaurants that they are wanting two sites for. Right now they have one site for their two locations that ranks pretty well for some bigger keywords for their style of food. With them wanting two sites, i'm struggling on whether we should just build them all within one site and just use separate folders on that site restaurant.com/location1 & restaurant.com/location2 with a landing page sending you to each, or if we should split it into subdomains. The content will be roughly the same, the menus are identical, i think each branch is just owned by a different family member so they want their own site. I keep leaning towards building it all into one site but i'm not sure. Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | insitemoz10 -
Question about structuring @id schema tags
We are using JSON-LD to apply schema. My colleague had question about applying @id tags in the schema parent lists: While implementing schema, we've included @id as a parameter to both the "list" child of "ListItem" of a "BreadcrumbList" - on the same schema, we've added an @id parameter to mainContentOfPage and both @id parameters are set to the pages URL. Having this @id in both places is giving schema checker results that have the child elements of "mainContentOfPage" appearing under the "list" item. Questions: is this good or bad? Where should @id be used? What should @id be set to? Thanks for the insight!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB0 -
Disallow URLs ENDING with certain values in robots.txt?
Is there any way to disallow URLs ending in a certain value? For example, if I have the following product page URL: http://website.com/category/product1, and I want to disallow /category/product1/review, /category/product2/review, etc. without disallowing the product pages themselves, is there any shortcut to do this, or must I disallow each gallery page individually?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jmorehouse0 -
Paging Question: Rel Next or Canonical?
Hi, Lets say you have a category which displays a list of 20 products and pagination of up to 10 pages. The root page has some content but when you click through the paging the content is removed leaving only the list of products. Would it be best to apply a canonical tag on the paging back to the root or apply the prev/next tags. I understand prev/next is good for say a 3 part article where each page holds unique content but how do you handle the above situation? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Bondara0 -
How To Internationalize - Big Question
Hi all, Here is a big question. We have a long-established good content website with a .co.uk domain. The site is UK focussed. However, we are planning a new feature which will be UK and worldwide. So do we: 1. Keep it all on our .co.uk ? 2. Put the non-UK parts on a .com domain ? We don't have any content as such for a separate domain, and are not planning any. But, we are not sure if for example US users would be unimpressed with a UK domain. We could fudge it with "co.uk/us" etc. (Notice how we have not mentioned Google. Fed-up chasing big G the whole time. We just want to concentrate on our users and the service we provide to them. But G remains the elephant crapping in the corner of the room.) Also, we are asking this question before we let our developers and designers get to work. Basically we value Moz community opinions over and above theirs. Realise this is a big question, but you have big brains. Please chip in.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dexm100 -
202 error page set in robots.txt versus using crawl-able 404 error
We currently have our error page set up as a 202 page that is unreachable by the search engines as it is currently in our robots.txt file. Should the current error page be a 404 error page and reachable by the search engines? Is there more value or is it a better practice to use 404 over a 202? We noticed in our Google Webmaster account we have a number of broken links pointing the site, but the 404 error page was not accessible. If you have any insight that would be great, if you have any questions please let me know. Thanks, VPSEO
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VPSEO0