Historic issue with incomplete indexing
-
Hi there
We run quite a big site in the UK in the commercial real-estate space.
Historically we have always had a challenge getting our "primary" landing pages indexed, which are location based property result pages.
e.g. https://realla.co/to-rent/commercial-property/oxford
For example, for the "towns" category we have 8,549 submitted in our xml sitemap, with only 3,171 indexed. This is a general issue across all our sitemaps. 120k submitted, 80k indexed. Our pages are linked through breadcrumbs, and nearby links.
In the new search console these pages are reported as "crawled - currently not indexed"
These all sit under the folder:
site:https://realla.co/to-rent/commercial-property/*
site:https://realla.co/to-rent/office/*
We have done extensive work to optimise performance, including AMP pages.
Each location page has many details pages for individual properties e.g.
https://realla.co/to-rent/details/0ffbbd0a1a1147edb8847c5ce6179509
One action we have remaining is to nest the details under the locations pages, which may help. These details pages are indexed fully.
Any feedback much appreciated
-
Hi Ian,
The details URL should ideally have keywords in it, getting property name in details page URL would be of great help, like : https://realla.co/to-rent/details/Office-to-let-John-Eccles-House-Robert Robinson-Avenue-Oxford-Science-Park-Oxford-OX4-4GP
About the category (locations in your case), you are submitting too many of them, your URL structure needs to re-structured, there is work to be done there and sitemap updated according to that. For example:
https://realla.co/to-rent/commercial-property/
can be changed to
https://realla.co/commercial-property-to-rent/
I hope this helps, let me know if you have further queries.
Regards,
Vijay
-
Thanks for your reply
We are just about to nest the "details" pages under the results path e.g. /to-rent/commercial-property/newbury/details/1294321739712973129 etc so it sits under the right location.
I think this is in line with your recommendation.
We have alot of individual sitemap files, should these be consolidated?
-
Hi Ian,
I have analyzed the website in detail, the problem seems to be that you are not giving any differentiation to search engine bots between important category/sub-category(in your case different locations) pages compared to product pages (in your case property details page). The location pages URL structure and their sitemap submission strategy can be re-worked to get the desired results.
Another scope of improvement is in URL structure for property details page **For example, **
https://realla.co/to-rent/details/0ffbbd0a1a1147edb8847c5ce6179509 should be https://realla.co/to-rent/details/Office-to-let-John-Eccles-House-Robert Robinson-Avenue-Oxford-Science-Park-Oxford-OX4-4GP
Your site structure is huge, and it must be getting dynamic links generated or removed, you need to be careful with the site structure and how often to submit sitemap.
I hope this helps. Let me know if you have further queries, I will be happy to help.
Regards,
Vijay
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 Not Indexing Submitted Images
Hi Guys! My question isn't too dissimilar to one asked a couple of years ago, regarding Google and image indexing, but having put my web address into a Google image search, I get a return of 15 images, so something isn't right. 5 months ago I submitted our 'new' site to Google webmaster. We have just moved it onto a Shopify platform. They (Shopify) are good at providing places to add titles and Alt tags and likewise we fill them in (so that box ticked!) However I have noticed over the last couple of months that despite 161 images being submitted, only 51 have been indexed. Furthermore and as I said earlier, when you put our site, site:http://www.hartnackandco.com into Google images, it only returns a total of 15 images. Any suggestions and help would be wonderful! Cheers Nick
Technical SEO | | nick_HandCo0 -
Meta description issue on Google
Hello, I have a small issue on Google with our Meta Description tag not always being properly displayed. If you search for the term: Globe Car (in two words), everything is being displayed properly: http://screencast.com/t/YQCUkJnk Now do the same search for the term GlobeCar (in one word) and the meta tag set into our homepage seems to be totallly ignored and Google is now displaying something that is generated from out of their hat: http://screencast.com/t/K0KeeRGSgspV Anyone has an idea what would cause this? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | GlobeCar1 -
My video sitemap is not being index by Google
Dear friends, I have a videos portal. I created a video sitemap.xml and submit in to GWT but after 20 days it has not been indexed. I have verified in bing webmaster as well. All videos are dynamically being fetched from server. My all static pages have been indexed but not videos. Please help me where am I doing the mistake. There are no separate pages for single videos. All the content is dynamically coming from server. Please help me. your answers will be more appreciated................. Thanks
Technical SEO | | docbeans0 -
Sitemap url's not being indexed
There is an issue on one of our sites regarding many of the sitemap url's not being indexed. (at least 70% is not being indexed) The url's in the sitemap are normal url's without any strange characters attached to them, but after looking into it, it seems a lot of the url's get a #. + a number sequence attached to them once you actually go to that url. We are not sure if the "addthis" bookmark could cause this, or if it's another script doing it. For example Url in the sitemap: http://example.com/example-category/0246 Url once you actually go to that link: http://example.com/example-category/0246#.VR5a Just for further information, the XML file does not have any style information associated with it and is in it's most basic form. Has anyone had similar issues with their sitemap not being indexed properly ?...Could this be the cause of many of these url's not being indexed ? Thanks all for your help.
Technical SEO | | GreenStone0 -
Https indexed...how?
Hello Moz, Since a while i am struggling with a SEO case: At the moment a https version of a homepage of a client of us is indexed in Google. Thats really strange because the url is redirected to an other website url for three weeks now. And we did everything to make clear to google that he has to index the other url.
Technical SEO | | Searchresult
So we have a few homepage urls A https://www.website.nl
B https://www.websites.nl/category
C http://www.websites.nl/category What we did: Redirected A with a 301 to B, a redirect from A or B to C is difficult because of the security issue with the ssl certificate. We put the right canonical url (VERSION C) on every version of the homepage(A,B) We only put the canonical urls in the sitemap.xml, only version C and uploaded it to Google Webmastertools We changed all important internal links to Version C We also get some valuable external backlinks to Version C Is there something i missed or i forget to say to Google hey look you've got the wrong url indexed, you have to index version C? How is it possible Google still prefers Version A after doing al those changes three weeks a go? I'am really looking forward to your answer. Thanks a lot in advanced! Greetz Djacko0 -
Why has Google stopped indexing my content?
Mystery of the day! Back on December 28th, there was a 404 on the sitemap for my website. This lasted 2 days before I noticed and fixed. Since then, Google has not indexed my content. However, the majority of content prior to that date still shows up in the index. The website is http://www.indieshuffle.com/. Clues: Google reports no current issues in Webmaster tools Two reconsideration requests have returned "no manual action taken" When new posts are detected as "submitted" in the sitemap, they take 2-3 days to "index" Once "indexed," they cannot be found in search results unless I include url:indieshuffle.com The sitelinks that used to pop up under a basic search for "Indie Shuffle" are now gone I am using Yoast's SEO tool for Wordpress (and have been for years) Before December 28th, I was doing 90k impressions / 4.5k clicks After December 28th, I'm now doing 8k impressions / 1.3k clicks Ultimately, I'm at a loss for a possible explanation. Running an SEOMoz audit comes up with warnings about rel=canonical and a few broken links (which I've fixed in reaction to the report). I know these things often correct themselves, but two months have passed now, and it continues to get progressively worse. Thanks, Jason
Technical SEO | | indieshuffle0 -
Does Google index has expiration?
Hi, I have this in mind and I think you can help me. Suppose that I have a pagin something like this: www.mysite.com/politics where I have a list of the current month news. Great, everytime the bot check this url, index the links that are there. What happens next month, all that link are not visible anymore by the user unless he search in a search box or google. Does google keep those links? The current month google check that those links are there, but next month are not, but they are alive. So, my question is, Does google keep this links for ever if they are alive but nowhere in the site (the bot not find them anymore but they work)? Thanks
Technical SEO | | informatica8100 -
Rel=canonical + no index
We have been doing an a/b test of our hp and although we placed a rel=canonical tag on the testing page it is still being indexed. In fact at one point google even had it showing as a sitelink . We have this problem through out our website. My question is: What is the best practice for duplicate pages? 1. put only a rel= canonical pointing to the "wanted original page" 2. put a rel= canonical (pointing to the wanted original page) and a no index on the duplicate version Has anyone seen any detrimental effect doing # 2? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Morris770