Site moved. Unable to index page : Noindex detected in robots meta tag?!
-
Hope someone can shed some light on this:
We moved our smaller site (into the main site ( different domains) .
The smaller site that was moved ( https://www.bluegreenrentals.com)
Directory where the site was moved (https://www.bluegreenvacations.com/rentals)Each page from the old site was 301 redirected to the appropriate page under .com/rentals. But we are seeing a significant drop in rankings and traffic., as I am unable to request a change of address in Google search console (a separate issue that I can elaborate on).
Lots of (301 redirect) new destination pages are not indexed. When Inspected, I got a message :
Indexing allowed? No: 'index' detected in 'robots' meta tagAll pages are set as Index/follow and there are no restrictions in robots.txtHere is an example URL :https://www.bluegreenvacations.com/rentals/resorts/colorado/innsbruck-aspen/Can someone take a look and share an opinion on this issue?Thank you!
-
That's hugely likely to have had an impact. No-indexing pages before they were ready was a mistake, but the much bigger mistake was releasing the site early before it was 'ready'. The site should only have been set live and released once ALL pages were ported to the new staging environment
Also, if all pages weren't yet live on the staging environment - how can the person looking at staging / the old site, have done all the 301 redirects properly?
When you no-index URLs you kill their SEO authority (dead). Often it never fully recovers and has to be restarted from scratch. In essence, a 301 to a no-indexed URL is moving the SEO authority from the old page into 'nowhere' (cyber oblivion)
The key learning is, don't set a half ready site live and finish development there. WAIT until you are ready, then perform your SEO / architectural / redirect maneuvering
Even if you hadn't no-indexed those new URLs, Google checks to see if the content on the old and new URLs is similar (think Boolean string similarity, in machine terms) before 'allowing' the SEO authority from the old URL to flow to the new one. If the content isn't basically the same, Google expects the pages to 'start over' and 're prove themselves'. Why? Well you tell me why a new page with different content, should benefit from the links of an old URL which was different - when the webmasters who linked to that old URL, may well not choose to link to the new one
Even if you hadn't no-indexed those new URLs, because they were incomplete their content was probably holding content (radically different from the content of the old URLs, on the old site) - it's extremely likely that even without the no-index tags, it still would have fallen flat on its face
In the end, your best course of actions is finish all the content, make sure the 301s are actually accurate (which by the sounds of it many of them won't be), lift the no-index tags, request re-indexation. If you are very, very lucky some of the SEO juice from the old URLs will still exist and the new URLs will get some shreds of authority through (which is better than nothing). In reality though the pooch is already screwed by this point
-
Thank you for the quick reply.
Yes, that's right (URLs and page look from 2017. The site was old and neglected. We decided to give it a facelift, sunset domain in a few months and bring site under our main site.
While pages were still in development (but migrated from staging to live site), we needed to protect them from accidental indexation and flagged every page "no index" no follow". Is it possible that google crawled pages in the past, got no index(as was set at that time) and never returned back? If that's' the case, should I manually request indexing?
-
I love these kinds of questions. You have shared a moved page URL, can you give us the URL it resided at before it was moved, which 'should' be redirecting now? That would massively help
Edit: found this one:
https://www.bluegreenrentals.com/searchresults.aspx?s=CO&sl=COLORADO
(this is what the page apparently used to look like before it was redirected, but the image is a little old from 2017 - OP can you confirm if it did look like this directly prior to redirect?)
... which 301 redirects to:
https://www.bluegreenvacations.com/rentals/resorts/colorado/innsbruck-aspen
... gonna carry on looking but this example of the full chain may help any other Mozzers looking to answer this Q
Suspected issue at this juncture, which could be wrong (not loads to go on right now) - content dissimilarity between URLs leading Google to deny the 301s
FYI: info to help OP, the no-index stuff may be relating moreso to this:
https://developers.google.com/search/reference/robots_meta_tag (may be deployed in the HTML as a tag, but can also be fired through the HTTP header which is another kettle of fish...)
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
-
Redirecting an Entire Site to a Page on Another Site?
So I have a site that I want to shut down http://vowrenewalsmaui.com and redirect to a dedicated Vow Renewals page I am making on this site here: https://simplemauiwedding.net. My main question is: I don't want to lose all the authority of the pages and if I just redirect the site using my domain registrar's 301 redirect it will only redirect the main URL not all of the supporting pages, to my knowledge. How do I not lose all the authority of the supporting pages and still shut down the site and close down my site builder? I know if I leave the site up I can redirect all of the individual pages to corresponding pages on the other site, but I want to be done with it. Just trying to figure out if there is a better way than I know of. The domain is hosted through GoDaddy.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | photoseo10 -
Google Indexed Site A's Content On Site B, Site C etc
Hi All, I have an issue where the content (pages and images) of Site A (www.ericreynolds.photography) are showing up in Google under different domains Site B (www.fastphonerepair.com), Site C (www.quarryhillvet.com), Site D (www.spacasey.com). I believe this happened because I installed an SSL cert on Site A but didn't have the default SSL domain set on the server. You were able to access Site B and any page from Site A and it would pull up properly. I have since fixed that SSL issue and am now doing a 301 redirect from Sites B, C and D to Site A for anything https since Sites B, C, D are not using an SSL cert. My question is, how can I trigger google to re-index all of the sites to remove the wrong listings in the index. I have a screen shot attached so you can see the issue clearer. I have resubmitted my site map but I'm not seeing much of a change in the index for my site. Any help on what I could do would be great. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cwscontent
Eric TeVM49b.png qPtXvME.png1 -
Index or noindex mobile version?
We have a website called imones.lt
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FCRMediaLietuva
and we have a mobile version for it m.imones.lt We originally put noindex for m.imones.lt. Is it a good decision or no? We believe that if google indexes both it creates double content. We definitely don't want that? But when someone through google goes to any of imones.lt webpage using smartphone they are redirected to m.imones.lt/whatever Thank you for your opinion.0 -
No-index pages with duplicate content?
Hello, I have an e-commerce website selling about 20 000 different products. For the most used of those products, I created unique high quality content. The content has been written by a professional player that describes how and why those are useful which is of huge interest to buyers. It would cost too much to write that high quality content for 20 000 different products, but we still have to sell them. Therefore, our idea was to no-index the products that only have the same copy-paste descriptions all other websites have. Do you think it's better to do that or to just let everything indexed normally since we might get search traffic from those pages? Thanks a lot for your help!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | EndeR-0 -
Pages Titles in SERPs - Wordpress Site
In Google SERPs we have several websites (built in wordpress) who's pages are being displayed without using the page title - is this google ignoring the page title or is there a problem in our code - also if this is google is it still taking notice of the page title to determine what content is on the page?I have read several articles on this but wondered if someone can advise - I can provide the URL if required.Also I wanted to 100% that our robots.txt is behaving its self.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JohnW-UK0 -
Dev Site Out of SERP But Still Indexed
One of our dev sites get indexed (live site robots.txt was moved to it, that has been corrected) 2-3 weeks ago. I immediately added it to our Webmaster Tools and used the Remove URL tool to get the whole thing out of the SERPs. A site:devurl search in Google now returns no results, but checking Index Status in WMT shows 2,889 pages of it still indexed. How can I get all instances of it completely removed from Google?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingof50 -
Thousands of 404 Pages Indexed - Recommendations?
Background: I have a newly acquired client who has had a lot of issues over the past few months. What happened is he had a major issue with broken dynamic URL's where they would start infinite loops due to redirects and relative links. His previous SEO didn't pay attention to the sitemaps created by a backend generator, and it caused hundreds of thousands of pages to be indexed. Useless pages. These useless pages were all bringing up a 404 page that didn't have a 404 server response (it had a 200 response) which created a ton of duplicate content and bad links (relative linking). Now here I am, cleaning up this mess. I've fixed the 404 page so it creates a 404 server response. Google webmaster tools is now returning thousands of "not found" errors, great start. I fixed all site errors that cause infinite redirects. Cleaned up the sitemap and submitted it. When I search site:www.(domainname).com I am still getting an insane amount of pages that no longer exist. My question: How does Google handle all of these 404's? My client wants all the bad pages removed now but I don't have as much control over that. It's a slow process getting Google to remove these pages that are returning a 404. He is continuously dropping in rankings still. Is there a way of speeding up the process? It's not reasonable to enter tens of thousands of pages into the URL Removal Tool. I want to clean house and have Google just index the pages in the sitemap.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeTheBoss0 -
Rel=canonical tag on original page?
Afternoon All,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jellyfish-Agency
We are using Concrete5 as our CMS system, we are due to change but for the moment we have to play with what we have got. Part of the C5 system allows us to attribute our main page into other categories, via a page alaiser add-on. But what it also does is create several url paths and duplicate pages depending on how many times we take the original page and reference it in other categories. We have tried C5 canonical/SEO add-on's but they all seem to fall short. We have tried to address this issue in the most efficient way possible by using the rel=canonical tag. The only issue is the limitations of our cms system. We add the canonical tag to the original page header and this will automatically place this tag on all the duplicate pages and in turn fix the problem of duplicate content. The only problem is the canonical tag is on the original page as well, but it is referencing itself, effectively creating a tagging circle. Does anyone foresee a problem with the canonical tag being on the original page but in turn referencing itself? What we have done is try to simplify our duplicate content issues. We have over 2500 duplicate page issues because of this aliasing add-on and want to automate the canonical tag addition, rather than go to each individual page and manually add this tag, so the original reference page can remain the original. We have implemented this tag on one page at the moment with 9 duplicate pages/url's and are monitoring, but was curious if people had experienced this before or had any thoughts?0