Issue with Robots.txt file blocking meta description
-
Hi,
Can you please tell me why the following error is showing up in the serps for a website that was just re-launched 7 days ago with new pages (301 redirects are built in)?
A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more.
Once we noticed it yesterday, we made some changed to the file and removed the amount of items in the disallow list.
Here is the current Robots.txt file:
# XML Sitemap & Google News Feeds version 4.2 - http://status301.net/wordpress-plugins/xml-sitemap-feed/ Sitemap: http://www.website.com/sitemap.xml Sitemap: http://www.website.com/sitemap-news.xml User-agent: * Disallow: /wp-admin/ Disallow: /wp-includes/ Other notes... the site was developed in WordPress and uses that followign plugins:
- WooCommerce All-in-One SEO Pack
- Google Analytics for WordPress
- XML Sitemap
- Google News Feeds
Currently, in the SERPs, it keeps jumping back and forth between showing the meta description for the www domain and showing the error message (above).
Originally, WP Super Cache was installed and has since been deactivated, removed from WP-config.php and deleted permanently.
One other thing to note, we noticed yesterday that there was an old xml sitemap still on file, which we have since removed and resubmitted a new one via WMT. Also, the old pages are still showing up in the SERPs.
Could it just be that this will take time, to review the new sitemap and re-index the new site?
If so, what kind of timeframes are you seeing these days for the new pages to show up in SERPs? Days, weeks? Thanks, Erin ```
-
At the moment, it doesn't seem that rel=publisher is doing all that much for sites (aside from sometimes showing better info ion the knowledge graph listing on Brand searches) but personally I believe it's functionality and influence are going to be greatly expanded fairly soon, so well worth doing. As far as it contributing anything to help speed up indexing... doubt it.
P.
-
Paul,
Thanks... you hit upon my hunch, that we will just have to wait.
Much of the information in the SERPs (metadescriptions, titles and urls) are still old,even though they redirect to the new pages when I click.
Thanks for the tip... and about social media.
Do you think it will help to get the rel=publisher link to the Google+ page on the site?
Erin
-
A lot of people, especially WP users use modules that may block certain spiders crawling your site, but in your case, you don't seem to have any.
-
If you just changed the robots.txt file yesterday, my guess is you're going to have to be patient while the site gets recrawled, Erin. Any of the pages that are in the index and were cached before yesterday's robots update will still include the directive not to include the metadescription (since that's the condition they were under when they were cached.)
I suspect the pages you're seeing with metadescriptions were crawled since the robots update. Are you seeing the same page change whether it shows metadescription or not?
As far as old pages showing in the SERPs, again they'll all have to be crawled before the 301 redirects can be discovered and the SEs can begin to understand they should be dropped. (Even then it can take days to weeks for the originals to drop out.)
Another very effective way to help get the new site indexed faster is to attract some good-quality new links to the new pages. Social Media can be especially effective for this, Google+ in particular.
Paul
-
Thanks!
What do I need to look for in the .htaccess file?
Here is what is there... and the rest (not shown) are redirects:
BEGIN WordPress <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / RewriteRule ^index.php$ - [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule . /index.php [L]</ifmodule> # END WordPress
BEGIN WordPress <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / RewriteRule ^index.php$ - [L] RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-f RewriteCond %{REQUEST_FILENAME} !-d RewriteRule . /index.php [L]</ifmodule> # END WordPress
-
Thanks for the tips! Let me check it out.
-
I'd also insure its not something to do with your .htacess file.
-
Make sure the pages aren't blocked with meta robots noindex tag
Fetch as Google in WMT to request a full site recrawl.
Run brokenlinkcheck.com and see if their crawler is successfully crawling or if it's blocked.
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
-
Weird Indexing Issues with the Pages and Rankings
When I found the my page was non-existent on the search results page, I requested Google to index my page via the Search Console. And then just a few minutes after I did that, that page rose to top 3 ranking on the search page (with the same keyword and browser search). It happens to most of the pages on my website. Maybe a week later the rankings sank again, and I had to do the process again to make my pages to the top. Any reasons to explain this phenomenon, and how I can fix this issue? Thank you in advance.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mrmrsteven0 -
Duplicate Meta Descriptions in Press Releases
We have a client that does multiple press releases a year. One issue we noticed is that every press release has the same meta description tag and the duplicates are starting to really add up. Unfortunately the client does not want to create specialized meta descriptions for new press releases due to legal restrictions (every new meta description must be reviewed). What should we do about this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB0 -
"noindex, follow" or "robots.txt" for thin content pages
Does anyone have any testing evidence what is better to use for pages with thin content, yet important pages to keep on a website? I am referring to content shared across multiple websites (such as e-commerce, real estate etc). Imagine a website with 300 high quality pages indexed and 5,000 thin product type pages, which are pages that would not generate relevant search traffic. Question goes: Does the interlinking value achieved by "noindex, follow" outweigh the negative of Google having to crawl all those "noindex" pages? With robots.txt one has Google's crawling focus on just the important pages that are indexed and that may give ranking a boost. Any experiments with insight to this would be great. I do get the story about "make the pages unique", "get customer reviews and comments" etc....but the above question is the important question here.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
JavaScript Issue? Google not indexing a microsite
We have a microsite that was created on our domain but is not linked to from ANYwhere EXCEPT within some Javascript elements on pages on our site. The link is in one JQuery slide panel. The microsite is not being indexed at all - when i do site:(microsite name) on Google, it doesn't return anything. I think it's because the link's only in a Java element, but my client assures me that if I submit to Google for crawling the problem will be solved. Maybe so, but my point is that if you just create a simple HTML link from at least one of our site pages, it will get indexed no problem. The microsite has been up for months and it's still not being indexed - another newer microsite that's been up for a few weeks and has simple links to it from our pages is indexing fine. I have submitted the URL for crawling but had to use the google.com/webmasters/tools/submit-url/ method as I don't have access to the top level domain WMT account. p.s. when we put the microsite URL into the SEOBook spider-test tool it returns lots of lovely information - but that just tells me the page is findable, does exist, right? That doesn't mean Google's going to necessarily index it, as I am surmising...Moz hasn't found in the 5 months the microsite has been up and running. What's going on here?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jen_Floyd0 -
Is there a limit to images file names?
Hi, I have an eCommerce site with hundreds of product images. For management reasons files are named in length to have the product details in them.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeytzNet
Is there a limit for a filename length before it is considered ambiguous or spammy etc.?
(it usually ranges 50-70 chars). Thanks0 -
Googlebot Can't Access My Sites After I Repair My Robots File
Hello Mozzers, A colleague and I have been collectively managing about 12 brands for the past several months and we have recently received a number of messages in the sites' webmaster tools instructing us that 'Googlebot was not able to access our site due to some errors with our robots.txt file' My colleague and I, in turn, created new robots.txt files with the intention of preventing the spider from crawling our 'cgi-bin' directory as follows: User-agent: * Disallow: /cgi-bin/ After creating the robots and manually re-submitting it in Webmaster Tools (and receiving the green checkbox), I received the same message about Googlebot not being able to access the site, only difference being that this time it was for a different site that I manage. I repeated the process and everything, aesthetically looked correct, however, I continued receiving these messages for each of the other sites I manage on a daily-basis for roughly a 10-day period. Do any of you know why I may be receiving this error? is it not possible for me to block the Googlebot from crawling the 'cgi-bin'? Any and all advice/insight is very much welcome, I hope I'm being descriptive enough!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NiallSmith1 -
Robots.txt 404 problem
I've just set up a wordpress site with a hosting company who only allow you to install your wordpress site in http://www.myurl.com/folder as opposed to the root folder. I now have the problem that the robots.txt file only works in http://www.myurl./com/folder/robots.txt Of course google is looking for it at http://www.myurl.com/robots.txt and returning a 404 error. How can I get around this? Is there a way to tell google in webmaster tools to use a different path to locate it? I'm stumped?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SamCUK0 -
10,000 New Pages of New Content - Should I Block in Robots.txt?
I'm almost ready to launch a redesign of a client's website. The new site has over 10,000 new product pages, which contain unique product descriptions, but do feature some similar text to other products throughout the site. An example of the page similarities would be the following two products: Brown leather 2 seat sofa Brown leather 4 seat corner sofa Obviously, the products are different, but the pages feature very similar terms and phrases. I'm worried that the Panda update will mean that these pages are sand-boxed and/or penalised. Would you block the new pages? Add them gradually? What would you recommend in this situation?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | cmaddison0