Send noindex, noarchive with 410?
-
My classifieds site returns a 410 along with an X-Robots-Tag HTTP header set to "noindex,noarchive" for vehicles that are no longer for sale. Google, however, apparently refuses to drop these vehicles from their index (at least as reported in GWT). By returning a "noindex,noarchive" directive, am I effectively telling the bots "yeah, this is a 410 but don't record the fact that this is a 410", thus effectively canceling out the intended effect of the 410?
-
That sounds good, let me know if you have further questions, I'm always glad to be of help!
-
Thanks for the info, mememax. I don't relish the thought of using the removal tool, but I suppose I can actually 301-redirect many of those 410s to category pages and then use the GWT for the rest.
-
hey Tony you made it in the right way, you added the error code + the noindex. However google won't drop your page from the index until it crawls it several times.
You can do this: first of all be sure that you have no links pointing to that page then:
- see in GWT if the page is showing as a 404 and when it will disappear from GWTools errors
- or go to GWT and ask google to remove it from the index. This is the fastest way, and google asks you to add a noindex or return a 404 to make this action, so actually you're more than fine to do that, however it depends on the volume of 404s you have this may be a huge and repetitive task to do.
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
-
Noindex user profile
I have a social networking site with user- and company profiles. Some profiles have little to no content. One of the users here at moz suggested noindex-ing these profiles. I am still investigating this issue and have some follow up questions: What is the possible gain of no-indexing uninteresting profiles? Especially interested in this since these profiles do bring in long-tail traffic atm. How "irreversable" is introducing a noindex directive? Would everything "return to normal" if I remove te noindex directive? When determining the treshold for having profiles indexed, how should the following items be weighed Sum of number of words on the page (comprised of one or more of the following: full name, city, 0 to N company names, bio, activity) (unique) Profile picture (Nofollowed) Links to user's profiles on social networks or user's own site. Embedded Google Map Thanks!
Technical SEO | | thomasvanderkleij0 -
Duplicated content in news portal: should we use noindex?
Hello, We have a news portal, and like other newspapers we have our own content and content from other contributors. Both our content and our contributors content can be found in other websites (we sell our content and they give theirs to us). In this regard, everything seems to work fine from the business and users perspective. The problem is that this means duplicated content... so my question is: "Should we add the noindex,nofollow" tag to these articles? Notice that there might be hundreds of articles everyday, something like a 1/3 of the website. I checked one newspaper which uses news from agencies, but they seem not to use any noindex tag. Not sure what others do. I would appreciate any opinion on that.
Technical SEO | | forex-websites0 -
Is anyone having problems with sending emails
I have been having problems for a number of weeks now, where if i send a couple of emails out then all of a sudden i am blocked and have to ask my hosting company for a new ip address. my site is in joomla and my email address is through my site. the messages i am getting when sending emails is as follows, and this stays like this until i get a new ip address A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-184886
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: 550-5.7.1 [184.154.89.211 1] Our system has detected an unusual rate of
550-5.7.1 unsolicited mail originating from your IP address. To protect our
550-5.7.1 users from spam, mail sent from your IP address has been blocked.
550-5.7.1 Please visit http://www.google.com/mail/help/bulk_mail.html to review
550 5.7.1 our Bulk Email Senders Guidelines. r2si12781844igh.70 - gsmtp any help would be great0 -
Should I noindex, follow categories?
Hey Everyone, A simple question (hopefully). Should I check or uncheck the noindex, follow setting for categories on our site? We've got about 5-6 but they aren't anything that people should know or would help in SEO. For example, one category is "featured content" and another is "what's happening." Checking them dictate where a post goes on the site. I'm pretty sure it should be checked, but I wanted to check with the experts first 🙂 http://d.pr/i/jtrc
Technical SEO | | ttb0 -
Internal search : rel=canonical vs noindex vs robots.txt
Hi everyone, I have a website with a lot of internal search results pages indexed. I'm not asking if they should be indexed or not, I know they should not according to Google's guidelines. And they make a bunch of duplicated pages so I want to solve this problem. The thing is, if I noindex them, the site is gonna lose a non-negligible chunk of traffic : nearly 13% according to google analytics !!! I thought of blocking them in robots.txt. This solution would not keep them out of the index. But the pages appearing in GG SERPS would then look empty (no title, no description), thus their CTR would plummet and I would lose a bit of traffic too... The last idea I had was to use a rel=canonical tag pointing to the original search page (that is empty, without results), but it would probably have the same effect as noindexing them, wouldn't it ? (never tried so I'm not sure of this) Of course I did some research on the subject, but each of my finding recommanded one of the 3 methods only ! One even recommanded noindex+robots.txt block which is stupid because the noindex would then be useless... Is there somebody who can tell me which option is the best to keep this traffic ? Thanks a million
Technical SEO | | JohannCR0 -
Why does SEOMos Pro include noindex pages?
I'm new to SEOMoz. Been digesting the crawl data and have a tonne of action items that we'll be executing on fairly soon. Love it! One thing I noticed is in some of crawl warnings include pages that expressly have the ROBOTS meta tag with the "noindex" value. Example: many of my noindex pages don't include meta descriptions. Therefore, is it safe to ignore warnings of this nature for these pages?
Technical SEO | | ChatterBlock0 -
Will Google Continue to Index the Page with NoIndex Tag Upon Google +1 Button Impression or Click?
The FAQs for Google +1 button suggests as follows: "+1 is a public action, so you should add the button only to public, crawlable pages on your site. Once you add the button, Google may crawl or recrawl the page, and store the page title and other content, in response to a +1 button impression or click." If my page has NoIndex tag, while at the same time inserted with Google +1 button on the page, will Google recognise the NoIndex Tag on the page (and will not index the page) despite the +1 button's impression or clicks send signals to Google spiders?
Technical SEO | | globalsources.com0 -
How rel=canonical works with index, noindex ?
Hello all, I had always wondered how the index,noindex affects to the canonical. And also if the canonical post should be included in the sitemap or not. I posted this http://www.comparativadebancos.co... and with a rel=canonical to this that was published at the beginning of the month http://www.comparativadebancos.co... but then I have the first one in google http://www.google.com/search?aq=f... May be this is evident for you but, what is really doing the canonical? If I publish something with the canonical pointing to another page, will it still be indexed by google but with no penalty for duplicate content? Or the usual behaviour should have been to havent indexed the first post but just the second one? Should I also place a noindex in the first post in addition to the canonical? What am I missing here? thanks
Technical SEO | | antorome0