homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.196.168.78
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

    
WMT URL parameters - Anyone had luck with these working?
Joshmc




msg:4372842
 4:39 pm on Oct 10, 2011 (gmt 0)

About a month ago I assigned Google to index no URLS from their parameter tools in Google Webmaster Tools. I immediately saved site:mysite.com inurl:parameter and it had around 1000 urls in the index. After one month the site search still has the same amount of urls in the index even though I told Google not to index any of them.

Has anyone had luck with this working for their site? Or does it usually take longer then a month for this to work?

I know these are only suggestions to Google, but I thought a little progress would be made if I told them not to index it as opposed to none.

 

AnkitMaheshwari




msg:4373111
 7:06 am on Oct 11, 2011 (gmt 0)

I also tried to remove our site search URL's but nothing happened even when we have blocked them through robots.txt

The only think that happened after about 3-4 months is that all the site search urls now appear in crawl error report as 404....

lucy24




msg:4373382
 8:48 pm on Oct 11, 2011 (gmt 0)

Changes to your gwt prefs tend not to be retroactive. That is, they won't index new stuff but they'll keep the old stuff unless you explicitly tell them to delete it. Has anyone tried removing pages with parameters from the existing cache and index? Can it even be done, or do you just get a message saying "We've already removed that page"?

If you formerly had 10,000 and still have 10,000 I suspect something is working, because otherwise it would be 15,000 or 20,000 by now.

tedster




msg:4373396
 9:11 pm on Oct 11, 2011 (gmt 0)

Changes to your gwt prefs tend not to be retroactive.

Right - exactly. If a type of URL is already indexed (such as Site Search) I use a 2-step approach for the clean-up. First, add a robots noindex to the template for about 4 weeks. Then add a robots.txt Disallow rule.

Joshmc




msg:4373449
 12:10 am on Oct 12, 2011 (gmt 0)

Hmm, ok that is interesting, I assumed that it would be retroactive. The parameter i am trying to remove is from dynamic urls that were created with a index problem we had a year ago. They have been fixed so that it cant happen however the urls are still valid. It would be almost impossible to add a disallow to this page because they are dynamic, is there a better way to do it? Can you disallow a parameter in robots.txt?

Thanks for all of the great info!

tedster




msg:4373513
 5:18 am on Oct 12, 2011 (gmt 0)

Can you disallow a parameter in robots.txt?

Most likely, if the character string that's used as your parameter name doesn't also appear the file and directory structure that the site uses.

This requires a pattern matching wild card "*" within the Disallow rule - that's an extension of the earlier robots.txt specification that Google supports. So imagine you want to disallow crawling of any URL that uses the parameter "pdq".

The rule
Disallow: /*pdq would do it. But if your parameter is "sch" and you also have a URL like /kirschwasser.php - then you're in a bit of trouble.
g1smd




msg:4373524
 6:26 am on Oct 12, 2011 (gmt 0)

If it is the first parameter then these would work:

Disallow: /*?pdq
Disallow: /*?sch

lucy24




msg:4373589
 11:16 am on Oct 12, 2011 (gmt 0)

If it is a non-first parameter, could you use

Disallow: /*&pdq
Disallow: /*&sch


? Or does the ampersand have a robots.txt-specific meaning that I've forgotten about?

Joshmc




msg:4373648
 3:05 pm on Oct 12, 2011 (gmt 0)

So if the problem parameter is amp;amp; due to the way the system would generate & then if I set up Disallow: /*amp;amp; then it should take care of the problem?

THanks!

g1smd




msg:4373760
 6:53 pm on Oct 12, 2011 (gmt 0)

Yes. All those code snippets look like they would each be valid for their specific purposes.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved