• majorAlexa

        See all notifications

        Skip to content
        Moz logo Menu open Menu close
        • Products
          • Moz Pro
          • Moz Pro Home
          • Moz Local
          • Moz Local Home
          • STAT
          • Moz API
          • Moz API Home
          • Compare SEO Products
          • Moz Data
        • Free SEO Tools
          • Domain Analysis
          • Keyword Explorer
          • Link Explorer
          • Competitive Research
          • MozBar
          • More Free SEO Tools
        • Learn SEO
          • Beginner's Guide to SEO
          • SEO Learning Center
          • Moz Academy
          • MozCon
          • Webinars, Whitepapers, & Guides
        • Blog
        • Why Moz
          • Digital Marketers
          • Agency Solutions
          • Enterprise Solutions
          • Small Business Solutions
          • The Moz Story
          • New Releases
        • Log in
        • Log out
        • Products
          • Moz Pro

            Your all-in-one suite of SEO essentials.

          • Moz Local

            Raise your local SEO visibility with complete local SEO management.

          • STAT

            SERP tracking and analytics for enterprise SEO experts.

          • Moz API

            Power your SEO with our index of over 44 trillion links.

          • Compare SEO Products

            See which Moz SEO solution best meets your business needs.

          • Moz Data

            Power your SEO strategy & AI models with custom data solutions.

          Let your business shine with Listings AI
          Moz Local

          Let your business shine with Listings AI

          Learn more
        • Free SEO Tools
          • Domain Analysis

            Get top competitive SEO metrics like DA, top pages and more.

          • Keyword Explorer

            Find traffic-driving keywords with our 1.25 billion+ keyword index.

          • Link Explorer

            Explore over 40 trillion links for powerful backlink data.

          • Competitive Research

            Uncover valuable insights on your organic search competitors.

          • MozBar

            See top SEO metrics for free as you browse the web.

          • More Free SEO Tools

            Explore all the free SEO tools Moz has to offer.

          NEW Keyword Suggestions by Topic
          Moz Pro

          NEW Keyword Suggestions by Topic

          Learn more
        • Learn SEO
          • Beginner's Guide to SEO

            The #1 most popular introduction to SEO, trusted by millions.

          • SEO Learning Center

            Broaden your knowledge with SEO resources for all skill levels.

          • On-Demand Webinars

            Learn modern SEO best practices from industry experts.

          • How-To Guides

            Step-by-step guides to search success from the authority on SEO.

          • Moz Academy

            Upskill and get certified with on-demand courses & certifications.

          • MozCon

            Save on Early Bird tickets and join us in London or New York City

          Unlock flexible pricing & new endpoints
          Moz API

          Unlock flexible pricing & new endpoints

          Find your plan
        • Blog
        • Why Moz
          • Digital Marketers

            Simplify SEO tasks to save time and grow your traffic.

          • Small Business Solutions

            Uncover insights to make smarter marketing decisions in less time.

          • Agency Solutions

            Earn & keep valuable clients with unparalleled data & insights.

          • Enterprise Solutions

            Gain a competitive edge in the ever-changing world of search.

          • The Moz Story

            Moz was the first & remains the most trusted SEO company.

          • New Releases

            Get the scoop on the latest and greatest from Moz.

          Surface actionable competitive intel
          New Feature

          Surface actionable competitive intel

          Learn More
        • Log in
          • Moz Pro
          • Moz Local
          • Moz Local Dashboard
          • Moz API
          • Moz API Dashboard
          • Moz Academy
        • Avatar
          • Moz Home
          • Notifications
          • Account & Billing
          • Manage Users
          • Community Profile
          • My Q&A
          • My Videos
          • Log Out

        The Moz Q&A Forum

        • Forum
        • Questions
        • My Q&A
        • Users
        • Ask the Community

        Welcome to the Q&A Forum

        Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.

        1. Home
        2. SEO Tactics
        3. Intermediate & Advanced SEO
        4. Avoiding Duplicate Content with Used Car Listings Database: Robots.txt vs Noindex vs Hash URLs (Help!)

        Moz Q&A is closed.

        After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.

        Avoiding Duplicate Content with Used Car Listings Database: Robots.txt vs Noindex vs Hash URLs (Help!)

        Intermediate & Advanced SEO
        3
        10
        3287
        Loading More Posts
        • Watching

          Notify me of new replies.
          Show question in unread.

        • Not Watching

          Do not notify me of new replies.
          Show question in unread if category is not ignored.

        • Ignoring

          Do not notify me of new replies.
          Do not show question in unread.

        • Oldest to Newest
        • Newest to Oldest
        • Most Votes
        Reply
        • Reply as question
        Locked
        This topic has been deleted. Only users with question management privileges can see it.
        • browndoginteractive
          browndoginteractive last edited by

          Hi Guys,

          We have developed a plugin that allows us to display used vehicle listings from a centralized, third-party database. The functionality works similar to autotrader.com or cargurus.com, and there are two primary components:

          1. Vehicle Listings Pages: this is the page where the user can use various filters to narrow the vehicle listings to find the vehicle they want.
          2. Vehicle Details Pages: this is the page where the user actually views the details about said vehicle. It is served up via Ajax, in a dialog box on the Vehicle Listings Pages.

          Example functionality:  http://screencast.com/t/kArKm4tBo

          The Vehicle Listings pages (#1), we do want indexed and to rank. These pages have additional content besides the vehicle listings themselves, and those results are randomized or sliced/diced in different and unique ways. They're also updated twice per day.

          We do not want to index #2, the Vehicle Details pages, as these pages appear and disappear all of the time, based on dealer inventory, and don't have much value in the SERPs. Additionally, other sites such as autotrader.com, Yahoo Autos, and others draw from this same database, so we're worried about duplicate content. For instance, entering a snippet of dealer-provided content for one specific listing that Google indexed yielded 8,200+ results:  Example Google query.

          We did not originally think that Google would even be able to index these pages, as they are served up via Ajax. However, it seems we were wrong, as Google has already begun indexing them. Not only is duplicate content an issue, but these pages are not meant for visitors to navigate to directly! If a user were to navigate to the url directly, from the SERPs, they would see a page that isn't styled right.

          Now we have to determine the right solution to keep these pages out of the index:  robots.txt, noindex meta tags, or hash (#) internal links.

          Robots.txt Advantages:

          • Super easy to implement
          • Conserves crawl budget for large sites
          • Ensures crawler doesn't get stuck. After all, if our website only has 500 pages that we really want indexed and ranked, and vehicle details pages constitute another 1,000,000,000 pages, it doesn't seem to make sense to make Googlebot crawl all of those pages.

          Robots.txt Disadvantages:

          • Doesn't prevent pages from being indexed, as we've seen, probably because there are internal links to these pages. We could nofollow these internal links, thereby minimizing indexation, but this would lead to each 10-25 noindex internal links on each Vehicle Listings page (will Google think we're pagerank sculpting?)

          Noindex Advantages:

          • Does prevent vehicle details pages from being indexed
          • Allows ALL pages to be crawled (advantage?)

          Noindex Disadvantages:

          • Difficult to implement (vehicle details pages are served using ajax, so they have no tag. Solution would have to involve X-Robots-Tag HTTP header and Apache, sending a noindex tag based on querystring variables, similar to this stackoverflow solution. This means the plugin functionality is no longer self-contained, and some hosts may not allow these types of Apache rewrites (as I understand it)

          • Forces (or rather allows) Googlebot to crawl hundreds of thousands of noindex pages.  I say "force" because of the crawl budget required.  Crawler could get stuck/lost in so many pages, and my not like crawling a site with 1,000,000,000 pages, 99.9% of which are noindexed.

          • Cannot be used in conjunction with robots.txt. After all, crawler never reads noindex meta tag if blocked by robots.txt

          Hash (#) URL Advantages:

          • By using for links on Vehicle Listing pages to Vehicle Details pages (such as "Contact Seller" buttons), coupled with Javascript, crawler won't be able to follow/crawl these links.  Best of both worlds:  crawl budget isn't overtaxed by thousands of noindex pages, and internal links used to index robots.txt-disallowed pages are gone.
          • Accomplishes same thing as "nofollowing" these links, but without looking like pagerank sculpting (?)
          • Does not require complex Apache stuff

          Hash (#) URL Disdvantages:

          • Is Google suspicious of sites with (some) internal links structured like this, since they can't crawl/follow them?

          Initially, we implemented robots.txt--the "sledgehammer solution." We figured that we'd have a happier crawler this way, as it wouldn't have to crawl zillions of partially duplicate vehicle details pages, and we wanted it to be like these pages didn't even exist. However, Google seems to be indexing many of these pages anyway, probably based on internal links pointing to them. We could nofollow the links pointing to these pages, but we don't want it to look like we're pagerank sculpting or something like that.

          If we implement noindex on these pages (and doing so is a difficult task itself), then we will be certain these pages aren't indexed. However, to do so we will have to remove the robots.txt disallowal, in order to let the crawler read the noindex tag on these pages. Intuitively, it doesn't make sense to me to make googlebot crawl zillions of vehicle details pages, all of which are noindexed, and it could easily get stuck/lost/etc. It seems like a waste of resources, and in some shadowy way bad for SEO.

          My developers are pushing for the third solution:  using the hash URLs. This works on all hosts and keeps all functionality in the plugin self-contained (unlike noindex), and conserves crawl budget while keeping vehicle details page out of the index (unlike robots.txt). But I don't want Google to slap us 6-12 months from now because it doesn't like links like these ().

          Any thoughts or advice you guys have would be hugely appreciated, as I've been going in circles, circles, circles on this for a couple of days now. Also, I can provide a test site URL if you'd like to see the functionality in action.

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Everett
            Everett @browndoginteractive last edited by

            Perhaps those URLs were indexed before you blocked them. If you have them blocked now, either by robots.txt and/or by robots meta noindex tag, you can use Google's URL Removal Tool in GWT to get them out of the index. It may take awhile though.

            I see nothing wrong with adding a nofollow tag to those href links. Go for it. If nothing else, it could help you salvage your crawl budget.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
            • browndoginteractive
              browndoginteractive @Everett last edited by

              Oh, I was under the mistaken impression that nofollowing the links would conserve that pagerank--a pretty outdated thought, I now realize.  Thanks for clearing that up!

              However, would you see any negatives to nofollowing the links just to keep Google from indexing the pages they lead to? Just so we avoid a zillion of those "A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt" pages?

              Unfortunately, my developers are having trouble figuring out how to retain the functionality we have without href tags, so it's looking like we're going to keep those links.

              Again, thank you so much for lending your time and knowledge, Everett--you rock!

              Everett 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • Everett
                Everett @browndoginteractive last edited by

                Nofollowing them won't help you conserve any of that pagerank for other links on the page. Instead, you would seek to make those something other than href tags. I'm not a developer, but here is one example that might help explain what I'm trying to say: http://www.quackit.com/javascript/popup_windows.cfm . Notice the javascript for the pop-up window on that page does not contain an href tag.

                browndoginteractive 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • browndoginteractive
                  browndoginteractive @Everett last edited by

                  Everett,

                  Thank you so very much for the thoughtful and really helpful answer.  We will implement the robots.txt disallow statements you suggested, and I will discuss with my developer the ability to reference just the id portion of the url.  We've begun the URL removal process in Webmaster Tools, and fortunately, in the vast majority of cases, the content hasn't been indexed due to robots.txt--just the URL.

                  As far as all of the hrefs diluting pagerank, what are your thoughts on nofollowing these links?  We've had this on the table for some time, but haven't been able to come to a decision. It would curb the pagerank dilution, and it would probably keep Google from indexing those robots-disallowed pages. It's good to know these pages probably wouldn't ever trip a Panda/dupe content filter, but it still seems cleaner/neater for them not to be indexed at all. That said, I'm afraid nofollowing the links could look suspicious to Google. All combined, it would result in 25-35 nofollowed internal links on each page, with about the same amount dofollowed (if you include navigation, etc).

                  Thank you again for lending your time and expertise to this answer.  It is truly, truly, truly appreciated.

                  Everett 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                  • Everett
                    Everett last edited by

                    The javascript you shared would allow Google to fairly easily access the page ending in dtc_inventory_ajax.php?id=29935291. If that's the page you want them to not be able to access, perhaps you'd be better off referencing just the id portion of the URL, which should be enough for the database to take the user to the right page.

                    Regardless, you "should" be OK with just the robots.txt block, though all of the href tags are sort of diluting the amount of pagerank you can send to other pages from whatever page you're on.

                    The robots.txt disallow statement you provided might be improved upon.

                    Disallow: /*?

                    The one above seems to me like it would only work on URLs that were in the root directory. Try this one instead of, or in addition to, the one above:

                    Disallow: /?id=*

                    Also I'd add this one to any Wordpress site, which in itself should take care of the issue if the URL in your script is an example of those that you're concerned about:

                    Disallow: /wp-content/plugins/

                    You can use the URL Removal Tool in Google Webmaster Tools to get the ones that have already been crawled out of the index. You can do it at the URL level, or at the directory level.

                    Lastly, if you're blocking Google and the SERP says unable to display because of the robots.txt file I don't think you need to worry about the content on those pages affecting your site with regard to a Panda penalty or anything like that. However, if Google had already indexed the content on those pages you will want to remove the URLs via Webmaster Tools as described above.

                    browndoginteractive 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                    • browndoginteractive
                      browndoginteractive @Matthew_Edgar last edited by

                      Yes, I hear you on Google seeming to be able to crawl anything.  Here is the million-dollar question:  if Google is finding the links but not crawling the pages to get any content, are these pages still going to part of any Panda filter?  Could we be penalized for robots-disallowed pages?  My worry is yes.

                      What are your thoughts on implementing rel=nofollow on these links?  That, combined with robots.txt, combined with the javascript, should have the intended effect.  I'm just a little reluctant for us to nofollow ~25-30 internal links on each page like this.

                      As far duplicate content, no the pages are not exact duplicates, and there are things we could do to set them apart from everybody else.  We have some good ideas for functionality, actually.  But...I have to say I don't have enough faith in Google that this will keep us safe.  I'm afraid we could still trip some filter, and CRASH there goes the traffic.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • Matthew_Edgar
                        Matthew_Edgar last edited by

                        I think the JavaScript implementation might still be able to be crawled by Google. Any more, I'm becoming convinced that Google can crawl just about anything. But, I'll be curious to see what the results are. Definitely update this thread with what ends up happening from that approach.

                        As for the robots.txt message, that would indicate that they are finding the link to the page but not crawling the page to get any content.

                        As for duplicated content concerns, just to take a step back, are the pages 100% the same or are you making alterations to the text? If you can do easy things that make that page different from the other sites (even if it is functionality), then the page isn't a true duplicate and there might be some good reasons why people could want to find those pages in the search results.

                        Ultimately, you have the same page, but you are making the page better than those other websites. If that is the case, then you should be safe letting those pages rank. Where having the same content as your competitor really hurts (in my experience, anyway) is when you aren't offering anything different than any other sites.

                        Hope that helps.

                        browndoginteractive 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • browndoginteractive
                          browndoginteractive @Matthew_Edgar last edited by

                          Matthew, thank you so much for the thoughtful response!

                          We do not currently have a fallback solution for users with Javascript disabled, mainly because--as you said--Google could then access it, and we'd have the same problem we have now. We implemented the Javascript solution this weekend, resulting in button code like this:

                          [Contact Seller](javascript:void(0);)

                          We don't know yet if Google will be able to access this.  Any ideas? We've uploaded this version of our plugin to a new test site, in order to see what happens.

                          As for the robots.txt solution, Google actually indexed the urls after the robots.txt file was uploaded, and we did test the file in Webmaster Tools to confirm that it worked prior to uploading it. We used Disallow: /*? to try and keep Google from crawling/indexing our Ajax urls, which all have question marks in them (like the data-url link in the code above).

                          Some of the indexed pages look normal in the SERPs--like any indexed page with a normal description, etc--and others have the message:  "A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt." I believe, from my research, that Google is indexing these pages based on the internal links to them.

                          It wouldn't be a tragedy if users navigated directly to the vehicle details pages, as we could make sure the pages are styled for them.  The bigger issue is that these pages are not really unique, given that multiple companies are pulling from the same database.

                          Any thoughts on the Javascript implementation?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • Matthew_Edgar
                            Matthew_Edgar last edited by

                            Hey,

                            This is definitely a complicated issue, and there is some risk in making a move in the wrong direction.

                            Here are my thoughts which might help you out. Feel free to private message me or shoot me an email (see my profile) and I'd be happy to talk more.

                            On the hash solution, would that require JavaScript be enabled in order to access those pages or would you have a fallback solution for those without JavaScript?

                            If you don't have a fallback solution for those without JavaScript, you might negatively affect visitors with disabilities. For instance, some types of Ajax are challenging for people with disabilities to access (see here to start digging into that: http://webaim.org/techniques/javascript/).

                            Thing is, if you have a fallback solution, Google could still access those. However, Google may still be able to access those pages with JavaScript as Google can execute some forms of JavaScript. Given that, the more appropriate solution would be to use the robots.txt file. You mentioned, though, that the command you put in didn't seem to work since Google kept indexing those pages. Couple questions:

                            First, did Google index those pages after the change or had those pages been indexed prior to the robots.txt change? Things take time, so I'm wondering if you didn't give them enough time to adjust.

                            The other question would be whether or not you tested the robots.txt file in Google Webmaster Tools? That just gives you an extra verification that it should work.

                            Also, you mentioned something interesting about the Vehicle Detail pages: "these pages are not meant for visitors to navigate to directly!" Given that is the case, is it possible for your developers to add some sort of server-side check to see if people are accessing the detail pages from the listing pages?

                            For instance, on some sites I've worked a cookie is set when you've reached the listing page that says "this person is okay to reach the detail page" and then the visitor can only reach the detail page if that cookie is set. Without that cookie, the visitor is redirected back to a listing page. Not sure how exactly that would work on your site, but it might be a way to keep visitors who find those pages in a Google search result from seeing the incorrectly styled page.

                            I hope that helps. Like I said, feel free to email me or private message me if you'd like me to take a look at your site or chat with you about more particulars.

                            Thanks!

                            browndoginteractive 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • 1 / 1
                            • First post
                              Last post

                            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.

                            • See all categories

                            Related Questions

                            • Mat_C

                              Block session id URLs with robots.txt

                              Hi, I would like to block all URLs with the parameter '?filter=' from being crawled by including them in the robots.txt. Which directive should I use: User-agent: *
                              Disallow: ?filter= or User-agent: *
                              Disallow: /?filter= In other words, is the forward slash in the beginning of the disallow directive necessary? Thanks!

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mat_C
                              1
                            • MJTrevens

                              Can I use duplicate content in different US cities without hurting SEO?

                              So, I have major concerns with this plan. My company has hundreds of facilities located all over the country. Each facility has it's own website. We have a third party company working to build a content strategy for us. What they came up with is to create a bank of content specific to each service line. If/when any facility offers that service, they then upload the content for that service line to that facility website. So in theory, you might have 10-12 websites all in different cities, with the same content for a service. They claim "Google is smart, it knows its content all from the same company, and because it's in different local markets, it will still rank." My contention is that duplicate content is duplicate content, and unless it is "localize" it, Google is going to prioritize one page of it and the rest will get very little exposure in the rankings no matter where you are. I could be wrong, but I want to be sure we aren't shooting ourselves in the foot with this strategy, because it is a major major undertaking and too important to go off in the wrong direction. SEO Experts, your help is genuinely appreciated!

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens
                              1
                            • HappyJackJr

                              Help with facet URLs in Magento

                              Hi Guys, Wondering if I can get some technical help here... We have our site britishbraces.co.uk , built in Magento. As per eCommerce sites, we have paginated pages throughout. These have rel=next/prev implemented but not correctly ( as it is not in is it in ) - this fix is in process. Our canonicals are currently incorrect as far as I believe, as even when content is filtered, the canonical takes you back to the first page URL. For example, http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/x-style.html?ajaxcatalog=true&brand=380&max=51.19&min=31.19 Canonical to... http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/x-style.html Which I understand to be incorrect. As I want the coloured filtered pages to be indexed ( due to search volume for colour related queries ), but I don't want the price filtered pages to be indexed - I am unsure how to implement the solution? As I understand, because rel=next/prev implemented ( with no View All page ), the rel=canonical is not necessary as Google understands page 1 is the first page in the series. Therefore, once a user has filtered by colour, there should then be a canonical pointing to the coloured filter URL? ( e.g. /product/black ) But when a user filters by price, there should be noindex on those URLs ? Or can this be blocked in robots.txt prior? My head is a little confused here and I know we have an issue because our amount of indexed pages is increasing day by day but to no solution of the facet urls. Can anybody help - apologies in advance if I have confused the matter. Thanks

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HappyJackJr
                              0
                            • jmorehouse

                              Disallow URLs ENDING with certain values in robots.txt?

                              Is there any way to disallow URLs ending in a certain value? For example, if I have the following product page URL: http://website.com/category/product1, and I want to disallow /category/product1/review, /category/product2/review, etc. without disallowing the product pages themselves, is there any shortcut to do this, or must I disallow each gallery page individually?

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jmorehouse
                              0
                            • RikkiD22

                              Recovering from robots.txt error

                              Hello, A client of mine is going through a bit of a crisis. A developer (at their end) added Disallow: / to the robots.txt file. Luckily the SEOMoz crawl ran a couple of days after this happened and alerted me to the error. The robots.txt file was quickly updated but the client has found the vast majority of their rankings have gone. It took a further 5 days for GWMT to file that the robots.txt file had been updated and since then we have "Fetched as Google" and "Submitted URL and linked pages" in GWMT. In GWMT it is still showing that that vast majority of pages are blocked in the "Blocked URLs" section, although the robots.txt file below it is now ok. I guess what I want to ask is: What else is there that we can do to recover these rankings quickly? What time scales can we expect for recovery? More importantly has anyone had any experience with this sort of situation and is full recovery normal? Thanks in advance!

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RikkiD22
                              0
                            • team_tic

                              International SEO - cannibalisation and duplicate content

                              Hello all, I look after (in house) 3 domains for one niche travel business across three TLDs: .com .com.au and co.uk and a fourth domain on a co.nz TLD which was recently removed from Googles index. Symptoms: For the past 12 months we have been experiencing canibalisation in the SERPs (namely .com.au being rendered in .com) and Panda related ranking devaluations between our .com site and com.au site. Around 12 months ago the .com TLD was hit hard (80% drop in target KWs) by Panda (probably) and we began to action the below changes. Around 6 weeks ago our .com TLD saw big overnight increases in rankings (to date a 70% averaged increase). However, almost to the same percentage we saw in the .com TLD we suffered significant  drops in our .com.au rankings. Basically Google seemed to switch its attention from .com TLD to the .com.au TLD. Note: Each TLD is over 6 years old, we've never proactively gone after links (Penguin) and have always aimed for quality in an often spammy industry. **Have done: ** Adding HREF LANG markup to all pages on all domain Each TLD uses local vernacular e.g for the .com site is American Each TLD has pricing in the regional currency Each TLD has details of the respective local offices, the copy references the lacation, we have significant press coverage in each country like The Guardian for our .co.uk site and Sydney Morning Herlad for our Australia site Targeting each site to its respective market in WMT Each TLDs core-pages (within 3 clicks of the primary nav) are 100% unique We're continuing to re-write and publish unique content to each TLD on a weekly basis As the .co.nz site drove such little traffic re-wrting we added no-idex and the TLD has almost compelte dissapread (16% of pages remain) from the SERPs. XML sitemaps Google + profile for each TLD **Have not done: ** Hosted each TLD on a local server Around 600 pages per TLD are duplicated across all TLDs (roughly 50% of all content). These are way down the IA but still duplicated. Images/video sources from local servers Added address and contact details using SCHEMA markup Any help, advice or just validation on this subject would be appreciated! Kian

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | team_tic
                              1
                            • Peter264

                              NOINDEX or NOINDEX,FOLLOW

                              Currently we employ this tag on pages we want to keep out of the index but want link juice to flow through them: <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX"> Is the tag above the same as: <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX,FOLLOW"> Or should we be specifying the "FOLLOW" in our tag?

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter264
                              0
                            • seo123456

                              Using 2 wildcards in the robots.txt file

                              I have a URL string which I don't want to be indexed. it includes the characters _Q1 ni the middle of the string. So in the robots.txt can I use 2 wildcards in the string to take out all of the URLs with that in it?  So something like /_Q1.  Will that pickup and block every  URL with those characters in the string? Also, this is not directly of the root, but in a secondary directory, so .com/.../_Q1.  So do I have to format the robots.txt as //_Q1* as it will be in the second folder or just using /_Q1 will pickup everything no matter what folder it is on? Thanks.

                              Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seo123456
                              0

                            Get started with Moz Pro!

                            Unlock the power of advanced SEO tools and data-driven insights.

                            Start my free trial
                            Products
                            • Moz Pro
                            • Moz Local
                            • Moz API
                            • Moz Data
                            • STAT
                            • Product Updates
                            Moz Solutions
                            • SMB Solutions
                            • Agency Solutions
                            • Enterprise Solutions
                            • Digital Marketers
                            Free SEO Tools
                            • Domain Authority Checker
                            • Link Explorer
                            • Keyword Explorer
                            • Competitive Research
                            • Brand Authority Checker
                            • Local Citation Checker
                            • MozBar Extension
                            • MozCast
                            Resources
                            • Blog
                            • SEO Learning Center
                            • Help Hub
                            • Beginner's Guide to SEO
                            • How-to Guides
                            • Moz Academy
                            • API Docs
                            About Moz
                            • About
                            • Team
                            • Careers
                            • Contact
                            Why Moz
                            • Case Studies
                            • Testimonials
                            Get Involved
                            • Become an Affiliate
                            • MozCon
                            • Webinars
                            • Practical Marketer Series
                            • MozPod
                            Connect with us

                            Contact the Help team

                            Join our newsletter
                            Moz logo
                            © 2021 - 2025 SEOMoz, Inc., a Ziff Davis company. All rights reserved. Moz is a registered trademark of SEOMoz, Inc.
                            • Accessibility
                            • Terms of Use
                            • Privacy

                            Looks like your connection to Moz was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.