why so little pages indexed

Steven1976a · #1 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 11:13 AM

Can anyone help tell us why this site has so little pages indexed in google?

http://www.dataplacetravel.com

This is not our site but the company who are developing our new site have created the site. They have a google site map and it says there are over 8000 urls listed in the xml sitemap but only about 15 show in googles SERPs.

Can any programmers see any reason why this site performs so bad with getting pages indexed?
We obviously want to try and avoid any potential probs.

Hiops · #2 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 11:20 AM

The reasons could be duplicate content, I believe this usually is the main reason, and the second main reason is a fast growing site.

**incrediblehelp** · #3 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 11:26 AM

Can you tell me why Google would index pages with so little content?

1. You link out to pages using JavaScript. Google (and other SE's) are not going to follow those so easily.
2. Each page look virtually identical or boiler plate.

Hiops · #4 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Can you tell me why Google would index pages with so little content?

1. You link out to pages using JavaScript. Google (and other SE's) are not going to follow those so easily.
2. Each page look virtually identical or boiler plate.

I believe they don't follow JavaScript links at all, especially Google.

**rumblepup** · #5 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 12:50 PM

Totally agree with incrediblehelp and Hiops.

No bot can follow a javascript link. Don't know who programmed the site for you, but smack em in the head.

achronister · #6 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 01:46 PM

Javascript links are a reason. Another one is that there is no direct navigation to any of the pages listed in the site map. Google doesn't have any reason to index orphaned pages. Third, all the pages look boilerplate and the title tag is the same across all pages.

Hiops · #7 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 03:11 PM

Hi achronister! Do you want to say,the more different the pages, the better for indexing.But how about having your logo on it page, menu bar, and maybe some other?

achronister · #8 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 05:03 PM

Yes, each page should be specifically targeted for each property/product/etc. This will increase the number of pages indexed and make the site more relevant for many more topics. Having a logo won't make a difference either way. Search engines use a technique called "shingling" where they can separate navigational elements that are common throughout the site.

Hiops · #9 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 06:39 PM

Thank you Aaron, that was very helpful and informative.

Steven1976a · #10 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 07:53 PM

Like i said this isnt our site but created by the same developer.

This is our site which is being created for us which is not finished

http://www.media-synergies.com/bodyj...cat.asp?POS=19

Are the links okay on this site? I dont think they are java script

Each page will have different page titles, tags, etc.. drawn from the catagory of the product in the data base so im hoping they will be recognised as different pages.

Any comments on this site?

Webnauts · #11 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steven1976a

Any comments on this site?

My first comment on that site is: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...asp%3FPOS%3D19

Webnauts · #12 (**permalink**) 12-16-2006, 09:31 PM

My second comment is: http://www.seo-browser.com/index.php...tion=Parse+URL

So I do not think after all, that this site will ever rank well.

Sure because of other factors I found too, but both above tell enough.

Steven1976a · #13 (**permalink**) 12-17-2006, 04:07 AM

Im sure this may be a stupid question but how significant are the results of http://validator.w3.org in terms of every thing? Are the guidelines of W3 the be all and end all of websites, SEO and indexing pages? Or is W3 just guidelines for better practice and cleaner code as the web becomes more complex?

When I first saw all the errors returned I was quite worried, so I tested a few other sites including the following to see what results they returned

www.amazon.com 1102 errors
www.walmart.com 132 errors

I was surprised to see that the sites listed above show so many errors due to the size of their business.

If errors are shown when validating in the W3 validator does this mean that sites can not be indexed if they return errors? Do the errors such as

""&": this may be valid in some contexts, but it is recommended to use "&"

make sites rank lower?
Stop search engines indexing pages?

If the individual errors returned are not so significant in the overall ranking and indexing of websites, what is the biggest single most important lesson of W3 vallidator results that we need to be aware of?

As for the SEO-Browser.com I dont know what info I should be looking at to be worried about?

nitefox · #14 (**permalink**) 12-18-2006, 05:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hiops

Thank you Aaron, that was very helpful and informative.

i wud like to know more abt "shingling"..can u elaborate on dat pls

Steven1976a · #15 (**permalink**) 12-18-2006, 10:01 AM

Webnaughts will you expand a bit further on your comments as to why you dont think the site will ever rank well?

I dont have a clue what this tool is telling me.

Web naughts comment
"My second comment is: http://www.seo-browser.com/index.php...tion=Parse+URL "

and in regards to the errors shown in W3 the postings made in regards to W3 that have been posted in another thread seems that errors wont affect SEO or indexing pages. Do you interperet the results differently? Please let me know what you are saying are our basic down falls so that we can have them fixed
thanks