3

I am running a Mediawiki at the domain someurl.com/wiki/. Unfortunally it generates a bunch of automatically generated Special pages which mainly are of low quality but nevertheless are massively scanned by search engines with queries like:

/index.php/Special:Whatlinkshere/some_topic or as well /index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=some_topic where some_topic is an article of the wiki.

These requests seem to be of very low benefit but they consume a good deal of bandwidth and in addition I fear those automatically generated pages are not so good for my site's quality reputation in the serchengines evaluation.

As the requests a mostly done by 'good' engines such as Google or Bing I am quite sure they would obey robots.txt. So I added the following robots.txt to the folder of the base url someurl.com (I added the whole robots.txt, even though only line 1 and 6 are relevant for the queries named above):

User-agent: *

Disallow: User:
Disallow: Discussion:
Disallow: MediaWiki:
Disallow: Special:

Disallow: /login.php
Disallow: /profile.php

Disallow: /author/
Disallow: /category/
Disallow: /tag/

This robots.txt is active for about two days now and has been crawled already, but still there are many requests to URLs like the above which I thought blocked.

So I have the following questions now:

1) is the above logic correct and capable of denying access (to well behaving bots). Especially I wonder whether Disallow: Spezial: correctly works as a wildcard to deny all request having "Special:" in URL or in parameter. I also wonder if the ":" in "Special:" might be a problem.

2) If so why then there is no effect yet? I consider I just have to grant more time to see the effect?

3) Will denying in the robots.txt lead to the de-indexing of this sites from the searchengines results? If not how can I get this huge amount of automatically generated URLs de-indexed?

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

robots.txt disallow rules are all "starts with" rules, not substring rules.

MediaWiki suggests using this in robots.txt for a case like yours:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /index.php?
Disallow: /index.php/Help
Disallow: /index.php/MediaWiki
Disallow: /index.php/Special:
Disallow: /index.php/Template
Disallow: /skins/

Google says that it supports more advanced syntax along with some other major search engines:

Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Ask support a limited form of "wildcards" for path values. These are:

  • * designates 0 or more instances of any valid character
  • $ designates the end of the URL

For those user agents you could use rules like:

Disallow: *Help
Disallow: *MediaWiki
Disallow: *Special:
Disallow: *Template

Other crawlers will end up just ignoring those rules because none of your URLs will start with any of the rules.

Improve this answer
6
  • Thanks a lot! - Looking at MediaWiki's suggestions was a good idea, which unfortunally did not come to my mind myself. The resource you linked also implicitely answeres my third question by: "While robots.txt stops (non-evil) bots from downloading the URL, it does not stop them from indexing it. This means that they might still show up in the results of Google and other search engines, as long as there are external links pointing to them. (What's worse, since the bots do not download such pages, noindex meta tags placed in them will have no effect.)" - so it seems I totally was on a wrong way.
    – Wooz
    Dec 21, 2015 at 12:54
  • In most cases, search engines won't index anything disallowed in robots.txt. There will be some rare cases, usually based on external links that slip through.
    – Stephen Ostermiller on Strike ♦
    Dec 21, 2015 at 12:57
  • Are you sure? As far as I have researched the last 30 minutes (so it's far from expert knowledge): There is a difference between indexing and listing. So the pages in question until now have surely been indexed even thought rarely listed. Do you think Searchengines will forget about these pages in their index and not only in their SERPS once I disallowed scanning them? Otherwise I fear these generated sites might still be spoiling my site's overall reputation in searchengines.
    – Wooz
    Dec 21, 2015 at 13:16
  • I consider there will be none but internal links to such pages. So I am certainly none of the rare cases which Google would be interested to list: youtube.com/watch?v=KBdEwpRQRD0
    – Wooz
    Dec 21, 2015 at 13:17
  • An external link may come from a scraper site or something equally random. But in general, robots.txt will work for almost all of your Special pages.
    – Stephen Ostermiller on Strike ♦
    Dec 21, 2015 at 14:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.