This project is read-only.

Orchard CMS and SEO

Topics: Administration
Sep 27, 2013 at 1:08 PM
In regards to SEO, is it best to use


It seems that Tags pages and Logon page have a negative scoring because of the fact that they have not enough words on the page, no meta description and so on... Any ideas?
Sep 28, 2013 at 8:40 PM
How about Onestop.Seo?
Sep 29, 2013 at 2:34 PM
Edited Sep 29, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Any more info about this module? There's no documentation, guidelines or whatnot...

I have tried to use it in my Orchard 1.7.1 project, but it has a dependency to Orchard.Caching,
which can't be immediately replaced with Orchard.OutputCache, it seems.
Sep 29, 2013 at 3:10 PM
Zoltan didnt you write this module?
Sep 29, 2013 at 9:13 PM
@2LM: just install it, you'll see a SEO menu on the dashboard. If you want to optimize items, attach SeoPart to the respective types. Orchard.Caching is this module.

@Nick: I did :-), but at and for Onestop, given specifications.
Sep 29, 2013 at 9:55 PM
Fork it. Change it.
Sep 29, 2013 at 10:44 PM
But why would I change it? :-) It works quite well as it is.
Sep 30, 2013 at 6:57 AM
But is this caching module not redundant now in Orchard 1.7.1? I hate to use additional modules that don't provide any new value but instead bog down the site.

Also, what does the OneStop.Seo module do? Is there a screenshot of this module or anything? Does it answer my initial question?
Sep 30, 2013 at 3:28 PM
Orchard.Caching is not output cache but a caching API and has nothing redundant with Orchard 1.7.1.

I linked Onestop.Seo because it gives you tools to add content meta tags to easily. No docs about it as far as I know.
Sep 30, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Yes - Orchard.Caching and Orchard.OutputCache are different animals.
The former is, as Zoltan said, an lightweight, extensible API for business object caching (by using HttpRuntime.Cache/Memcached/Redis etc. under the hood), and the latter is used for simply caching the rendered page output.
Oct 1, 2013 at 10:17 AM
Ah ok, thanks for clearing that up. What is the difference between Vandelay.Meta, which I use today and Onestop.Seo?
Oct 2, 2013 at 4:44 AM
Vandelay.Meta has long been obsoleted. It's now part of Vandelay.Industries. That one, in turn, gives you static definition of metadata item by item, whereas Onestop.Seo is much more elaborate and enables you to define token-based patterns at the type level, making it more automated.
Oct 2, 2013 at 7:43 AM
Ok, I am indeed using the Vandelay.Meta feature of Vandelay.Industries. Are you saying Onestop.Seo is better then?

On the other hand, I wasn't having issues with keyword metadata. My original question was about the following:

I signed up for a trial for Raven Tools, to see what this could bring to the table for my site in regards to SEO. This tool reported a whole lot of link and meta issues, where alot of the issues were arround the fact that /User/Account/Logon creates a lot of pages with request parameters (as it creates a linked page for each page with the only difference being the ?returnUrl=pageUrl). These indexed pages were also reported as low on keyword/description and content (obviously). That's why I updated my layout.cshtml to include a <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX, NOFOLLOW"> for /User/Account/LogOn, effectively removing these pages from Google's index altogether.

The Tags pages were creating similar results, no page metadata, not enough content and such, so I added a <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX, FOLLOW"> there, also not indexing these, but still following all the links on the Tags pages.

So my original question was: does anyone have any experience with on-page SEO optimization like this and is this an ok route tofollow, or should I solve this in another way? It seems the rel=nofollow on certain internal links is also not appreciated by google...
Oct 6, 2013 at 5:50 AM
Yes, I am saying that. If what Vandelay is doing is all you need, it's fine, but Onestop.Seo goes much farther.
Oct 6, 2013 at 8:38 AM
Ok, thanks for the feedback.

Any feedback on the robots question?
Oct 7, 2013 at 7:34 AM
I don't know.
Oct 7, 2013 at 9:41 AM
Ok, thanks anyway.
Oct 16, 2013 at 10:36 AM
At present, keywords are mainly crawled from content itself. I think era of meta tags has come to an end by the latest algorithms by Google and other search engines. Many of the web portal developers are avoiding this method and they are trying to working on quality contents.
Oct 16, 2013 at 3:11 PM
Thanks for the input, but the question was NOT about keywords, but about the ROBOTS metatag containing NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW for specific pages in Orchard like the Tags and Logon pages.
Nov 4, 2013 at 5:16 PM
I'm always late to parties. :)

If you are dealing with robots, then just out of curiosity why not use the Robots.txt module? Google's own webmaster content has some info on how to use robots.txt with examples so that you can exclude pages from searches. I have two lines with

Disallow: /User
Disallow: /Users

specifically for one of the situations you mentioned earlier.
Nov 4, 2013 at 8:16 PM
Ah super! Thanks for your feedback! Any other paths that should be disallowed for Orchard?
Nov 4, 2013 at 8:57 PM
Edited Nov 4, 2013 at 8:57 PM
Aside from the ones you specifically create that you want to hide (e.g., I have several sites for the same business, so things like "~/ContactUs" I allow robots on the main site, but I disallow them on the others in case it's seen as a duplicate for SEO purposes (the page is the same on each of my sites); also, I hide some form pages I created with custom modules).

Here are the Orchard related ones that I use:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /Admin
Disallow: /Media
Disallow: /Themes
Disallow: /User
Disallow: /Users
Nov 5, 2013 at 8:30 AM
This is exactly what I was looking for, thanks!