How To Find Lower-Quality Content Being Excluded From Indexing Using Bing’s XML Sitemap Coverage Report (and Its “Content Quality” Flag)

Bing yet rolled retired its XML Sitemap Coverage Report successful Bing Webmaster Tools, which is simply a large summation for tract owners. Using the report, you tin cheque indexing levels based connected the urls being submitted via XML sitemaps. This is akin to what Google offers successful its Coverage reporting, but it’s large to person different large hunt motor supply this data.

Hello “Content Quality” flag:
When I archetypal dug into the reporting, I rapidly started checking urls excluded from indexing crossed sites. Like Google, Bing provides a fig of categories for urls being excluded,  including noindexed, redirected, 404s, and more. But 1 of those categories truly struck maine – “Content Quality”. With “Quality” being the astir important happening that tract owners should absorption on, knowing erstwhile a large hunt motor believes you person prime problems, and surfacing those circumstantial urls, is beauteous awesome.

Bing is not Google, but Bing is simply a large hunt engine: And volition Google follow?
With large algorithm updates evaluating prime connected respective levels, having this accusation from Bing could perchance assistance tract owners aboveground and amended lower-quality content. And with Google’s wide halfway updates, reviews updates, and present adjuvant contented updates, digging into urls flagged arsenic little prime could assistance jumpstart a tract owner’s analysis. Sure, Bing is not Google, but the contented that Bing is surfacing successful its Sitemap Index Coverage reporting could beryllium a proxy for what Google besides believes is lower-quality content. You don’t privation to instrumentality that astatine look value, but it’s decidedly worthy investigating…

And possibly a bigger question is… volition Google travel Bing present and supply a “Content Quality” class successful its ain Coverage reporting? I cognize Google has toyed with this thought successful the past, but ne'er officially rolled retired a contented prime class successful Search Console. To beryllium honest, I’m not definite that would ever happen, since it could uncover a spot excessively overmuch of the concealed sauce. I cognize they don’t privation to supply excessively overmuch nexus information either based connected that happening.

I mean, ideate waking up 1 time and seeing this successful Google Search Console. :)

Finding the Index Coverage reporting successful Bing Webmaster Tools:
If you person astatine slightest 10K urls indexed successful Bing, past you should beryllium capable to spot the scale sum reporting for your tract successful the Sitemaps reporting. But, based connected what I’m seeing, a fig of sites do not person that option. If you don’t spot the option, past I would marque definite you are submitting xml sitemaps successful BWT oregon including a notation to them successful your robots.txt file.

For example, present is simply a large-scale tract with sitemaps successful BWT, but the scale sum enactment isn’t available.

Maybe the Index Coverage reporting is inactive rolling retired to much sites… I’ll scope retired to Bing’s Fabrice Canel to spot wherefore those sites don’t person scale sum reporting and past update this station with much information.

Reviewing contented prime problems crossed sites: Were the urls really debased quality?
I was anxious to analyse the “Content Quality” class crossed sites to spot what types of contented were surfaced there. So I dug successful crossed respective sites, and crossed respective verticals. I’ll rapidly screen what I recovered below.

First, though galore of the urls were ones that I would see lower-quality oregon thin, not each were. Do not instrumentality Bing’s connection blindly… you decidedly request to reappraisal the urls yourself. Some were precisely what I would aboveground arsenic lower-quality, portion others seemed good for users (they were not great, but not unspeakable either)…

And erstwhile inspecting circumstantial urls that were flagged arsenic little prime successful the Sitemap Index Coverage reporting, I typically saw different categories look for wherefore the urls weren’t indexed. It did not accidental “Content Quality”. Fabrice did accidental the information mightiness not beryllium successful sync and determination could beryllium a 1-2 time lag determination betwixt the tools, but it’s worthy noting.

For example, a url that was flagged arsenic “Content quality” successful the Sitemap Index Coverage reporting really yielded “Discovered but not crawled” erstwhile inspecting that url. That class tin awesome prime problems too, but it doesn’t accidental “Content quality”.

Summary – “Content Quality” is being flagged by a large hunt engine. Dig successful there…
Again, I was beauteous excited to spot Bing Webmaster Tools supply a emblem for contented quality. With truthful overmuch accent connected “quality” from the large hunt engines, it’s large to excavation successful and analyse urls being surfaced arsenic having prime issues. The reporting volition ne'er beryllium perfect, and I would not blindly enactment connected what’s being surfaced there, but it’s a bully starting constituent for tract owners trying to recognize contented prime issues crossed their sites. I highly urge digging successful there. :)

GG