We just fixed a Meta refresh, unified our link profile and now our rankings are going crazy
-
Crazy in a bad way!I am hoping that perhaps some of you have experienced this scenario before and can shed some light on what might be happening.Here is what happened:We recently fixed a meta refresh that was on our site's homepage. It was completely fragmenting our link profile. All of our external links were being counted towards one URL, and our internal links were counting for the other URL. In addition to that, our most authoritative URL, because it was subject to a meta refresh, was not passing any of its authority to our other pages.Here is what happened to our link profile:Total External Links: Before - 2,757 After - **4,311 **Total Internal Links: Befpre - 125 After - 3,221
Total Links: Before - 2,882 After - 7,532Yeah....huge change. Great right? Well, I have been tracking a set of keywords that were ranking from spots 10-30 in Google. There are about 66 keywords in the set. I started tracking them because at MozCon last July Fabio Riccotta suggested that targeting keywords showing up on page 2 or 3 of the results might be easier to improve than terms that were on the bottom of page 1. So, take a look at this. The first column shows where a particular keyword ranked on 11/8 and the second column shows where it is ranking today and the third column shows the change. For obvious reasons I haven't included the keywords.11/8 11/14 Change****10 44 -34
10 26 -16
10 28 -18
10 34 -24
10 25 -15
15 29 -14
16 33 -17
16 32 -16
17 24 -7
17 53 -36
17 41 -24
18 27 -9
19 42 -23
19 35 -16
19 - Not in top 200
19 30 -11
19 25 -6
19 43 -24
20 33 -13
20 41 -21
20 34 -14
21 46 -25
21 - Not in top 200
21 33 -12
21 40 -19
21 61 -40
22 46 -24
22 35 -13
22 46 -24
23 51 -28
23 49 -26
24 43 -19
24 47 -23
24 45 -21
24 39 -15
25 45 -20
25 50 -25
26 39 -13
26 118 - 92
26 30 -4
26 139 -113
26 57 -31
27 48 -21
27 47 -20
27 47 -20
27 45 -18
27 48 -21
27 59 -32
27 55 -28
27 40 -13
27 48 -21
27 51 -24
27 43 -16
28 66 -38
28 49 -21
28 51 -23
28 58 -30
29 58 -29
29 43 -14
29 41 -12
29 49 -20
29 60 -31
30 42 -12
31 - Not in top 200
31 59 -28
31 68 -37
31 53 -22Needless to say, this is exactly the opposite of what I expected to see after fixing the meta refresh problem. I wouldn't think anything of normal fluctuation, but every single one of these keywords moved down, almost consistently 20-25 spots. The further down a keyword was to begin with, it seems the further it dropped.What do you make of this? Could Google be penalizing us because our link profile changed so dramatically in a short period of time? I should say that we have never taken part in spammy link-building schemes, nor have we ever been contacted by Google with any kind of suspicious link warnings. We've been online since 1996 and are an e-commerce site doing #RCS. Thanks all! -
Totally agree,
Have seen this a few times in the past.
Major SEO changes, big drop in rankings for 2/3 weeks. Then rankings gradually return.
@Dana: Keep us posted, im curious to see if in a few weeks time things have improved
-
Thanks Dr. Pete. I know this is pushing the boundaries of normal Q&A. I appreciate your answer. Yes, one thing at a time I think is a good way to go. I suggested that we try the mod_pagespeed rewrite on the dev site as a first step. I think it would probably be more efficient for us to hire a developer proficient in SEO to handle some of the more technical items. Thanks again!
-
Sorry, I'm not really clear on what the question is - these seem like general IT items unrelated to the SEO problem. The JS rewrites definitely can be tricky and depend completely on the code in question - I can't really provide a general resource.
Not sure how the alias domains tie in, but they definitely need to be part of any redirection scheme. I've used mod_rewrite for pretty large-scale stuff (as do many large sites), but it's possible to write bad/slow rules. It really depends on the scope. I'm not sure if you're talking about 100s or 1000s (10000s, etc.) of pages. Writing the rules for a big site is beyond the scope of any general Q&A. That's something your team is going to have to really dig deep into.
I feel like they might be over-thinking this one issue and trying to fix everything all at once, but I can't say that confidently without understanding the situation. I think it might be better to tackle these things one at a time.
-
Dr. Pete, Our IT manager responded to my request. Can you point me in the right direction to research these things (I am copying and poasting directly from his message): "A few items that I noticed just skimming the forums that we will
need to look at a little closer are:- Java script that is self referencing, as both tab control and the slide show are self referencing
- Alias domains which we have a number of
- HTTPS pages, which for us, is all pages depending on
when a person logs in."
I found info in the GW forum about the mod_pagespeed rewrite module and sent that to him.
He responded "We are currently using mod_rewrite to handle a number of things including 301 redirection. My experience with mod_rewrite does have me very cautious, because it is very easy to “blow up” the site. I would want to run this on the dev site for some time with a concerted testing effort to make sure we do not have issues."
Any references you can recommend would be great. Thank you so much!
-
It's just one of those things where you're always going to be wondering if the bloated code is causing problems, and it's going to drive you nuts. Fix it, and worst case, you'll rule out a cause. Some days, that's the best we can do.
-
Agreed. I worked at another company that had a 19-year-old kid split out the JS. I submitted the request. I'll let you know what happens. Thanks again!
-
I can't prove it would cause substantial improvement, but right now it's just in your way, and you'll never know. To me, that kind of clean-up is a no-brainer, because it's no risk. At worst, it cleans up the code, improves caching (and load times as you said), and makes updating easier. At best, you see measurable gains.
As a former developer and dev-team manager, I have to say, too, that it's not a tough fix to split out that JS. It would probably make the dev teams life easier down the road. If they're acting like it's a Herculean task, then either (1) they just don't want to do it, or (2) you need a better dev team.
-
Thanks Dr. Pete. The marketing team has been complaining about how far the meta tags, etc. are pushed down in our code for years. Unfortunately, there hasn't been enough evidence that this is doing us any harm so it's never been a priority to fix. I believe moving those lines of JS to an external file would, if nothing else, improve our page speed wouldn't it? If our pages load faster it could impact our SEO in a positive way
Thanks again very much for your suggestions
-
Yeah, the canonical should be ok - I just wanted to make sure you had something in place. One minor thing - I'd get that up on the page - with all the JS, the canonical is down on line 436 of the source code. You'd really be better off getting all that script into external files. It shouldn't make a big ranking difference, but it won't hurt.
You do have have a dozen pages that share your home-page TITLE and META description. Some seem to be odd, near-duplicates, where others probably just have duplicate meta data. Either way, I'd clean that up. Run this query in Google to see them:
site:ccisolutions.com intitle:"Acoustics, Sound, Lighting"
...or check Webmaster Tools (or your SEOmoz campaigns). Again, it probably isn't the culprit, but it's not helping.
I'd really dig to see if anything else is going on. The timing could just be coincidence. I find it really hard to believe that the META refresh change alone harmed you, unless this is just a temporary bounce while Google sorts it out. I definitely would NOT put it back - you risk compounding the problem. People rush to reverse things, assuming that will take them back to where they were, and it rarely does. More than 70% of the time, it just makes a bigger mess.
-
Thanks Dr. Pete. Here's the scoop, and I'm happy to provide the actual URLs so you can have a real view of the source code, etc.
The meta refresh was on this URL:
it redirected to this URL:
http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/IAFDispatcher?iafAction=showMain
We removed the meta refresh, and put "<rel="canonical" href="<a class=" external"="" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.ccisolutions.com/" /> to the head of both URLs</rel="canonical">
Our IT Manager couldn't get a 301 redirect to work from http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/IAFDispatcher?iafAction=showMain to http://www.ccisolutions.com, but in another Q&A thread Streamline Metrics mentioned that this really shouldn't matter as long as the canonical tag is properly set up, which I think it is.
What do you think? (and thanks very much!)
-
I tend to agree that it could just be a short-term re-evaluation period, but I do understand that patience is hard to come by in these situations. I have one concern - I assume the META refresh was acting as some kind of redirect to a different URL? When you removed it, did you canonical the other URL somehow? Just removing the refresh wouldn't consolidate the link "juice" of the various URLs, so it could be that you went from one form of fragmentation to another, different form.
That's just speculation, since I don't fully understand the old/new setups. If you can provides some details with fictional URLs, we might be able to dig in deeper.
-
Yes Paul. I agree. I have seen wild fluctuations on other sites that went through big changes. I believe this is probably an example of a time when we have to hang in there and ride through "The Dip."
"Time, Patience and Intelligent Work" is my mantra....but I also have to convince my CEO that the $1,000 we just spent fixing the meta refresh was actually a good thing. Rankings sinking like this aren't helping me make my case.
If an when I hear anything from Google I'll let you and Bryan know.
I'm sure we aren't the only ones who've fixed something technical that fixed a fragmented link profile. It sure would make me feel better to hear someone say "Yes, similar thing happened to me and now we're ricking it!" LOL - well, you can't blame a girl for dreaming!
-
I'll just add, Dana, that this major a change to the site will often cause massive ranking fluctuations as the crawlers work through the site and consolidate what's going on.
Small comfort, but a week really isn't long enough for things to have settled out to the "new normal". It's a good idea to keep looking for issues, but I'd also hold my breath for another week or two (or three) to see what happens as the dust settles. I know it goes against the grain to wait & see, but in this case I really think it's warranted.
Good luck, and keep breathing
Paul
-
Thanks Bryan. Yes, I took your advice and filed a reconsideration request just now. I spelled out exactly what happened with the whole meta refresh fix. This site has so many technical SEO problems that I am just hoping that it's not a completely different problem being caused by something else. I'll let you know what/if I hear anything.
I'd sure love to hear from any other SEOs out there who've ever been in similar situations!
Thanks again.
-
Like I said it can be many factors.. Perhaps making the drastic changed looks like a spam attack...
Total External Links: Before - 2,757 After - **4,311 **
Total Internal Links: Befpre - 125 After - 3,221
Total Links: Before - 2,882 After - 7,532More then doubled the link count. If you send Google a reconsideration request they will look at your issue and probably help you solve it. -
Thanks Bryan. Yes, I checked the link profile last night. Everything looks totally normal. Interestingly, nearly all of the added links to the new link total were Internal, not External, so I don't think the quality of the links is the issue, maybe moreso the quantity.
I don't think a reconsideration request would be appropriate in this instance because we have not been de-indexed. We are just being hit hard by the algo I think.
If that is the case, I would hope that over the next few weeks, as Google sees our internal links not changing so dramatically, things will settle down.
Any additional thoughts?
-
Perhaps adding the links together ended up pointing too many or a bigger ratio of low quality or non relevant links to your site... Or maybe the anchor link profile is now over optimized, the loss can be due to many reasons... I would recommend checking the new link profile and also making sure everything looks natural. If all is well and are still not ranking, you can send Google the reconsideration request explaining what happened.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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.
Related Questions
-
Do you still loose 15% of value of inbound links when you redirect your site from http to https (so all inbound links to http are being redirected to https version)?
I know when you redesign your on website, you loose about 15% internally due to the 301 redirects (see moz article: https://moz.com/blog/accidental-seo-tests-how-301-redirects-are-likely-impacting-your-brand), but I'm wondering if that also applies to value of inbound links when you redirect your http://www.sitename.com to https://www.sitename.com. I appreciate your help!
Technical SEO | | JBMediaGroup0 -
Duplication in Meta Titles
Hi,
Technical SEO | | ChrisHolgate
In order to appease the Moz crawler we recently changed over 10,000 URL's in order to make our Meta Page Title less than 55 characters as it suggested. Unfortunately our rankings dropped dramatically pretty much overnight so I am getting the feeling that perhaps our titles are now just a little too concise and need elaborating on just a touch. Our competitors that rank well seem to use a small amount of keyword repetition. For example, whereas we may have:
Brother DCP-197C Inkjet Cartridges They will have:
Brother DCP-197C Inkjet Cartridges. Cheap Brother DCP-197C Ink. What are your opinions of the fact that: a) Their Title is over the 55 character figure that is suggested for displaying correctly in the SERPs.
b) The words Brother and DCP-197C are repeated in the title. The fact their title appears to be working better is almost enough to sway me but the competitors title just looks a little too spammy for me to make a sitewide change without asking some second opinions first. Cheers all!0 -
Anything I'm missing as my page just donst seem to rank
I am wandering if anyone can offer any suggestions, we have a page on our site https://www.wilsonfield.co.uk/insolvency-advice/liquidation/ this page is optimised to rank for liquidation however no matter how many links or how optimised the page is it just will not show in the SERPS. Moz gives it a page score of A we have built relevant links directly to the page using appropriate anchor text, have social likes and concentrated of getting more google+ likes. We run a detailed Moz SERP report comparing the above url to the top 10 ranked pages and we are looking competitive if not better on all ranking factors. This is now really frustrating that we arnt even in the top 100 and cant understand why. we have the https version of the site also submitted to webmaster tools and www is set to be the prefered. Has anyone got any ideas as to why google just dosnt like our site, we have no crawl errors we use all best practices.
Technical SEO | | Wilson_Field0 -
Just noindexed and redirected junk from my site. Now what?
Hi to all! I've just finished 301 redirecting some pages and "noindex - follow" some other. I have to add a lot of canonicals yet, but this is a start. Now how I check the results? Should I wait a week or so to see if something improves? How long does it takes for Google to remove the pages I've just redirected and noindexed? My site is crawled every day (as all sites I guess). Thanks!
Technical SEO | | enriquef0 -
Why am I ranking for this
In need of some second opinions here. I have a domain softboxsystems.co.uk which ranks for the keyword sofrigam. It is not meant to! Have posted previously on this but to cut long story short, the clients .com started to rank for this term and then they lost the contract to supply the services so got a legal request to stop ranking for it (it had been seoed so was ranking 100% on off page issues). The client is a UK company so they decided that they would block the .com from google and use the co.uk domain for a period of time instead while they worked on deranking the domain. The .com domain was therefore blocked from the index, the .co.uk homepage would not rank for anything then it turned out that they had placed a canonical tag link from the .co.uk to the blocked .com!!! On my suggestion this was removed and the homepage of the .co.uk appeared in google in a matter of a couple of days (other pages on the site were indexed but not the home). Now, somehow the co.uk domain homepage is ranking for the banned term. I have checked open link and there are not any links pointing to the domain with the anchor of sofigram, nor is the term mentioned onsite. I now have the client panicking on the phone to get the page out of google again asap before the competitors legal people get wind of it. I am still trying to deindex the .co.uk homepage in the short term. I have readded the canonical back to the .com as that worked at not getting that page indexed previously. The main issue I have is how on earth I am ranking for this term in the first place and more importantly how do I stop from ranking for this term! The only terms I can find as anchor text in the moz tools are the keywords I have been seoing for help hehe thanks
Technical SEO | | Grumpy_Carl0 -
Panda and unnatural links caused ranking drop
Hi I have been approached to do some SEO work for a site that has been hit badly by the latest panda update 3.3, they have also had a warning in their Google webmaster tools account saying they had unnatural looking links to their site, they received this in 26 Feb and that prompted them to stop working with their excising seo company and look for a new one. Apparently their rankings for the keywords they were targeting have dropped dramatically, but it looks like just those they were actively building back links for, other phrases do not look affected. Before I take them on I want to be clear that it is possible to help them reclaim their rankings? I have checked the site and the on-page seo is good, the site build is good, just a few errors to fix but the links that have been built by the seo company are low quality with a lot of spun articles and the same anchor text so I see what the Google webmaster tools message is refuring to. I do not think these links can be removed as there is no contact details on the sites I checked I have not checked all of them but a random sample does not show promise, they are from low authority domains. So if I am to take them on as a client and help them to regain their previous rankings what is the best strategy? Obviously they want results yesterday and from our phone call they would rather someone else did the work than them, so my initial response of add some better quality content that others in your industry would link to as a reference did not go down well, to be fair I think it is a time issue there are only 3 people in the company and they are not technical at all. Thanks for your help Sean
Technical SEO | | ske110 -
How do you add a description to the Meta Description area to Tag Pages in Wordpress? This way I do not get the errors: "Missing Meta Description Tag" from SEOMoz Bot? Thanks!
I tried to add descriptions to my tags in Wordpress (well actually one to test), but I still keep getting the "Missing Meta Description Tag" error. Any suggestions on how to fix this in Wordpress? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | jhblogger0 -
What is link juice - and how do I utilise it?
Apologies for the very basic question - I am trying to determine exactly what link juice is. Every article I seem to find assumes that you already know what link juice is. From what I can tell it is how your internal links push around from your homepage and how they flow through your site. I don't understand how to optimize this and how to improve it throughout my site - or what the opportunities are. I'll attach an image of my site link numbers compared to a few rivals (names removed) to illustrate the difference - not vs the first column but certainly the other two. Can someone shed some light on Link Juice for me and point me in the right direction? Thanks. Oy2c5.png
Technical SEO | | Benj250