Should I be running my crawl on our www address or our non-www address?
-
I currently run our crawl on oursitename.com, but am wondering if it should be run on www.oursitename.com instead.
-
It does make sense. Based on what you wrote, ours is not set up correctly. But now I have the language to better work with our provider.
You are very helpful!! Thank you!
-
There's really no way to avoid the existence of the two different addresses, THMCC - they're a byproduct of the way of the way web servers and domain names work. They both exists as soon as a website is created. And visitors tend to use them interchangeably.
They aren't "actually" two different sites, they are just two different addresses that refer to the same pages, causing the search engines to see them as duplicate content. Kind of like how your house's location can be described by the lot number on the city plan, or by the postal address. Same house - different ways of showing where it's located.
If the 301 redirect is done correctly, the search engines will understand that everything should be considered to be at the one primary address and they'll pass along the other version's authority to the primary version automatically. And therefore no second version to compete with.
You can easily tell if the redirect is working properly. Let's assume you decide for example that the www.thmedicalcallcenter.com version is the primary and redirect the non-www version to it. When you type in the non-www address into the browser's address bar and hit enter, you should actually see the URL in the address bar change to the www version of the address.
And yea, you absolutely must have both addresses taken care of. You have no way of controlling whether someone types in the address with or without the www. and you want either one to get forwarded on to the primary address.
Does that all makes sense?
Paul
-
Thanks so much, Paul!!
The SEO Moz helpdesk is who told me that I needed to have oursitename.com in addition to www.oursitename.com. Is this true? Creating oursitename.com and the redirect seems to have caused a lot of errors, mostly duplicates from the redirect probably not being done correctly. But overall, was/is it in our best interest to have both www.oursitename.com and oursitename.com?
-
Thanks again!! One more question if you don't mind. If the 301 redirect is done correctly will this fix the competition issue in all the search engines? If not, should I get rid of oursitename.com?
-
As far as the search engines are concerned, thmedicalcallcenter.com and www.thmedicalcallcenter.com are two separate sites that will compete against each other and dilute each others' authority and ranking unless one is 301-redirected to the other.
As SEO5 indicates, it's best to assess which version already has the most incoming links and use that version as the primary, redirecting the other one to it.
This is best done using a 301 redirect written into your site's .htaccess file. In addition, there is spot in Google Webmaster Tools (GWT or WMT) where you can also hint to Google which version of the site you want to be the primary.
It's not enough to only use the hint in GWT as that only applies to Google, it will do nothing to correct the problem in the other search engines.
Paul
-
I thought they were the same...with a 301 redirect from oursitename to www.oursitename.com so I am confused as to why one would have more inbound links than the other. Also, what is WMT?
Thanks!!!
-
Pick the one that has more inbound links associated with it and already has high pages in the index. Make sure you set the preferences in WMT to either the www. or the non www version.
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
-
Rookie question re Moz Crawl errors after deleting a property from console.
Hi all, I stupidly removed the "http" url of my one website a few days back (it is one of three, the other two being the https), then re-added it around a day later and, while google console isn't reporting back any errors, Moz Crawl is going to town on this now for one critical "4xx" issues, canonicals and various other content issues that I addressed days previously...last Moz crawl performed an hour ago, url deleted and re-added two days ago. I have resubmitted a sitemap, will this smooth itself out or shall I go and make changes? Many thanks in advance.
Moz Pro | | UkPod0 -
Block Moz (or any other robot) from crawling pages with specific URLs
Hello! Moz reports that my site has around 380 duplicate page content. Most of them come from dynamic generated URLs that have some specific parameters. I have sorted this out for Google in webmaster tools (the new Google Search Console) by blocking the pages with these parameters. However, Moz is still reporting the same amount of duplicate content pages and, to stop it, I know I must use robots.txt. The trick is that, I don't want to block every page, but just the pages with specific parameters. I want to do this because among these 380 pages there are some other pages with no parameters (or different parameters) that I need to take care of. Basically, I need to clean this list to be able to use the feature properly in the future. I have read through Moz forums and found a few topics related to this, but there is no clear answer on how to block only pages with specific URLs. Therefore, I have done my research and come up with these lines for robots.txt: User-agent: dotbot
Moz Pro | | Blacktie
Disallow: /*numberOfStars=0 User-agent: rogerbot
Disallow: /*numberOfStars=0 My questions: 1. Are the above lines correct and would block Moz (dotbot and rogerbot) from crawling only pages that have numberOfStars=0 parameter in their URLs, leaving other pages intact? 2. Do I need to have an empty line between the two groups? (I mean between "Disallow: /*numberOfStars=0" and "User-agent: rogerbot")? (or does it even matter?) I think this would help many people as there is no clear answer on how to block crawling only pages with specific URLs. Moreover, this should be valid for any robot out there. Thank you for your help!0 -
SEO on-demand crawl
what happened to the on-demand crawl you could do in PRO when they switched to the new MOZ site?
Moz Pro | | Vertz-Marketing0 -
SEOmoz crawler not crawling my site
We set up a new campaign in SEOmoz on Friday. It is my understanding that the preliminary crawl can cover up to 250 and this has been our experience in the past. However, the preliminary crawl only went through 2 pages. This is a larger eCommerce site with many pages. Any ideas why more pages weren't crawled? We set up the campaign to track at the root domain level.
Moz Pro | | IMM0 -
Crawl Report Warnings
How much notice should be paid to the warnings on the SEO Moz crawl reports? We manage a fairly large property site and a lot of the errors on the crawl reports relate to automated responses. As a matter of priority which of the list below will have negative affects with the search engines? Temporary RedirectToo Many On-Page LinksOverly-Dynamic URLTitle Element Too Long (> 70 Characters)Title Missing or EmptyDuplicate Page ContentDuplicate Page TitleMissing Meta Description Tag
Moz Pro | | SoundinTheory0 -
I have a Rel Canonical "notice" in my Crawl Diagnostics report. I'm presuming that means that the spider has detected a rel canonical tag and it is working as opposed to warning about an issue, is this correct?
I know this seems like a really dumb question but the site I'm working on is a BigCommerce one and I've been concerned about canonicalisation issues prior to receiving this report (I'm a SEOmoz pro newbie also!) and I just want to be clear I am reading this notice correctly. I presume this means that the site crawl has detected the rel canonical tag on these pages and it is working correctly. Is this correct?? Any input is much appreciated. Thanks
Moz Pro | | seanpearse0 -
Help Understanding Crawl results on this site
I'm just starting to SEO this site http://thefirmbusinessbrokerage.com/welcome and I'm having trouble with the crawl report data. First question, should I be building links to the site above or the main page http://thefirmbusinessbrokerage.com/ (which is a flash intro). If I build links to the flash page, what do I do to the forwarding URL to the welcome page to make it effective? Second question, why does the crawl data report show up almost completely blank? Is this site perfect or are there some onsite issues that I'm not seeing. Thanks for your support and guidance on this site. I'm not hosting the site, just building links and offering optimization advice onsite. JOE
Moz Pro | | KreativElement0 -
Is having the company's address in the footer (or header) of each webpage important for SEO?
Is having the company/office's address in the footer (or header) of each webpage important for SEO? Your page for the Geotarget tool says that having the address in this element helps search engines find your location. My question is, how important or relevant is this to SEO? How does knowing the address influence SEO? Is it best SEO practice to put the address in the footer of every webpage? http://www.seomoz.org/geotarget
Moz Pro | | richardstrange0