Site not coming up even when I search with the .com
-
We have a customer whose site: http://camilojosevergara.com doesn't show up even when you search for his exact domain. http://bit.ly/18RjPPX
Wondering why that is. Is it because wikipedia and the other links rank higher? I've submitted his sitemap to google so I'm trying to figure out why its not showing up.
Any tips/recommendations to fix this would be greatly appreciated.
thanks
-
the forum you are posting on was created on the backbone of the software used to examine backlinks.
as per the rest of your questions.. you're on the right path. let's see how we can keep you moving along said path:
-
Hi Everett -
thanks for the info. Can you link me to or elaborate on these topics "link profile, disavow links and file a re-inclusion request."
when I view source I'm not seeing any drug spam links in the body tag: http://chrle.us/PSV0
what would you recommend to get it indexed ASAP?
-
Hi Jesse -
thanks for the tips. How did you check the backlinks to the site? Also regarding 3 how do you check for the unnatural link penalty?
thanks
-
good catch on the body tag. not sure that would cause google to ignore all else but i'd be curious to know this..
As for the lack of redirects, I didn't mean to imply that this would be causing the site to not be indexed. I meant that as a separate issue I noticed when briefly researching the site.
Just wanted to clear that up. Nonetheless, it should be dealt with. While Google can differentiate which site to index, it most definitely splits up your link juice and causes diminished PR/DA.
-
Hello Erik,
I did notice two beginning and ending body tags in the source code. Search for this in View Source:
Hello
That would mean the only content on the page is "Hello" if Google was to be paying attention to that body tag instead of the other one.
I seriously doubt www Vs non-www would keep your site from being indexed. This is one of those really minor issues that Google does a really great job of handling 99% of the time.
I'm inclined to agree with Jesse that the site has been removed from the index due to the spammy links: http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/links?site=camilojosevergara.com
That is a bigger topic than we can cover here but you can start by looking into how to clean up your link profile, disavow links and file a re-inclusion request.
-
Pretty sure I can get this indexed for you Erik (and still not sure why you don't PM me on Facebook with these Qs first. lol)
Just took a screenshot now with site:www.camilojosevergara.com not showing indexed. Will check again in a bit.
My best guess at this is the duplicate content is making Google choose not to bother indexing it.
"What duplicate content?"
http://behindthescenes.nyhistory.org/tracking-time/
Since the whole website is on one line (according to view source in Chrome) Google likely believes that the entirety of the nyhistory.org site has been scraped. Either a) they just didn't index it or b) it's possibly banned if it was previously in the index.
-
I am outsider to this question, sorry. But it got interesting. I want to know one would do this
"1.) This site does not have any redirects in place. There are essentially duplicates of ever page existing for the www and non-www versions respectively. This is a problem that should be addressed immediately"
Is there a best practice to this. I had a similar problem with www. and non www. Supposedly the technical person solved this issue.
-
One last thing.. Consider this for your search query's URL: http://www.google.com/search?&q=camilojosevergara.com&pws=0
The &pws=0 at the end is very important for any SEO who wants to see real SERPs
-
Okay couple things here:
1.) This site does not have any redirects in place. There are essentially duplicates of ever page existing for the www and non-www versions respectively. This is a problem that should be addressed immediately.
2.) What are the target keywords? Because looking at the shady back-link profile it would seem that this is a site that sells Propranolol without a prescription. There are TONS of backlinks coming into this site with that in the anchor text. Did your client ever use this domain for something else or buy it from someone else?
3.) Check Google's Webmaster Tools. I'm willing to bet that there is a unnatural link penalty notice sitting in there. Penguin will hit a site like this, but usually won't remove it entirely. This site looks like it has a manually imposed penalty looming. It's a bit of a disaster and if it were my site and I were the photographer I'd consider finding a new domain name and starting over.
4.) Out of curiosity, when you say "we have a customer.." what exactly do you mean and what kind of business do you work for? What is your specialty? That I'm just wondering to satisfy my own curiosity and you're welcome to disregard this question.
Hope this helps.
-
not in flash. view source on it. Its HTML 5
thanks
-
Hi Erik,
Is the website ALL in flash?
If so, Google cannot read SWF files and can only read text (And alt tags, meta data etc.) I checked the page source and found this:
There are no keywords set and there is no meta description.
I can only assume the missing meta data as well as the website being completely made in flash is what is stopping Google from crawling your website and adding it to the SERP.
I believe there is a way in which you make a "copy" of your website in a text version for search engines to read (Hopefully another member can point you in the right direction for that).
All I can recommend is not to make websites in flash. In my opinion (and it's only my opinion) is that flash is dead. And the beautiful things you used to be able to do in flash, you can no do even better in Ajax and other javascript as well as having fully readable websites by search engines!
Hope this answer is of some help to you!
Tom
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
-
How to create sitemap for example.com and blog.example.com ?
Hi I try to create sitemap for www.example.com, this website has link www.blog.example.com. after creating the sitemap using different tool. the sitemap not include www.blog.example.com and its relative files how can i get both example.com and blog.example.com in one sitemap
Technical SEO | | fogtheagency0 -
Site Navigation
Hello, I have some questions about best practices with site navigation & internal linking. I'm currently assisting aplossoftware.com with its navigation. The site has about 200 pages total. They currently have a very sparse header with a lot of links in the footer. The three most important keywords they want to rank for are nonprofit accounting software, church accounting software and file 990 online. 1. What are your thoughts about including a drop down menu in the header for the different products? (they have 3 main products). This would allow us to include a few more links in the header and give more real estate to include full keywords in anchor text. 2. They have a good blog with content that gets regularly updated. Currently it's linked in the footer and gets a tiny amount of visits. What are your thoughts about including it as a link in the header instead? 3. What are best practices with using (or not using) no follow with site navigation and footer links? How about with links to social media pages like Facebook/Twitter? Any other thoughts/ideas about the site navigation for this site (www.aplossoftware.com) would be much appreciated. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | stageagent0 -
How to add a disclaimer to a site but keep the content accessible to search robots?
Hi, I have a client with a site regulated by the UK FSA (Financial Services Authority). They have to display a disclaimer which visitor must accept before browsing. This is for real, not like the EU cookie compliance debacle 🙂 Currently the site 302 redirects anyone not already cookied (as having accepted) to a disclaimer page/form. Do you have any suggestions or examples of how to require acceptance while maintaining accessibility? I'm not sure just using a jquery lightbox would meet the FSA's requirements, as it wouldn't be shown if JS was not enabled. Thanks, -Jason
Technical SEO | | GroupM_APAC0 -
Internal Links on eCommerce sites
I have been working on an eCommerce site; www.pretavoir.co.uk over the past year. Improvements in SERPs have been good with many top three positions. However, there are other important keywords of similar difficulty which refuse to behave in a similar way.... The site is PR4 and has a homepage PA 52. The homepage includes links to internal brand pages eg Prada, Gucci etc. Q Would it be worthwhile creating footer anchor text with eaxct text eg Prada sunglasses, Gucci Sunglasses?? Thanks
Technical SEO | | seanmccauley0 -
How much of an issue is it if a site is somehow connected to a site that was penalized by Google?
I am working with someone that is about to launch a new site, and one of the sites was affected by the Panda update. Does it matter if the two sites are connected? Share the same hosting provider and same Google Webmaster's account?
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Considering redirecting my site from .com/us to just .com. What could the possible SERP consequences?
Today we use country-specific .tlds but have the US site on .com/us; .com is now a 'flag-site.' Ikea uses that structure too (.com/.com/us). Looking potential risk to redirecting current US site to .com.
Technical SEO | | KnutDSvendsen0 -
Converse.com - flash and html version of site... bad idea?
I have a questions regarding Converse.com. I realize this ecommerce site is needs a lot of seo help. There’s plenty of obvious low hanging seo fruit. On a high level, I see a very large SEO issue with the site architecture. The site is a full page flash experience that uses a # in the URL. The search engines pretty much see every flash page as the home page. To help with issue a HTML version of the site was created. Google crawls the Home Page - Converse.com http://www.converse.com Marimekko category page (flash version) http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko Marimekko category page (html version, need to have flash disabled) http://www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko Here is the example of the issue. This site has a great post featuring Helen Marimekko shoes http://www.coolmompicks.com/2011/03/finnish_foot_prints.php The post links to the flash Marimekko catagory page (http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko) as I would expect (ninety something percent of visitors to converse.com have the required flash plug in). So the flash page is getting the link back juice. But the flash page is invisible to google. When I search for “converse marimekko” in google, the marimekko landing page is not in the top 500 results. So I then searched for “converse.com marimekko” and see the HTML version of the landing page listed as the 4<sup>th</sup> organic result. The result has the html version of the page. When I click the link I get redirected to the flash Marimekko category page but if I do not have flash I go to the html category page. ----- Marimekko - Converse All Star Marimekko Price: $85, Jack Purcell Helen Marimekko Price: $75 ... www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko - Cached So my issues are… Is converse skating on thin SEO ice by having a HTML and flash version of their site/product pages? Do you think it’s a huge drag on seo rankings to have a large % of back links linking to flash pages when google is crawling the html pages? Any recommendations on to what to do about this? Thanks, SEOsurfer
Technical SEO | | seosurfer-2883190 -
Duplicate Homepage: www.mysite.com/ and www.mysite.com/default.aspx
Hi, I have a question regarding our client's site, http://www.outsolve-hr.com/ on ASP.net. Google has indexed both www.outsolve-hr.com/ and www.outsolve-hr.com/default.aspx creating a duplicate content issue. We have added
Technical SEO | | flarson
to the default.aspx page. Now, because www.outsolve-hr.com/ and www.outsolve-hr.com/default.aspx are the same page on the actual backend the code is on the http://www.outsolve-hr.com/ when I view the code from the page loaded in a brower. Is this a problem? Will Google penalize the site for having the rel=canonical on the actual homepage...the canonical url. We cannot do a 301 redirect from www.outsolve-hr.com/default.aspx to www.outsolve-hr.com/ because this causes an infinite loop because on the backend they are the same page. So my question is two-fold: Will Google penalize the site for having the rel=canonical on the actual homepage...the canonical url. Is the rel="canonical" the best solution to fix the duplicate homepage issue on ASP. And lastly, if Google has not indexed duplicate pages, such as https://www.outsolve-hr.com/DEFAULT.aspx, is it a problem that they exist? Thanks in advance for your knowledge and assistance. Amy0