Weird title tag in SERps (see attachment)
-
Hi Mozzers
Does anyone know why my clients title tag appears like it does in the image attached?
It seems as though Google is pulling the parent page url and putting that at the front.
All other title tags are normal.
Anyone any ideas and is it anything to be worried about?
Thanks
Anthony
@Anthony_Mac85
-
I agree with chris, if its not needed why have it?
As for doing harm, Duane Forester from Bing advised not to do it, and said that sites that misuse the canonical tag, Bing will ignore them all together.
There is also the line of thought, that we know that canonical tags do not pass all link juice, just like 301's or any request, there is a certain amount of decay, 15% in the original google algorithm.
It just may be that when you have a canonical back to yourself, it is followed and that you get that decay unnecessarily
-
Hi Gerard
Thanks for sharing that link with me - very interesting.
So according to that post, Google are saying that for the search query "Picosure Tattoo Removal" the URL - "treatments/picosure-tattoo-removal" delivers more relevance, as opposed to the original title tag - "PicoSure Tattoo Removal UK | Serving Manchester..."
Think I'd prefer the original title tag to be honest. What do you think guys?
Thanks
Anthony
PicoSure Tattoo Removal UK
-
Hi Anthony!
These are all great responses to your question. It's funny that just yesterday I was researching this very topic for my own company and came across this post which shed some light on the subject as well. It'll also be interesting to see how things shape up with the new SERP redesign by Google.
Keep us updated!
Thanks,
Gerry
-
Sounds like a great plan! Good luck. Let us know if it gets resolved.
-
Yeh I guess it doesn't matter either way.
I tried the structured data testing tool and the title tag displays correctly.
Hmmm, think I'll wait a few days and see it sorts itself out. Then try amending the title tag option
Thanks
-
Hiya,
Yes I would agree it doesn't cause harm however it doesn't do anything else either. The canonical doesn't make a difference really. I wouldn't see how it protects you from scrapers or people stealing your content having your page indexed first is irrelevant of the tag. look at it another way if a scraper stole your content they could just stick a canonical pointing to them selfs and thus claim it was their content, it wouldn't work. It all boils down to who Google index's to and if most people are pointing to the original (in theory)
Reason I pointed it out was it may have been an error of Google getting in a muddle with the canonical and might of been worth a try
-
Hey Chris
Just done some reading into putting a rel canonical on a page pointing to itself and it seems that it's harmless. Matt Cutts even says so in this video.
Also, a couple of people have said that "having a tag on your page protects you somewhat from scrapers and people stealing your content. If your page is indexed first with your tag, any syndicated or duplicate versions from 3rd parties in theory should not be able to rank that content." Found that in this thread here.
They don't seem to be doing any harm so think I'm going to leave them
Anthony
-
Thanks for your responses Chris and Jane - both very useful!
I will try your suggestions and thanks for the other tips re: dupe content on directory listings and and canonicals. I'll get those sorted too
Anthony
-
Hi Anthony,
It looks like a simple error on Google's part, especially since your other pages are displayed correctly, but do try the actions listed by Chris like Fetch as Googlebot, perhaps after also making some minor changes to the title tag to spur a new title to be indexed (nothing drastic, try "PicoSure Tattoo Removal UK | Fastest Treatment in Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham" perhaps).
I don't believe this will be the problem in this case, but beware of copying pages' content on other websites like Yell:
http://i.imgur.com/JAqToZv.png
http://i.imgur.com/e94blAB.png
It's a bad idea to place your content on other websites, especially authoritative sites. Google heavily filters (and sometimes penalises for) duplicate content and the last thing you want is Yell or another review / directory site being considered more relevant for your text than you are.
-
Just a guess here, I know Google if it feels you're Meta isn't right can select its own and this maybe what's happened although I don't think this is what it is. I would also try removing the canonical as there is no need for it as its pointing to its self. You can also try a Fetch as Google see if it refreshes the Meta.
You can always wait a day and see if it resolves its self as sometimes an over reaction can do more harm then good especially if it resolves on its own. Lucky you're in a good placement and the incorrect meta still gets the keyword across.
Hope some of that helps a bit.
Good luck!
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
-
Url title and then category vice versa
We have recently developed a site with the structure of domain.com/page-title/about/category Instead of the traditional domain.com/category/page-title We want to optimize more on each single article rather than the category its in. However now we get the info from a seo company that this is rather a bad idea and it hurts the SEO performance because google doesnt understand the structure. The archive page of each category is domain.com/category/overview Whats your input on this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Preen0 -
Best Practices for Homepage Title Tag
Hi, I would like to know if there is any update about the best practices for the homepage title tag. I mean, a couple of years ago, it was still working placing main keywords in the homepage title tag. But since the last google SERP update, the number of characters that are being shown were reduced, and now we try to work with 55 and 56 characters. That has reduced our capacity of including many keywords on the title tag. Besides, search engines are smarter now to choose the correct inner page to show in SERP. But I am wondering if the Homepage Title should have a branded orientation or should include main keywords, cause it is still working that strategy. I would appreciatte any update in this issue. Thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | teconsite0 -
Title in serch result
Hi, Im the webmaster of http://www.canexel.es and we are having some problems with the title of the home page. this is my title tag: <title></span><span>Casas de madera mucho más que casas prefabricadas - Canexel</span><span class="webkit-html-tag"></title> This what apear in SERPS in keywords like casas de madera (google esp): Canexel: Casas de madera mucho más que casas prefabricada...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Canexel0 -
Title Tag Best Practices
In light of all the Google updates in 2013, have you updated/changed your title tag best practices? Is the format of (Keyword | Brand) still working well for your optimization efforts or have you started incorporating an approach similar to this format . (Keyword in a Sentence | Brand) Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SEO5Team0 -
Why does Google show Titles different than the coded titles?
Hi, I've noticed that on many pages Google shows on the SERPS titles that he chose for me and not necessarily the ones coded in the Title tag (usually small difference like adding suffix etc.). Why is that? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeytzNet0 -
Google Web Master Tools: Duplicate Title Tags?
According to Google Web Master Tools it says my site has 910 Duplicate Title Tags. How verbose should title tags be? What's the maximum character length? For example, let's say I have an image of an iPhone 4S being held in someone's hand. How verbose of a title and how many characters am I allowed to have? Is the goal with title tags to be very specific in describing the image? In the above example, do I need to say something like: "iPhone 4S being held by white caucasian male" or will "iPhone 4S" suffice?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | asc760 -
Original Source and Canonical tags
We've been using canonical links to protect site SEO for contributor content and requiring canonical of our partners (as well as tagging internal duplicate content with canonical). Most other media sites have been doing the same but this is a moving target. I'm now hearing that the original source tag is now a better option. Special focus for us is placement on google news. Any guidance?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jbertfield0 -
How to find what Googlebot actually sees on a page?
1. When I disable java-script in Firefox and load our home page, it is missing entire middle section. 2. Also, the global nav dropdown menu does not display at all. (with java-script disabled) I believe this is not good. 3. But when type in <website name="">in Google search and click on the cached version of home page > and then click on text only version, It displays the Global nav links fine.</website> 4. When I switch the user agent to Googlebot(using Firefox plugin "User Agent Swticher)), the home page and global nav displays fine. Should I be worried about#1 and #2 then? How to find what Googlebot actually sees on a page? (I have tried "Fetch as Googlebot" from GWT. It displays source code.) Thanks for the help! Supriya.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Amjath0