Fetching & Rendering a non ranking page in GWT to look for issues
-
Hi
I have a clients nicely optimised webpage not ranking for its target keyword so just did a fetch & render in GWT to look for probs and could only do a partial fetch with the below robots.text related messages:
Googlebot couldn't get all resources for this page
Some boiler plate js plugins not found & some js comments reply blocked by robots (file below):
User-agent: *
Disallow: /wp-admin/
Disallow: /wp-includes/As far as i understand it the above is how it should be but just posting here to ask if anyone can confirm whether this could be causing any prrobs or not so i can rule it out or not.
Pages targeting other more competitive keywords are ranking well and are almost identically optimised so cant think why this one is not ranking.
Does fetch and render get Google to re-crawl the page ? so if i do this then press submit to index should know within a few days if still problem or not ?
All Best
Dan
-
ok thanks !
nothing has changed just hoped it might do something
-
If anything changed between the 15th and today, it'll help ensure it gets updated. But that's all.
-
thanks Donna ! yes its all there and cache date is 15 Jan but still thought worthwhile fetching & rendering & submitting again, or does that do nothing more if its already indexed apart from asking G to take another look ?
-
Can you see if it's cached? Try cutting and pasting the entire URL into the search window, minus the http://. If it's indexed, it should show up in search results. Not the address bar, the search window.
-
Thanks for commenting Donna !
And providing the link to the interesting Q&A although this isn't the scenario i'm referring to with my original question.
The page isn't ranking at all although its very well optimised (and not overly so) and the keyword isn't that competitive so i would expect to be somewhere in the first 3-4 pages but its not even in first 100
Very similarly optimised pages (for other target keywords which are more competitive) are ranking well. Hence the fetch and render & submit to index i did, just to double check Googles seeing the page.
Cheers
Dan
-
Hi Dan,
You might find this Q&A helpful. It offers suggestions for what to do when an unexpected page is ranking for your targeted keyword phrase. I think most, if not all, suggestions apply in your case as well. Good luck!
-
Marvellous !
Many Thanks Robert !
All BEst
Dan
-
Yes there are a lot of overlaps when it comes to GWT - for the most part if you are making a submission request for crawling, it is indexed simultaneously - I believe the difference lies in some approaches which allow you to crawl as Google as opposed to submitting for official index.
In other words, what you have done is a definitive step in crawling and indexing, as opposed to seeing what Google would find if it were to crawl your site (as a test). "Submit to Index" is normally something I reserve for completed sites (as opposed to Stub content) to avoid accidental de-indexing.
In your circumstances, however, I don't think it will hurt you and it may help you identify any outstanding issues. Just remember to avoid it if you don't want a site indexed before it is ready!
Hope this helps,
Rob
-
Hi Robert,
Thanks for your help again
!
That's great thanks, but what about 'submit to index' which i did also ? As in did i need to do that or not ?(since GWT says all pages submitted are indexed in sitemap section of GWT, so i take it i didn't need to, but did anyway as a precaution) ?
All Best
Dan
-
Hello again, Dan,
From what I can tell from your description, you have done what you can to make this work. We would expect JS to be blocked by that robots.txt file.
To answer your questions:
Fetch & render does allow Google to re-crawl the page using GWT. A request of this nature typically takes between 1-3 days to process, so you should know where you stand at that point.
Feel free to put an update here and if there is further information I will see what I can do to help out.
Cheers!
Rob
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
-
Issue with GA tracking and Native AMP
Hi everyone, We recently pushed a new version of our site (winefolly.com), which is completely AMP native on WordPress (using the official AMP for WordPress plugin). As part of the update, we also switched over to https. In hindsight we probably should have pushed the AMP version and HTTPS changes in separate updates. As a result of the update, the traffic in GA has dropped significantly despite the tracking code being added properly. I'm also having a hard time getting the previous views in GA working properly. The three views are: Sitewide (shop.winefolly.com and winefolly.com) Content only (winefolly.com) Shop only (shop.winefolly.com) The sitewide view seems to be working, though it's hard to know for sure, as the traffic seems pretty low (like 10 users at any given time) and I think that it's more that it's just picking up the shop traffic. The content only view shows maybe one or two users and often none at all. I tried a bunch of different filters to only track to the main sites content views, but in one instance the filter would work, then half an hour later it would revert to no traffic. The filter is set to custom > exclude > request uri with the following regex pattern: ^shop.winefolly.com$|^checkout.shopify.com$|/products/.|/account/.|/checkout/.|/collections/.|./orders/.|/cart|/account|/pages/.|/poll/.|/?mc_cid=.|/profile?.|/?u=.|/webstore/. Testing the filter it strips out anything not related to the main sites content, but when I save the filter and view the updated results, the changes aren't reflected. I did read that there is a delay in the filters being applied and only a subset of the available data is used, but I just want to be sure I'm adding the filters correctly. I also tried setting the filter to predefined, exclude host equal to shop.winefolly.com, but that didn't work either. The shop view seems to be working, but the tracking code is added via Shopify, so it makes sense that it would continue working as before. The first thing I noticed when I checked the views is that they were still set to http, so I updated the urls to https. I then checked the GA tracking code (which is added as a json object in the Analytics setting in the WordPress plugin. Unfortunately, while GA seems to be recording traffic, none of the GA validators seem to pickup the AMP tracking code (adding using the amp-analytics tag), despite the json being confirmed as valid by the plugin. This morning I decided to try a different approach and add the tracking code via Googles Tag Manager, as well as adding the new https domain to the Google Search Console, but alas no change. I spent the whole day yesterday reading every post I could on the topic, but was not able to find any a solution, so I'm really hoping someone on Moz will be able to shed some light as to what I'm doing wrong. Any suggestions or input would be very much appreciated. Cheers,
Technical SEO | | winefolly
Chris (on behalf of WineFolly.com)0 -
Why would Google rank a highly irrelevant page in the top 15 especially for a seemingly important keyword?
While searching for "Blog writing service reviews", I found that a web page that's not even optimized for the query is ranking within top 15 search results. Upon checking the source code, I found that the webpage has been optimized for product reviews services. Plus, the website is only 11 months old, got 7 digit Alexa rank and has PR 1. Why would Google rank such a page in top 15?
Technical SEO | | suskanchan0 -
Sudden drop in ranking google.co.uk ranking
Anyone else had any sudden drops in rankings this week? Is there an update going on? One of my primary keywords has dropped from 6th to 49th in the google.co.uk search results. Not in webmaster tools to flag an issue. I have downloaded the links from webmaster and it does look if some content has been scraped and then linked back to us from a large number of sites that we have never sort links from. I have upload the google disavow link tool. Only one keyword appears to be effected not all of them? Any ideas? Thanks
Technical SEO | | highwayfive0 -
How to verify a page-by-page level 301 redirect was done correctly?
Hello, I told some tech guys to do a page-by-page relevant 301 redirect (as talked about in Matt Cutts video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1lVPrYoBkA) when a company wanted to move to a new domain when their site was getting redesigned. I found out they did a 302 redirect on accident and had to fix that, so now I don't trust they did the page-by-page relevant redirect. I have a feeling they just redirected all of the pages on the old domain to the homepage of the new domain. How could I confirm this suspicion? I run the old domain through screaming frog and it only shows 1 URL - the homepage. Does that mean they took all of the pages on the old domain offline? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | EvolveCreative0 -
Why are pages linked with URL parameters showing up as separate pages with duplicate content?
Only one page exists . . . Yet I link to the page with different URL parameters for tracking purposes and for some reason it is showing up as a separate page with duplicate content . . . Help? rpcIZ.png
Technical SEO | | BlueLinkERP0 -
Issue: Duplicate Page Content
Hi All, I am getting warnings about duplicate page content. The pages are normally 'tag' pages. I have some blog posts tagged with multiple 'tags'. Does it really affect my site?. I am using wordpress and Yoast SEO plugin. Thanks
Technical SEO | | KLLC0 -
Indexed pages and current pages - Big difference?
Our website shows ~22k pages in the sitemap but ~56k are showing indexed on Google through the "site:" command. Firstly, how much attention should we paying to the discrepancy? If we should be worried what's the best way to find the cause of the difference? The domain canonical is set so can't really figure out if we've got a problem or not?
Technical SEO | | Nathan.Smith0 -
Page not Accesible for crawler in on-page report
Hi All, We started using SEOMoz this week and ran into an issue regarding the crawler access in the on-page report module. The attached screen shot shows that the HTTP status is 200 but SEOMoz still says that the page is not accessible for crawlers. What could this be? Page in question
Technical SEO | | TiasNimbas
http://www.tiasnimbas.edu/Executive_MBA/pgeId=307 Regards, Coen SEOMoz.png0