Google Mobile Friendly designation in Search results
-
We have recently deployed a mobile (http://m.pssl.com) version of our desktop website (http://www.pssl.com). We've followed the guidelines in their documentation (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6101188) & (http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/04/rolling-out-mobile-friendly-update.html), added the appropriate rel=alternate/rel=canonical tags updated site maps and robots.txt files, etc.
A mobile search for our company shows the "mobile-friendly" flag in the search results for our home page, but for some reason other pages such as category and brand are not showing showing as "mobile-friendly".
I can submit the pages using the mobile-friendly tester (https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/mobile-friendly/) and all of the pages I test come back as mobile friendly.
Does anyone have any experience or advice they'd be willing to share that might help us resolve this issue?
-
Hi,
It's quite possible that it's just a matter of time before the label shows like Patricks mentions. However, if you check your site with PageSpeed Insights there seems to be something strange with the way you implement the redirect: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pssl.com which could be the reason why the label does not appear:
Your page has 2 redirects. Redirects introduce additional delays before the page can be loaded.Avoid landing page redirects for the following chain of redirected URLs.
If you want to check this "manually" you can check the headers yourself using web-sniffer.net with a mobile user agent. I would check with your technical team how to avoid this redirect chain.Apart from that, if you check the insights for speed, your scores for both mobile & desktop are not really great. Testing on webpage test http://www.webpagetest.org/result/150429_62_19PT/1/details/ - loaded in 3.7 sec is not extremely bad but not great either. You could probably reduce the load time by combining your 19 js & 6 css files. For mobile 400K images & 270K javascript (!) is probably a bit too much to load over a mobile connection(the test also shows the double redirect).rgds,Dirk
-
Hi there
I wouldn't worry too much about this. This is going to be a roll out update, so it's going to take time for it to fully reflect in the SERPs.
I would imagine that Google has yet to crawl your entire site, which means that they haven't crawled the changes you implemented. If the test tool says you are fine, I would take comfort in that. That being said, watch your mobile traffic in GA and your mobile rankings in Google Webmaster Tools. If something is wrong, those two will tell you rather quickly.
Hope this helps!
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
-
Dates on Google Search Results
Hello, I manage htts://globalrose.com When I search on Google for "Yellow Roses", "Yellow Roses Globalrose", or any search that might bring up one of our pages, sometimes our search results appear with dates right before the description. Does anyone know what this mean? Why they appear on some and not other pages? Here is a search result for example: Example Google Search Can someone please help clarify this for us?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | globalrose.com0 -
Javascript search results & Pagination for SEO
Hi On this page http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches we have javascript on the paginated pages to sort the results, the URL displayed and the URL linked to are different. e.g. The paginated pages link to for example: page2 http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:30&orderBy:5&pageView:list& The list is then sorted by javascript. Then the arrows either side of pagination link to e.g. http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 - this is where the rel/prev details are - done for SEO But when clicking on this arrow, the URL loaded is different again - http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches#productBeginIndex:60&orderBy:5&pageView:list& I did not set this up, but I am concerned that the URL http://www.key.co.uk/en/key/workbenches?page=3 never actually loads, but it's linked to Google can crawl it. Is this a problem? I am looking to implement a view all option. Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
AngularJS - How does Google go?
We're rebuilding our entire website in angularJS. We've got it rendering fine in WMT, but does that mean that it's content is detectable? I've looked into prerender.io and that seems like a great solution to the problem of not seeing any static HTML, but is it really necessary? I'm looking into this as I'm having the argument currently with my devs, and they're all certain that Google renders angularJS fine.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | localdirectories0 -
Search Spike over the weekend
I own a website, and recently had a HUGE spike in organic search traffic from Google over the weekend. It seems to be going back down. Anyone have any idea why? Anyone have any similar experiences? odd-traffic.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alhallinan1 -
Who is beating you on Google (after Penguin)?
Hi,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | rayvensoft
After about a month of Penguin and 1 update, I am starting to notice an annoying pattern as to who is beating me in the rankings on google. I was wondering if anybody else has noticed this.
The sites who are beating me - almost without exception - fall into these 2 categories. 1) Super sites that have little or nothing to do with the service I am offering. Now it is not the homepages that are beating me. In almost all cases they are simply pages hidden in their forums where somebody in passing mentioned something relating to what I do. 2) Nobodies. Sites that have absolutely no links back to them, and look like they were made by a 5 year old. Has anybody else noticed this? I am just wondering if what I see only apply to my sites or if this is a pattern across the web. Does this mean that for small sites to rank, it is now all about on-page SEO? If it all about on-page, well that is great... much easier than link building. But I want to make sure others see the same thing before dedicating a lot of time to overhaul my sites and create new content.| Thanks!0 -
Alexa site title shows as "302 Found" on search result pages
If you search for the site "ixl.com" in Alexa, for some reason, it's showing the site as "302 Found" instead of showing the website name, IXL. If you drill into that, it shows the site as ixl.com, but underneath that, it says "302 Found" again. Every other site I search for seems to show the site's name properly. I have no idea where it's getting this "302 Found" from. Does anyone know how to fix this? Here's a link directly to the search results page: http://www.alexa.com/search?q=ixl.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | john4math0 -
Local Searches done from outside of local area better than searches from within local area
Here's a strange one: I am working on a site for a local business and targeting local searches. The names have been changed to protect the innocent. Various keyword position tools show the site ranking very well for searches like "Anytown Widget Store". Doing the same Google search from a browser in Anytown, the site shows up much lower. So I tried changing the location in Google to other cities, using a variety of browsers and it comes up much higher out of town than in town. I have seen plenty of geographic discrepancies before, but usually they went the other way - searches from the actual local area did slightly better than the same searches done elsewhere, which would make sense. Any thoughts on why this would happen?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nick_Ker0 -
Google, Links and Javascript
So today I was taking a look at http://www.seomoz.org/top500 page and saw that the AddThis page is currently at the position 19. I think the main reason for that is because their plugin create, through javascript, linkbacks to their page where their share buttons reside. So any page with AddThis installed would easily have 4/5 linbacks to their site, creating that huge amount of linkbacks they have. Ok, that pretty much shows that Google doesn´t care if the link is created in the HTML (on the backend) or through Javascript (frontend). But heres the catch. If someones create a free plugin for wordpress/drupal or any other huge cms platform out there with a feature that linkbacks to the page of the creator of the plugin (thats pretty common, I know) but instead of inserting the link in the plugin source code they put it somewhere else, wich then is loaded with a javascript code (exactly how AddThis works). This would allow the owner of the plugin to change the link showed at anytime he wants. The main reason for that would be, dont know, an URL address update for his blog or businness or something. However that could easily be used to link to whatever tha hell the owner of the plugin wants to. What your thoughts about this, I think this could be easily classified as White or Black hat depending on what the owners do. However, would google think the same way about it?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bemcapaz0