Site property is verified for new version of search console, but same property is unverified in the old version
-
Hi all!
This is a weird one that I've never encountered before.
So basically, an admin granted me search console access as an "owner" to the site in search console, and everything worked fine. I inspected some URL's with the new tool and had access to everything. Then, when I realized I had to remove certain pages from the index it directed me to the old search console, as there's no tool for that yet in the new version. However, the old version doesn't even list the site under the "property" dropdown as either verified or unverified, and if I try to add it it makes me undergo the verification process, which fails (I also have analytics and GTM access, so verification shouldn't fail).
Has anyone experienced something similar or have any ideas for a fix? Thanks so much for any help!
-
That assuredly did used to be a problem and in these times I've found it hit and miss. Sometimes Google is able to reach the file directly and not be redirected, but sometimes Google still can't reach the file. In which case, you modify your .htaccess file to allow that one file (or URL) to be accessed via either protocol. I don't remember the exact rule but from memory, doing this isn't that hard
Failing that you should have access to this method:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/9008080?hl=en
Ctrl+F (find) for "DNS record" and expand that bit of info from Google. That version works really well and I think, it also gives you access to the new domain level property
The htaccess mod method may be more applicable for you. Certainly make the change via FTP and not via a CMS back-end. If you break the .htaccess and kill the site, and you only have the CMS back-end to fix it - which also becomes broken, you're stuck. Modding your .htaccess file should not break FTP unless you do something out of this world, crazy-insanely wrong (in-fact I'm not sure you can break FTP with your .htaccess file)
Another option, temporarily nullify the HTTP to HTTPS redirects in the .htaccess, verify, make your changes, then put the rule back on. This is a bad method because, in a few weeks Google will fail to reach the file and you will be unverified again. Also your site may have legal reasons it must, must be on HTTPS. Also allowing HTTP again may shake up and mess up your SERPs unless you act lightning fast (before Google's next crawl of your site)
Something like this might help: https://serverfault.com/questions/740640/disable-https-for-a-single-file-in-apache or these search results: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=disable+https+redirect+for+certain+file
Hope that helps
-
Thanks very much for your response. You are exactly right about the travails of the multiple properties, and I hadn't even thought about how the new domain level access should handle the multiple versions of each site (I'm still used to having to verify four separate properties).
In the end, you were exactly right; I just had to FTP the verification file once more and it worked immediately.
A question, though: if you were trying to verify a non secured protocol (http://) of a site that is https://, and you were for some reason unable to verify through GA or GTM, wouldn't uploading a verification file automatically create a secured protocol and therefore be invalid for verification? This is (thank goodness) purely theoretical, but it seems as though it would be a rough task which I'm sure happens periodically.
Thanks again for the insight. You were a great help!
-
I have no experience with this particular error but from the sounds of it, you will just have to re-verify and that's all that you can do. One thing to keep in mind is that different versions of the same site (HTTPS/WWW, HTTPS, HTTP/WWW, HTTP, any sub-domains) all count as separate websites in Search Console
The days of that being a problem are numbered as Google have come out with new domain-level properties for Search Console, but to verify those you need hosting level access so most people still aren't using that until Google can make the older verification methods applicable
What this does mean is that, if the URLs which you want to remove are for a different version of the site (which still counts as a separate property) then you still have to verify that other version of the site (maybe the pre-HTTPS version, or a version without WWW). If you have the wrong version of the property (site) registered in your GSC (which doesn't contain the URLs you want to remove) then you still need to register the old version
A common issue is when people move from HTTP to HTTPS, and they want to 'clean up' some of the old HTTP URLs and stop them from ranking (or at least, re-direct Google from the old property to the new one properly). They delete the HTTP version of the site from their GSC, but then they can't get back to do proper clean-up. In most instances Google still considers different site versions to be different sites in GSC. As mentioned this isn't a problem for some people now, soon it won't be a problem for anyone. But if you're looking at any kind of legacy account for sites that were built and verified up to a few months ago, the likelihood is you still have to re-verify other site versions
The new domain level properties may also have bugs in, where they defer back to the non-domain level properties for some stuff. You may have just found an example of that to be honest (but I can't confirm this)
I'd advise just doing what the UI tells you, it's really all you can feasibly do at this juncture
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
-
Moving our Google Analytics Account to a New Account
My company is building a new website with a new web development company. Our old website development company hosted our Google Analytics account on their account (this was done 13+ years ago, probably a good idea then, but we definitely would've done it differently knowing what we know now). I've been researching how we could move our GA property to a new account owned by us, but according to this article: "There are some circumstances in which you cannot move a property:
Reporting & Analytics | | GreatLegalMarketing
-> The source account and the destination account are not in the same Google Marketing Platform organization. Contact an organization admin to make sure both accounts belong to the same organization." In our case, the source account and the destination account do not belong to the same organization. I may just have to accept that we are losing 13+ years of historical data about our website, and if that's the case, oh well. But, if anyone has an idea how we can export/import our GA data to our new analytics account, I would greatly appreciate it.0 -
Delays in Search Console Data
We are seeing big delays in search console data this month. In the past we have seen delays of a few days, but I have never noticed it being this long before. At the moment we have no data since 23rd February. Have I just never noticed this before or is this particularly long? Is anyone else seeing the same thing?
Reporting & Analytics | | Wagada0 -
Automated XML Sitemap for a BIG site
Hi, I would like to do an automated sitemap for my site but it has more than a million pages. It would need to be a sitemap index with a separation on different parts of the site (i.e. news, video) and I'll want a news sitemap and video sitemap as well (of course). Does anyone have any recommended way of making this and how much would you recommend it getting updated? For news and , I would like it to be pretty immediate if possible but the static pages don't need to be updated as much. Thanks!
Reporting & Analytics | | mattdinbrooklyn0 -
How to safely exclude search result pages from Google's index?
Hello everyone,
Reporting & Analytics | | llamb
I'm wondering what's the best way to prevent/block search result pages from being indexed by Google. The way search works on my site is that search form generates URLs like:
/index.php?blah-blah-search-results-blah I wanted to block everything of that sort, but how do I do it without blocking /index.php ? Thanks in advance and have a great day everyone!0 -
Implementing demographics for a nopCommerce site
Hi Guys, I have been trying to implement demographics in Analytics for a site built in nopCommerce and I have run out of things to try to correct the problem and get some data! The code I am using is below: Any help would be greatly appreciated - it's driving me mad! Thanks, Dan
Reporting & Analytics | | SEOBirmingham810 -
Reasons for drop in URLs Receiving Entrances Via Search
Hi I'm having trouble understanding why I'm getting the results I am for my organic traffic data. I've been focussing on a few keywords throughout my website and the most recent results show that there is a big increase in the Organic Search Visits and the Non-Paid Keywords Sending Search Visits for both Branded Keywords and Non-branded Keywords, but the results for URLs Receiving Entrances Via Search are the complete opposite. Down by a few percent. I don't understand why this would happen and was hoping that someone could maybe explain and give a few reasons for why this is happening and maybe give some tips on how to stop it from happening in the future if possible. Thanks.
Reporting & Analytics | | Bonx0 -
No Internal Followed Links on My Site?
I just ran the Site Explorer on my site (myeyedr.com) and it reported that there are no internal links on www.myeyedr.com or myeyedr.com. However, there were 20 internal followed links on www.myeyedr.com/index.aspx. I'm guessing this is hurting my SEO. Any suggestions?
Reporting & Analytics | | lance-1744490 -
Something strange going on with new client's site...
Please forgive my stupidity if there is something obvious here which I have missed (I keep assuming that must be the case), but any advice on this would be much appreciated. We've just acquired a new client. Despite having a site for plenty of time now they did not previously have analytics with their last company (I know, a crime!). They've been with us for about a month now and we've managed to get them some great rankings already. To be fair, the rankings weren't bad before us either. Anyway. They have multiple position one rankings for well searched terms both locally and nationally. One would assume therefore that a lot of their traffic would come from Google right? Not according to their analytics. In fact, very little of it does... instead, 70% of their average 3,000 visits per month comes from just one referring site. A framed version of their site which is through reachlocal, which itself doesn't rank for any of their terms. I don't get it... The URL of the site is: www.namgrass.co.uk (ignore there being a .com too, that's a portal as they cover other countries). The referring site causing me all this confusion is: http://namgrass.rtrk.co.uk/ (see source code at the bottom for the reachlocal thing). Now I know reach local certainly isn't sending them all that traffic, so why does GA say it is... and what is this reachlocal thing anyway?? I mean, I know what reachlocal is, but what gives here with regards to it? Any ideas, please??
Reporting & Analytics | | SteveOllington0