Strange cache - what could be the reason
-
The cache of one of our site is being displayed in a strange way in Google. The site in question is - http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/ The cache is shown like this -
Title is shown first
description
Followed by URL
What could be the reason for this.
Normally, cache is shown in a box like this ..... in a rectangular box
This is Google's cache of .... . It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on...
-
Thanks. Understood.
-
I was thinking that Google first caches a site, and then includes the site in it's index.
The mechanics of how Google actually works is not public information. We have to make decisions based upon the glimpses of information that is shared along with our experiences and testing results.
With the above understood, Google defines the noarchive tag as "noarchive: prevents Google from showing the Cached link for a page". So technically they could still make the cached page available by other means but not offer the link.
My experience is Google clearly has all the data from your site. If they crawl your site and index it, they capture all the information. They are choosing to not make any cached copies of the site available due to the noarchive tag. Your experience in this instance clearly indicates Google not only does not present the "cached" link in SERPs but blocks users from seeing the cache through other means as well.
In short, I agree with you. I believe your page is cached but Google is preventing the cache from being viewed.
-
Thanks Ryan for your time and patience.
Don't you think the issue here is that the page is indeed cached, but NOT showing the cached link due to the tag mentioned by me. How can a page be in Google's index, but not cached.
I was thinking that Google first caches a site, and then includes the site in it's index.
-
Yes to both questions.
I mean the page is in Google's index and not cached.
The noarchive meta tag is designed specifically to prevent search engines from caching a web page.
-
You mean that page is in Google's index, but NOT cached.
I just came across this tag
is the issue has something to do with this tag ?
I replied late because i am in a different time zone.
-
When I enter the search query you offered, cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/, I see a single normal search result. There is nothing wrong with the result except you are wanting to see the cached page, not the search result. The issue is, the cached page does not exist. Google SERPs shows no cache. The system cannot provide what it does not possess.
It appears Google is thinking, well we don't have the cache that is being requested, so we'll offer the next best thing, the search result to the live page which the user can click on. It makes perfect sense to me.
You are comparing the result for your page with other pages and asking about the differences. In the example you offered, www.bidvolt.com/drywall-contractors.php is a cached page. It has an SEO issue in that both the www and non-www URLs work.
When I look at the non-www cache it comes up with a standard "your search did not match any documents" message. This url, as entered, lacks any result matches in Google. If you enter the same URL adding in the www subdomain, you will see the cached page.
The result is different because in this example the page is not in Google's index, where your page is in the index. From what I am seeing the results are logical, sensible and normal.
-
So how exactly are you viewing the "cache"?
I am viewing the cache using Google toolbar. Please enter the below line in Google and you will understand what i am trying to say
cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/
and view the result. If it's not cached as you are saying, then why is it being shown like this. If a page is not cached, it does not show like this.
If a page is not cached, it should show like this -
-
Perhaps we can find some common ground upon which to agree.
http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/ is not currently cached in Google. The screenshot I shared shows the page is not cached.
The natural way to view cache is to click the "Cached" link in a search result page. You are not clicking that link. So how exactly are you viewing the "cache"?
I am taking a guess that you are attempting to access the cache directly through another means, and therefore you are not seeing the desired result.
The reply offered earlier where you said "I have added the image of the cache" does not have any image attached. Perhaps if you could share a complete image it would clarify things.
-
If you open the page http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/, and view it's cache, you will understand what i am trying to say. It shows
cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/
Web Development India - UG Webmart6 Jul 2011 – UG Webmart specializes in custom web development, open source solutions and Organic SEO services.
www.ugwebmart.com/en/What i mean by normal cache ( cache which is normally shown ) is what is being shown when you view of http://www.ugwebmart.com/ ( home page )
The difference in the cache of two pages is what i would like to know
If there is no cache, it should have been shown blank
-
You are searching the cache for www.ugwebmart.com/en/. The problem is, there is no cache for the page, which is why your results are appearing that way.
Notice the second result does not have the word "cache" next to it.
-
I have added the image of the cache.
-
Atul, I took a look at the cache for the URL you offered and it appears normal to me. Can you offer a search term or the exact page that is showing the issue? As Steven suggested, a screenshot would be most helpful.
-
Do you have a screen capture of the cache result that you see it as appears as normal for me an its a little difficult to determine what you're describing
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
-
Site Audit Tools Not Picking Up Content Nor Does Google Cache
Hi Guys, Got a site I am working with on the Wix platform. However site audit tools such as Screaming Frog, Ryte and even Moz's onpage crawler show the pages having no content, despite them having 200 words+. Fetching the site as Google clearly shows the rendered page with content, however when I look at the Google cached pages, they also show just blank pages. I have had issues with nofollow, noindex on here, but it shows the meta tags correct, just 0 content. What would you look to diagnose? I am guessing some rogue JS but why wasn't this picked up on the "fetch as Google".
Technical SEO | | nezona0 -
Are bad links the reason for not ranking?
Hello Moz community. I'm looking here for some input from the experts on what could be wrong with a site I'm working on. The site is in Spanish, but I'm sure you'll get the idea. We want to rank the site first page on Google Mexico (www.google.com.mx) for the keyword "refacciones Audi" and some other brands (refacciones = replacement parts would probably be a good translation, just FYI). Now, our page hasn't been completely optimized, so in my mind it's OK not to be on first page yet. However, our main competitor is ranking first page for all the keywords we want to rank for, but when you check their site, you'll find there is hardly any content, no keywords are being used in their content, all pages have the exact same title and meta description, their catalog is in a completely different domain. In short, no SEO whatsoever. Looking at Moz data, our site has a DA of 26, while our competitor's has a 10. They have no external backlinks at all, while we have a few hundred. This leaves me scratching my head: how can a completely non-optimized site outrank us? I decided to check our backlink profile, and a previous SEO agency seems to have built MANY fake blogs with lots of backlinks with rich anchor text. Quite a big percentage of our backlinks are of this kind, so this is the only thing I can think can be affecting our ranking. Will disavowing be our solution? If you'd like to check, our site is: www.refaccionariaalemana.com.mx Our competitors' is: www.saferefacciones.com ANY help will be extremely appreciated as I feel a bit lost. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | EduardoRuiz1 -
Strange 404 Error(Answered)
Hi everyone! I recently took over a new account and I was running an initial crawl on the site and a weird 404 error popped up. http://www.directcolors.com/products/liquid-colored-antique/top
Technical SEO | | rblake
http://www.directcolors.com/applications/concrete-antiquing/top
http://www.directcolors.com/applications/concrete-countertops/top I understand that the **top **could be referring to an actual link that brings users to the top of a page, but on these pages there is no such link. Am I missing something?1 -
Does anyone know how to automatically record Google Cache dates?
I haven't heard of such a tool but I would have thought it would be pretty useful for measuring changes etc Does anyone know of such a tool?
Technical SEO | | CraigAddyman0 -
Advice on strange URL problem
I'm considering doing some pro bono work for a local non-profit and upon initial review they have a number of serious issues but there is one in particular I'd like to check my thinking on. The developer who set up the site some years ago implemented a javascript redirect on their root domain so that it redirects to: http://domain.com/wordpress This is wrong for all kinds of reasons and I want to recommend eliminating this redirect and getting rid of the 'wordpress' part of the path altogether. However, the site is quite established with good PR and they would take a hit by changing the path. I'd do 301 redirects to the new URLs that would not have 'wordpress' in the path in addition to other remediation. My question - is my thinking here good? It's worth it, right? The other option is just get rid of the weird redirect and keep 'wordpress' in the path but this seems unacceptable to me. Any opinions?
Technical SEO | | friendlymachine0 -
Every time google caches our site it shows no website.
Our site <cite>www.skaino.co.uk/</cite> seems to be having real issues with being picked up with Google. The site has been around for a long time but no longer even ranks on google if you search for the word 'Skaino'. This is odd as its hardly a competitive keyword. If I do a site:www.skaino.co.uk then it shows all the pages proving the site has been indexed. But if I do cache:www.skaino.co.uk it shows a blank cache. I'm starting to worry that Google isn't able to crawl our site properly. If it helps to clarify we have a flash site with a HTML site running underneath for those who cant view flash. Im wandering if I've missed something glaringly obvious. Is it normal to have a blank google cache? Thanks AJ
Technical SEO | | handygammon0 -
I am wondering if I should use the Meta 'Cache" tag?
I am working on removing unnecessary meta tags that have little impact on SEO and I have read so many mixed reviews about using the Meta 'Cache' tag. I need to informative information on whether or not this tag should be used.
Technical SEO | | ImagetecLP0 -
Cache my page
So I need to get this page cached: http://www.flowerpetal.com/index.jsp?info=13 It's been 4-5 months since uploaded. Now it's linked to from the homepage of a PR5 site. I've tweeted that link 10 times, facebooked, stumbled, linked to it from other articles and still nothing. And I submitted the url to google twice. Any thoughts? Thanks Tyler
Technical SEO | | tylerfraser0