Why "title missing or empty" when title tag exists?
-
Greetings! On Dec 1, 2011 in a SEOMoz campaign, two crawl metrics shot up from zero (Nov 17, Nov 24).
- "Title missing or empty" was 9,676.
- "Duplicate page content" was 9,678.
Whoa! Content at site has not changed.
I checked a sample of web pages and each seems to have a proper TITLE tag.
Page content differs as well -- albeit we list electronic part numbers of hard-to-find parts, which look similar.
I found a similar post http://www.seomoz.org/q/why-crawl-error-title-missing-or-empty-when-there-is-already-title-and-meta-desciption-in-place .
In answer, Sha ran Screaming Frog crawler. I ran Frog crawler on a few hundred pages. Titles were found and hash codes were unique. Hmmm.
Site with errors is http://electronics1.usbid.com
Small sample of pages with errors:
- electronics1.usbid.com/catalog_10.html
electronics1.usbid.com/catalog_100.html
electronics1.usbid.com/catalog_1000.html
I've tried to reproduce errors yet I cannot.
What am I missing please?
Thanks kindly, Loren
-
Hi Ryan,
Thank you for the reply. Yes, content for millions of part numbers is hard to come by for one's own use. It's proprietary for most companies.
When we have more part information, such as a part we have sold, I have a plethora of good information on that part because we've inspected in (photos, detailed visual examination, etc). Example: http://parts.usbid.com/SAA7115HL.html
Yet, there are millions of parts we can sell to people that we haven't actually sold yet. We have hundreds of vendors. We can procure parts from other sources for our customers (as well as out of our own inventory). Since we offer hard-to-find parts, businesses come to us when they cannot find it via other channels.
How do they search? They dump the number in Google and look for reputable sites that can provide a quote on that part (qty, manufacturer, etc).
So, many times all I have is the part number and a list of those on the page **is not great content. So admitted. ** It's the best I have to generate a lead.
If you have strong thoughts on SEO attention and content for the arena in which we play, I'm all ears. Like I mentioned to Cyrus, I am looking to work with talented people to improve content and SEO. Whom do you recommend?
Kindly, Loren
-
Hi Cyrus,
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. On Rogerbot's challenge crawling our site and vice-versa, is there a data dump or other clues on what went wrong? You got me halfway there identifying a crawl problem. The next step is for me to understand/reproduce (and fix) the black box to which you refer.
Care to use your super powers to shine a bit more light in the box for me?
Title tags are too long. I agree and will change.
Also, you are perceptive and spot-on for the scalability of this content. When I have many more attributes than part number (such as manufacturer, data code, description, photos, etc) we have those on "single part pages." Those pages are more descriptive and "content worthy."
The problem is that we have only so much content for part information. If I could buy it, believe me, I'd purchase, enhance and publish that information. (Manufacturer datasheets already exist and are for engineers more than our audience).
Our business is to provide hard-to-find parts. So, we need to show up in searches when purchasers dump a manufacturer part number into a search engine (yep, when it's hard to find, that's what businesses do to search).
So, I need to scale the best I can with content of this type. We experiment quite a bit. If you have ideas for me or know of someone to engage for a thoughtful experiment, I am willing to engage talent to assist.
Again, thank you. I hope you'll give me a bit more insight into an error dump (a few lines maybe) so I can see what's up. I will validate and clean up HTML today.
Any follow-up thoughts?
Kindly, Loren
-
Hi Loren,
I took a peek at your website, and checked some things behind the scenes using my super-awesome administrative powers here at SEOmoz. It looks like one of two things happened.
- Rogerbot encountered an error when crawling your site
- Your site had trouble with rogerbot.
In either case, you probably want to contact the help team (help@seomoz.org), especially if the problem persist in the next crawl report.
On another note..
Those extra-long title tags might cause some crawlers a little confusion. I'm not saying they're bad for you, but I doubt they are helping you much from a search engine point of view. Undoubtedly, I'd say with near certainty that Google is not indexing the entirety of your title tags. Paginated lists like this are tough to get indexed properly. If folks are actually searching for these obscure part numbers, perhaps this is the only way to scale it. That said, I would encourage you to experiment.
-
Hi Loren.
I took a look at the pages you shared. There is definitely a problem with the title. The Title field is supposed to have a maximum of 70 characters. Anything beyond that is cut off. I've seen some titles go a bit past that but your first page has a title with over 500 characters, and the second page you list has over 600 characters.
Another problem is the title's purpose is to let users and search engines understand the topic of the page. All of your titles begin with "Electronic Parts". Duplicating the same term at the beginning of all your titles is very bad for SEO.
Each page requires a unique, relevant, readable title under 70 characters.
Additionally, the page content is really poor. These are not indexable pages. Your pages all have the identical header, footer and sidebar which is understandable. Then you offer the exact same form at the top. After there is just a very long list of part numbers. There is no readable text, no sentences, no paragraphs, nothing to index except hundreds of part numbers.
Your site requires major SEO attention if you wish to be listed in search engines.
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
-
Product Tags
Opencart allows the use of product tags (please note, these are NOT meta tags) which I believe are used for when customers want to search for a product using the search function. So one of my tags could be ''star wars socks'', and when a customer types this into the search it brings up every product containing the tag for socks. This is all good and well, however, these tags appear on the product page itself, right below the Manufacturer/Brand, and above the price (they created pages but I have canonical links in them so that is a non-issue). Will Google look kindly on this or could it be considered as keyword stuffing? Or will Google know they're for search and ignore them? I just need to know whether or not removing them entirely will be a good or bad idea.
Technical SEO | | moon-boots0 -
Schema markup for products is missing "price": Is this bad?
Hey guys, So a current client of mine has an e-commerce shop with a few hundred products. They purposely choose to keep the prices off of their website, which is causing errors in Google Webmaster Tools. Basically the error shows: Error: Structured Data > Product (markup: schema.org) Error type: missing price 208 items with error Is this a huge deal? Or are we allowed to have non-numerical prices for schema ie. "call for quote"
Technical SEO | | tbinga1 -
Is a Rel="cacnonical" page bad for a google xml sitemap
Back in March 2011 this conversation happened. Rand: You don't want rel=canonicals. Duane: Only end state URL. That's the only thing I want in a sitemap.xml. We have a very tight threshold on how clean your sitemap needs to be. When people are learning about how to build sitemaps, it's really critical that they understand that this isn't something that you do once and forget about. This is an ongoing maintenance item, and it has a big impact on how Bing views your website. What we want is end state URLs and we want hyper-clean. We want only a couple of percentage points of error. Is this the same with Google?
Technical SEO | | DoRM0 -
Will I still get Duplicate Meta Data Errors with the correct use of the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags?
Hi Guys, One of our sites has an extensive number category page lsitings, so we implemented the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags for these pages (as suggested by Google below), However, we still see duplicate meta data errors in SEOMoz crawl reports and also in Google webmaster tools. Does the SEOMoz crawl tool test for the correct use of rel="next" and "prev" tags and not list meta data errors, if the tags are correctly implemented? Or, is it necessary to still use unique meta titles and meta descriptions on every page, even though we are using the rel="next" and "prev" tags, as recommended by Google? Thanks, George Implementing rel=”next” and rel=”prev” If you prefer option 3 (above) for your site, let’s get started! Let’s say you have content paginated into the URLs: http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1
Technical SEO | | gkgrant
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4 On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1, you’d include in the section: On the second page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2: On the third page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3: And on the last page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4: A few points to mention: The first page only contains rel=”next” and no rel=”prev” markup. Pages two to the second-to-last page should be doubly-linked with both rel=”next” and rel=”prev” markup. The last page only contains markup for rel=”prev”, not rel=”next”. rel=”next” and rel=”prev” values can be either relative or absolute URLs (as allowed by the tag). And, if you include a <base> link in your document, relative paths will resolve according to the base URL. rel=”next” and rel=”prev” only need to be declared within the section, not within the document . We allow rel=”previous” as a syntactic variant of rel=”prev” links. rel="next" and rel="previous" on the one hand and rel="canonical" on the other constitute independent concepts. Both declarations can be included in the same page. For example, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2&sessionid=123 may contain: rel=”prev” and rel=”next” act as hints to Google, not absolute directives. When implemented incorrectly, such as omitting an expected rel="prev" or rel="next" designation in the series, we'll continue to index the page(s), and rely on our own heuristics to understand your content.0 -
Will Google display the "@" Symbol in a SERP Title?
In our page title's, we'd like to include the "@" symbol. Will google display that symbol in the search results if we include it in the page's title?
Technical SEO | | sftravel0 -
If you only want your home page to rank, can you use rel="canonical" on all your other pages?
If you have a lot of pages with 1 or 2 inbound links, what would be the effect of using rel="canonical" to point all those pages to the home page? Would it boost the rankings of the home page? As I understand it, your long-tail keyword traffic would start landing on the home page instead of finding what they were looking for. That would be bad, but might be worth it.
Technical SEO | | watchcases0 -
Updated title tags not displayed in SERPs?
A couple weeks ago I updated the title tags and URLs of some of my site's top landing pages, but the new versions aren't indexed in Google. Webmaster tools says that my site has been crawled since updated. I'm using a pretty old version of Joomla for a CMS, and had to fight with the plugins a little bit to make it all work (sh404SEF for the URLs and sh404SEF Custom Tag Module for the title tags). For example, www.radiussecurityinc.com's indexed title is still: Radius Security Solutions | Home But should be: CCTV System Design - IP Industrial Surveillance | Radius Security Other pages besides the home page have the old title tags as well as old URLs. Any ideas how I can fix this? Thanks a lot in advance! Jeff
Technical SEO | | jaysan0 -
Is SEOMoz only good for "ideas"?
Perhaps I've learned too much about the technical aspects of SEO, but nowhere have I found scientific studies backing up any claims made here, or a useful answer to a discussion I recently started. Maybe it doesn't exist. I do enjoy Whiteboard Friday's. They're fantastic for new ideas. This site is great. But I take it there are no proper studies conducted that examine SEO, rather just the usual spin of "belief from authority". No?
Technical SEO | | stevenheron0