Www.oru.edu & oru.edu
-
Everyplace I check, the pagerank for both of those domains is either 0 or NA. However on this site oru.edu actually has a pagerank and this is the only source I can find for that. The sub www.oru.edu still has a zero on this site. A historical checker has oru.edu a N/A ranking just a few days ago and in June.
-
When I try that tool it completely malfunctions for me....doesn't do anything.
I think it's a moot point though.
If you previously had pagerank and now you've gone down to either 0 or N/A then there's a good chance you've got some kind of penalty.
Do you have any indication of whether traffic has dropped? If you don't have analytics you can possibly get information from your hosting company and server logs. Pagerank (PR) really doesn't mean much...but a loss of Pagerank plus a loss of traffic makes some type of penalty a big possibility.
The question is whether it is a manual penalty or an algorithmic one like Penguin or Panda.
I really would advise setting up webmaster tools today. You can either wait and see if a warning pops up or if you feel that traffic has dropped you could actually file a reconsideration request. Google will respond back within 3-14 days and let you know whether you actually do have a penalty. If so, then the nature of the message should help us know what the problem is. If not, then we go looking at traffic data to determine whether this is Penguin or Panda.
OR..............it's possible there is something else such as a robots.txt problem or something else going on. But really, without some type of traffic information and without knowing if there is a warning in webmaster tools it's going to be hard to diagnose the problem.
-
Unfortunately I don't have access to that.
This tool here is what's throwing me off with the http://oru.edu http://www.seomoz.org/toolbox/pagerank, even though I'm sure it's a 0 or N/A, I can't figure out why this one tool comes up with a different response than everyplace else.
-
I see you've fixed your div issues - it looks much better now!
oru.edu redirects to www.oru.edu (as it should) for me and I see both as Pagerank N/A.
I'm not sure if it was established or not on your previous message, but do you have webmaster tools set up, and if so, do you have any warnings in your messages there?
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
-
Spam Score & Redirecting Inbound Links
Hi, I recently downloaded a spreadsheet of inbound links to my client sites and am trying to 301 redirect the ones that are formatted incorrectly or just bad links in general (they all link to the site domain, but they used to have differently formatted urls on their old site, or the link URL in general has strange stuff on it). My question is, should I even bother redirecting these links if their spam score is a little high (i.e. 20-40%)? it already links to the existing domain, just with a differently formatted URL. I just want to make sure it goes to a valid URL on the site, but I don't want to redirect to a valid URL if it's going to harm the client's SEO. Also not sure what to do about the links with the --% spam score. I really appreciate any input as I don't have a lot of experience with how to deal with spammy links.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | AliMac260 -
Internal Links & Possible Duplicate Content
Hello, I have a website which from February 6 is keep losing positions. I have not received any manual actions in the Search Console. However I have read the following article a few weeks ago and it look a lot with my case: https://www.seroundtable.com/google-cut-down-on-similar-content-pages-25223.html I noticed that google has remove from indexing 44 out of the 182 pages of my website. The pages that have been removed can be considered as similar like the website that is mentioned in the article above. The problem is that there are about 100 pages that are similar to these. It is about pages that describe the cabins of various cruise ships, that contain one picture and one sentence of max 10 words. So, in terms of humans this is not duplicate content but what about the engine, having in mind that sometimes that little sentence can be the same? And let’s say that I remove all these pages and present the cabin details in one page, instead of 15 for example, dynamically and that reduces that size of the website from 180 pages to 50 or so, how will this affect the SEO concerning the internal links issue? Thank you for your help.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Tz_Seo0 -
Fred Update & Ecommerce
Hi I wondered if there had been any other insights since March about the Fred update or any other Google update? I don't think we were hit by Fred but in March we dropped out for a lot of keyword rankings, I just cannot pinpoint why. We are an ecommerce site, so some of our product/category pages don't have a huge amount of written content. We might have a couple of extra backlinks to disavow, but nothing major. Does anyone else have any insights? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | BeckyKey1 -
Nov 19th & 20th Update?
Did anyone see any big changes around Nov 19th & 20th? Mozcast had some high temps around there. If you saw any big changes in organic search, any ideas WTH that was all about? Any guesses? One site I work with took about a 15% hit and has since sort of skidded sideways.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | 945010 -
Is article syndication still a safe & effective method of link building?
Hello, We have an SEO agency pushing to implement article syndication as a method of link building. They claim to only target industry-relevant, high authority sources. I am very skeptical of this tactic but they are a fairly reputable agency and claim this is safe and works for their other clients. They sent a broadly written (but not trash) article, as well as a short list of places they would syndicate the article on, such as issuu.com and scribd.com. These are high authority sites and I don't believe I've heard of any algo updates targeting them. Regarding linking, they said they usually put them in article descriptions and company bylines, using branded exact and partial matches; so the anchor text contains exact or partial keywords but also contains our brand name. Lately, I have been under the impression that the only "safe" links that have been manually built, such as these, should be either branded or simply your site's URL. Does anyone still use article syndication as a form of link building with success? Do you see any red flags here? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | David_Veldt0 -
Are the Majority of SEO Companies 'Spammers, Evildoers, & Opportunists'?
This may not be the most productive Q&A discussion, but I've had some really interesting experiences this last month that have made me even more distrusting of "SEO" companies. I can't help but think of this post (not much has changed since '09). Even though it takes a pretty extreme stance, I agree with the core of it - _"The problem with SEO is that the good advice is obvious, the rest doesn’t work, and it’s poisoning the web." _ I didn't start doing this type of work wanting to have such a negative opinion of SEO companies, but I just keep having the same experience: I'll get referred to someone who isnt' happy with their SEO company. They send me their web address, I check out the site, and seriously can't believe what I find. MISSING PAGE TITLES, EVERY CANONICAL URL ISSUE IMAGINABLE, AND 10'S OF THOUSANDS OF BOT SPAM EMAT LINKS FROM PAGES LIKE THIS...AND THIS and just recently a company a called one of my clients and conned him into paying for this piece of spam garbage, obviously scraped from the site that I made for him. and what's worse, sometimes for whatever reason these companies will have all the client's FTP and CMS logins and it can be hell trying to get them to hand them over. There's no webmaster tools set up, no analytics, nothing.... These businesses are paying a good chunk of change every month, I just can't believe stuff like this is so common...well acutally, it's what i've come to expect this point. But I used to think most SEO companies actually had their clients best interest at heart. Does every honest consultant out there run into this same type of stuff constantly? How common is this type of stuff really? Now, on to the positive. This community rocks, and I feel like it represents real, ethical, solution-oriented, boundary-less SEO. So thank you Mozzers for all you do. and I love using the tools here to help businesses understand why they need an honest person helping them. If anyone has thoughts on the topic, I'd love to hear 'em...
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SVmedia3 -
Rollover design & SEO
After reading this article http://www.seomoz.org/blog/designing-for-seo some questions came up from my developers. In the article it says "One potential solution to this problem is a mouse-over. Initially when viewed, the panel will look as it does on the left hand side (exactly as the designer want it), yet when a user rolls over the image the panel changes into what you see on the right hand side (exactly what the SEO wants)." My developers say" Having text in the rollovers is almost like hiding text and everyone knows in SEO that you should never hide text. "In the article he explains that it is not hidden text since its visible & readable by the engines.What are everyone's thoughts on this? Completely acceptable or iffy?Thanks
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | DCochrane0 -
DropBox.com High PA & DA?
"What’s up with these dl.dropbox.com High PA & DA links?" You know, It's frustrating to spend almost an entire day getting a few great link backs... then to find out your competitor has hundreds of cheap & easy link backs for the keyword you are going for with greater Authority [according to SEOmoz's OSE]. So I ran a search on one of our top competitors in Open Site Explorer to gather an idea of where the heck they are getting all of their links. Please feel free to copy my actions so you can see what I see. Run a search in OSE for www[dot]webstaurantstore[dot]com. Click on the ‘Anchor Text’ Tab. Click on the first Anchor Text Term, which should be ‘restaurant supplies’ :: Then it will expand, click on the ‘View more links and details in the inbound links section.’ As you scroll down the list you will notice that they have a bunch of linking pages from dl.dropbox.com, all of them are .pdb files, for their targeted Anchor Text, restaurant supplies. Q: So my question is can someone please elaborate on what .pdb files are and how they are getting this to work for them so well? Also you will notice, on the expanded Anchor Text Page, that their 6<sup>th</sup> most powerful link for this phrase (restaurant supplies) seems to be linked straight from a porn site, I thought Google does not rank adult sites like this? Q: For future reference, does anyone know legitimate websites to maybe file an SEO manipulation complaint? Thanks!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Burkett.com0