Previously ranking #1 in google, web page has 301 / url rewrite, indexed but now showing for keyword search?
-
Two web pages on my website, previously ranked well in google, consistent top 3 places for 6months+, but when the site was modified, these two pages previously ending .php had the page names changed to the keyword to further improve (or so I thought). Since then the page doesn't rank at all for that search term in google.
I used google webmaster tools to remove the previous page from Cache and search results, re submitted a sitemap, and where possible fixed links to the new page from other sites. On previous advice to fix I purchased links, web directories, social and articles etc to the new page but so far nothing... Its been almost 5 months and its very frustrating as these two pages previously ranked well and as a landing page ended in conversions.
This problem is only appearing in google. The pages still rank well in Bing and Yahoo. Google has got the page indexed if I do a search by the url, but the page never shows under any search term it should, despite being heavily optimised for certain terms. I've spoke to my developers and they are stumped also, they've now added this text to the effected page(s) to see if this helps.
Header("HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently");
$newurl=SITE_URL.$seo;
Header("Location:$newurl");Can Google still index a web page but refuse to show it in search results? All other pages on my site rank well, just these two that were once called something different has caused issues?
Any advice? Any ideas, Have I missed something? Im at a loss...
-
Do you want to give me the old url to double check for you? You can personal message me if you don't want it to be public.
-
I should also say that was for the old URL it says Success with the button "submit to index" no mention of any 301?
-
Ran the fetch as google, says Success with a button "submit to index". Should I click the submit button?
-
If you used the remove URL tool to only remove page 1 from the index then that's why it won't be ranking, I'm guessing page 2 wasn't removed using this tool? I don't think the canonical tag would help you in this situation as you're now telling Google that page 2 is the same as a page you've already told them not to index!
Just to confirm, when you used the redirect checker did you put in the old url and it says 301? It's worth using the fetch as GoogleBot tool inside Webmaster tools and then adding the old url to be crawled again so that they can see it has been moved permanently. If the 301 was only implemented properly 2 weeks ago there is still the chance it will come back!
-
Thanks for the advice, just checked and it is saying "301 Moved Permanently" Which I'm assuming is correct.
But I must admit Im confused as to why the page is not ranking well. The page is a list of products and it ran on to a second page, the url being the same just with /page-2 at the end. Weirdly the page 2 started ranking but not the original. I then added rel="canonical" back to the original page, thinking this would help, but all this did was stop indexing page 2 and the original page still doesn't show...
Tearing my hair out!!!
The latest 301 redirect code was added 2 weeks ago, it did have 301 redirect before, but it was done in a different way...
**Previous Code : **
Header("Location:/$seo,true,301"); -
It sounds like you went about this in the wrong way. What you should have done first is 301 redirect the old url to the new url and then update all you sites links to also point to the new url. You have used webmaster tools to specifically tell Google not to index that page and therefore it has lost all of it's authority (the 301 would have passed most of the authority on from the start)
Use this tool and insert your old url and make sure the header returned definitely says "301 Moved permanently". How long ago was the 301 implemented? It may still recover once Google picks up the redirect.
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
-
Paginated category pages still showing in Google
Despite our blog using rel=next and rel=”prev” we’re still finding paginated pages getting impressions in Google, suggesting they are taking up unnecessary crawl budget. An example is: https://www.theukdomain.uk/seo/page/2/ What steps would you recommend I take to most benefit my sites SEO? Thanks, Sam
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sjefferies0 -
Keyword not provided now in search console
Hello, Is the not provided now available in google search console ? It seems that it is or is it a totally different thing in the search console ? Thank you,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Product Pages not indexed by Google
We built a website for a jewelry company some years ago, and they've recently asked for a meeting and one of the points on the agenda will be why their products pages have not been indexed. Example: http://rocks.ie/details/Infinity-Ring/7170/ I've taken a look but I can't see anything obvious that is stopping pages like the above from being indexed. It has a an 'index, follow all' tag along with a canonical tag. Am I missing something obvious here or is there any clear reason why product pages are not being indexed at all by Google? Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Update I was told 'that each of the product pages on the full site have corresponding page on mobile. They are referred to each other via cannonical / alternate tags...could be an angle as to why product pages are not being indexed.'
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RobbieD910 -
Showing Different Content To Members & Non-Members/Google and Cloaking Risk
How do we safely show logged-in members/Google one type of content on a page and logged out/non-members another kind of content without getting slammed for cloaking? Right now we do this thing where we show Google everything on the page, but new visitors partial forum comments with the pitch to sign up and see full comments. So far, we have not gotten into trouble for this. The new idea is to show non-members a lot of marketing messages and one kind of navigation and then once they sign up and are logged in, show different or no marketing messages and a different kind of navigation. How do we stay out of trouble with this? Where is the cloaking line drawn? It's got me kinda nervous. Thanks... Darcy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Does Google still don't index Hashtag Links ? No chance to get a Search Result that leads directly to a section of a page? or to one of numeras Hashtag Pages in a single HTML page?
Does Google still don't index Hashtag Links ? No chance to get a Search Result that leads directly to a section of a page? or to one of numeras Hashtag Pages in a single HTML page? If I have 4 or 5 different hashtag link section pages , consolidated into one HTML Page, no chance to get one of the Hashtag Pages to appear as a search result? like, if under one Single Page Travel Guide I have two essential sections: #Attractions #Visa no chance to direct search queries for Visa directly to the Hashtag Link Section of #Visa? Thanks for any help
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Muhammad_Jabali0 -
Why the archive sub pages are still indexed by Google?
Why the archive sub pages are still indexed by Google? I am using the WordPress SEO by Yoast, and selected the needed option to get these pages no-index in order to avoid the duplicate content.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MichaelNewman1 -
Adding Orphaned Pages to the Google Index
Hey folks, How do you think Google will treat adding 300K orphaned pages to a 4.5 million page site. The URLs would resolve but there would be no on site navigation to those pages, Google would only know about them through sitemap.xmls. These pages are super low competition. The plot thickens, what we are really after is to get 150k real pages back on the site, these pages do have crawlable paths on the site but in order to do that (for technical reasons) we need to push these other 300k orphaned pages live (it's an all or nothing deal) a) Do you think Google will have a problem with this or just decide to not index some or most these pages since they are orphaned. b) If these pages will just fall out of the index or not get included, and have no chance of ever accumulating PR anyway since they are not linked to, would it make sense to just noindex them? c) Should we not submit sitemap.xml files at all, and take our 150k and just ignore these 300k and hope Google ignores them as well since they are orhpaned? d) If Google is OK with this maybe we should submit the sitemap.xmls and keep an eye on the pages, maybe they will rank and bring us a bit of traffic, but we don't want to do that if it could be an issue with Google. Thanks for your opinions and if you have any hard evidence either way especially thanks for that info. 😉
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | irvingw0 -
Keywords repetition in both post/page title+url path or spread between both of them?
Hello all, I have one doubt concernig SEO optimization as I am buiding the structure of my website to be sound with the Keywords I am targeting: I have read that the post/page name is very important (selecting the right keywords you are targeting and the lenght) and also the url path name, taking into account both keywords+lengt. I still have the doubt if (Imagine I am considering 5 keywords for SEO.): 1) OPTION 1 I should use as far as it is possible, the 5 keywords in the post/page title and repeat the 5 same keywords in the url path name? OR 2) OPTION 2 I should use these 5 keywords spread between title and url path? I mean maybe I use 3 keywords in the post/page name and 2 keywords in the url path, but my main concern is as search engines gives more weight in SEO for post/page name rather than to the url path name, maybe I will miss 2 of the keywords I used in the url path name? My choice would be OPTION 2 as I can have: Shorter post/page name - Shorter url path name. More caracters for targeting the keywords: 75 (from post/page name) + 115 (from url path name). I avoid repetition of keywords in both title and url path. Thank you very much, Antonio
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | aalcocer20030