Ranking report problem
-
Hello,
I have two things that I'm a little concerned.
- Ranking report is not working because all these keywords were on google first page but the report is showing the calendar sign
- Crawl results, I just went from 5000 warnings and errors to 4 in two weeks. It seems a little crazy
-
Matt,
Can you send me a email at help@seomoz.org. I want to take a look at your crawl results too, makes sure to let me know which crawl your results came from by letting me know the campaign
I will wait for you there!
Peter
SEOmoz Help Team. -
Hi there,
That definitely looks interesting. I started a ticket for you to go over the issues in a little more in-depth. Roger is definitely acting a little strange, I want to take a better look at it to see if this is an issue on our end. Once you get that email if you could go over what you were seeing before vs. now, I could give a better response on what is going on.
Hope that helps,
Peter
SEOmoz Help Team. -
Well in that case I think Roger had a lazy week indeed! Hopefully it will be fixed soon!
-
Yes, I did some changes, but I don't think that the changes were that good to cancel that many problems at once. I'm wondering the overall reliability of SEOmoz services, because both ranking and crawling are all off.
-
Yes, the keywords were already in SEOMoz since beginning and they were all in 1st page on the report.
-
This week's crawl results were a little crazy for us too.
We dropped to 1 error (-171), and to 48 warnings (-538), yet most of the issues not reported this week are still most definitely there. I guess roger was having a lazy week?
-
About the rankings: did the tool show rankings for those keywords before? If so, I would write SEOmoz support to help you out (or wait until tuesday to see what happens). If those keywords are recently added you'll just have to wait until the new update.
The drop in the errors in huge indeed. Do you know what kind of errors it were? Did you change a lot on the site? It's hard to give you an answer not knowing the issues.
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
-
Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
How specific do I have to be when adding keyword to the meta title which I am trying to rank for?
I am looking for some clarity on what exactly you need to spell out for google in the exact match and what google understands in terms of using keywords in your meta title which I am trying to rank for. For example if my category page is for women's top, with both printed and solid color options, would it be ok to write- "Women's Tops: Printed & Solid Shirts & Tunics" and be able to rank for women's tops, women's printed tops, women's solid shirts etc. or would I have to be more specific and use women's as the keyword modifier before each term and write- "Women's Tops, Women's Printed & Solid Shirts, Women's Tunics"?
On-Page Optimization | | whiteonlySEO0 -
Site Not Ranking for Key Term
Question for my fellow Mozers I have a ranking question that I cannot put my finger on. I have a site (visitplano.com) where the client wants to rank for the keyword "Plano". I can't say if the site was previously ranking for this keyword, but I looked into the basic SEO practices and found that the keyword is incorporated in: Domain Title Content There is a lack of internal linking and anchor text within the content External links - 1,558 DA - 46 PA - 55 Currently, the website does not rank for the keyword "Plano". Could someone shed some light on why they aren't ranking or what I may be missing? I would greatly appreciate your help.
On-Page Optimization | | flcity150 -
Home Page Keywords not Ranking and Assigned to Inside Pages
Hi, thank you for taking the time to read this. We have a few websites with the same problem. I will use http://www.prepared-meals.com as an example: The home page was ranking on page one for keyword "Prepared Meals". The site is about 6 months old. We use the Moz page optimizer on all pages of our websites to score an A rating. Recently we found the home page is no longer showing up in search results and the keyword "prepared meals" now points to an inside page that is not relevant: http://www.prepared-meals.com/Senior-Meals/Moms-Meals-Reviews.html this page shows up for Prepared Meals around page 15 in Google results. We have read keywords in the URL might be the issue, even though the page optimizer in MOZ says to do that. We are wondering if this is the issue or there is some other problem we are not aware of. Again, thank you for you for your time. -Craig
On-Page Optimization | | CraigSWD0 -
Why are my rankings down?
My rankings seem to be going down all the time. Any idea why? www.rewardcharts4kids.com Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | nicolebd0 -
Is reported duplication on the pages or their canonical pages?
There are several sections getting flagged for duplication on one of our sites: http://mysite.com/section-1/?something=X&confirmed=true
On-Page Optimization | | Safelincs
http://mysite.com/section-2/?something=X&confirmed=true
http://mysite.com/section-3/?something=X&confirmed=true Each of the above are showing as having duplicates of the other sections. Indeed, these pages are exactly the same (it's just an SMS confirmation page you enter your code in), however, they all have canonical links back to the section (without the query string), i.e. section-1, section-2 and section-3 respectively. These three sections have unique content and aren't flagged up for duplications themselves, so my questions are: Are the pages with the query strings the duplicates, and if so why are the canonical links being ignored? or Are the canonical pages without the query strings the duplicates, and if so why don't they appear as URLs in their own right in the duplicate content report? I am guessing it's the former, but I can't figure out why it would ignore the canonical links. Any ideas? Thanks0 -
What is causing Bing and Google Rankings to Differ by so much?
Does anyone know the trick to have Google Rankings to be as good as Bing/Yahoo Results?
On-Page Optimization | | hfranz0 -
Problem with fresh content on homepage
On my site my homepage acts as sort of a landing page that is geared towards getting the customer sign up (almost like a PPC landing page aside from a few navigation options...about, blog, contact and the legal docs in the footer). My blog is geared towards other businesses in the industry and the like minded tech people. My problem:
On-Page Optimization | | JasonJackson
From a user perspective I don't feel that blog snippets would add anything useful to the homepage. However, I feel like I fresh content would help my SEO endeavors. Suggestions? Note:
Should be mentioned that all my social stuff is deeply integrated into my /blog so importing tweets, for example, is out of the question.0
