Problem indexing web developed with Ruby on Rails
-
Hi there!
Here we are again, we are having problems indexing one of our clients, which website has been developed with Ruby on Rails.
It doesnt get the titles right from almost all our pages...Has anyone had the same problem? Any feedback would help a lot...
Thanks!
-
Hi Eduardo,
For the titles this is probably due to google rewriting page titles based on brand searches. They have been experimenting with various ways of displaying titles in the serps for branded searches and if you are searching for 'jobsandtalent' with no spaces then this is a pretty specific search and google is rewriting you title based on it. If you search for your whole page title + brand you will see the normal title as expected. It does not have anything to do with Ruby on Rails.
As for the page rank, this is not a number I place much importance in. I cant remember off hand how often it is updated but it is not all the time. More to the point to be looking a moz domain and page metrics if you ask me. That being said I see your pr as 5 for the root domain www.jobandtalent.oom.
I noticed you seem to be using cookie based redirects from the main domain to the language folder so that if you have entered /es once then going to the .com main page automatically pushes you to .com/es. This can potentially be problematic in terms of google properly indexing you site. I cannot say if this is responsible for your difficulties in rankings but in a competitive sector like job postings I would certainly look changing that so that google (and users) can view all pages of the site in whichever language they choose without being pushed into a language based on cookies.
Hope that helps!
-
Lynn is correct, if you give a look we can see if we spot anything.
When you say they don't get the titles right, Google often changes the titles depending on the search term. But a site:domain.com search should bring up correct titles.
-
Hi Eduardo,
There is no reason why the language the site is developed in would have this affect since the page titles etc that the search engines read are in the final html produced, so if it looks right in the html it should look right to the crawlers. Same goes for the indexing of pages, although in that case there are more potential issues, but again none specific to ruby on rails. Care to give an example so we can have a look?
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
-
Only fraction of the AMP pages are indexed
Back in June, we had seen a sharp drop in traffic on our website. We initially assumed that it was due to the Core Update that was rolled out in early June. We had switched from http to https in May, but thought that should have helped rather than cause a problem. Until early June the traffic was trending upwards. While investigating the issue, I noticed that only a fraction (25%) of the AMP pages have been indexed. The pages don't seem to be getting indexed even though they are valid. Accordingly to Google Analytics too, the percentage of AMP traffic has dropped from 67-70% to 40-45%. I wonder if it is due to the indexing issue. In terms of implementation it seems fine. We are pointing canonical to the AMP page from the desktop version and to the desktop version from the AMP page. Any tips on how to fix the AMP indexing issue. Should I be concerned that only a fraction of the AMP pages are indexed. I really hope you can help in resolving this issue.
Technical SEO | | Gautam1 -
Google is indexing bad URLS
Hi All, The site I am working on is built on Wordpress. The plugin Revolution Slider was downloaded. While no longer utilized, it still remained on the site for some time. This plugin began creating hundreds of URLs containing nothing but code on the page. I noticed these URLs were being indexed by Google. The URLs follow the structure: www.mysite.com/wp-content/uploads/revslider/templates/this-part-changes/ I have done the following to prevent these URLs from being created & indexed: 1. Added a directive in my Htaccess to 404 all of these URLs 2. Blocked /wp-content/uploads/revslider/ in my robots.txt 3. Manually de-inedex each URL using the GSC tool 4. Deleted the plugin However, new URLs still appear in Google's index, despite being blocked by robots.txt and resolving to a 404. Can anyone suggest any next steps? I Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Tom3_150 -
Hidden text and mobile indexing
Hello, I believe mobile indexing 1 st is in place. Since then, does google give the same value to content that is hidden behind a tab (for example a question where you need to click on the + to see the answer) as content that would be directly visible ? Thank you,
Technical SEO | | seoanalytics0 -
Bing indexing at a tiny fraction of Google
I've read through other posts about this but I can't find a solution that works for us. My site is porch.com, 1M+ pages indexed on Google, ~10k on Bing. I've submitted the same sitemaps, and there's nothing different for each bot in our robots file. It looks like Bing is more concerned with our 500 errors than Google, but not sure if that might be causing the issue. Can anyone point me to the right things to be researching/investigating? Fixing errors, sitemap crawling issues, etc. I'm not sure what to spend my time looking into...
Technical SEO | | Porch0 -
Thesis Theme (Nofollow, noindex) Problem
Hi, Im using Thesis theme for one of my wordpress website, for some reason, some of my pages are 'noindex" and 'nofollow" even though i have these boxes unchecked Does anybody know the solution to that? Thanks
Technical SEO | | KentR0 -
What to do with 302 redirects being indexed
Hi there, Our site's forums include permalinks that for some reason uses an intermediary URL that 302 redirects to the URL with the permalink anchor. For example: http://en.tradimo.com/learn/chart-analysis/time-frames/ In the comments, there is a permalink to the following URL; en.tradimo.com/co/50c450005f2b949e3200001b/ (there is no content here, and never has been). This URL 302 redirects to the following final URL: http://en.tradimo.com/learn/chart-analysis/time-frames/?offset=0&limit=20#50c450005f2b949e3200001b The problem is, Google is indexing the redirect URL (en.tradimo.com/co/50c450005f2b949e3200001b/) and showing duplicate content even though we are using the nofollow tag on these links. Ideally, we would directly use the last link rather than redirecting. Alternatively, I'd say a 301 redirect would be preferable. But if both aren't available, is there a way to get these pages out of the index? Is the canonical tag the best way? I really wish I could just add /co/ to the robots.txt file, but I think they would still be in the index, right? Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | etruvian0 -
/index.php/ page
I was wondering if my system creates this page www my domain com/index.php/ is it better to block with robot.txt or just canonize?
Technical SEO | | ciznerguy0 -
Code problem and the impact on links
We have a specific URL naming convention for 'city landing pages': .com/Burbank-CA .com/Boston-MA etc. We use this naming convention almost exclisively as the URLs for links. Our website had a code breakdown and all those URLs within that naming convention led to an error message on the website. Will this impact our links?
Technical SEO | | Storitz0