Avoiding the "sorry we have no imagery here" G-maps error
-
Hi there, we recently did a redesign on a big site and added Gmaps locations to almost every page since we are related to Real State, Listings, Details, search results all have a map embedded.
While looking at GWT I found that the top keywords on our site (which is in spanish) are the following.
- have
- here
- imagery
- sorry
After a quick search I found out this is a Gmaps bug, when Google Bot accesses the Pages it throws an error out with this text repeated several times. If you do a search for "sorry we have no imagery here" you will see lots of sites with this issue.
My question is, Is this affecting the overall SEO since Bots are actually crawling and indexing this hence its being reported by GWT, Should I cloak this to robots? Has anyone noticed this or has been able to fix it?
Thanks in advance!
-
Hmmm.. seems to be a very common issue.
How about creating script that fires the map load on a div that loads a static map image instead of the iframe by default? Then using a simple function switch that image to the iframe of the map. That should do it for the "sorry we have no imagery here" problem.
If it doesn't, you could try using some kind of internal catching to get the static image and save it in your server to serve that as the "1st" image, you can then load the iframe.
Hope that makes sense
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
-
Linking Anchor Text is simply "." what is the purpose of this?
I have several backlinks with high spam scores. The anchor text as listed is either just a period, or it says there is no anchor text. These links don't generate traffic and there is no way for me to contact the website owner. Is this a case for the Search Console Disavow Tool?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Harley.Helmer0 -
Am I over "Optimising My Site" or following "Best Practice"
Hi We're developing our site an wanted to ask if we are "over optimising" or following best practice. Maybe you have some recommendations. I've provided 4 examples below. Eventually we'll use Moz on page grader but as a new start up, I'd appreciate your help. Thank you, Faye. 1. URL: http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/browns/cipressa/ PAGE TITLE: Cipressa | Engineered Brown Wood | The Wood Galleries H1: Cipressa – Engineered Brown Wood KEYWORD: Engineered Brown Wood META: Buy Cipressa Brown Engineered Wood, available at The Wood Galleries, London. Provides an Exceptional Foundation for Elegant Décor & Extravagant Furnishings. IMAGE TAG: Brown Engineered Flooring KEYWORD IN BODY CONTENT: YES (1) 2. URL: http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/beiges/mauro/ H1: Mauro | Beige Engineered Wood | The Wood Galleries PAGE TITLE: Mauro – Beige Engineered Wood KEYWORD: Beige Engineered Wood META: Buy Mauro Beige Engineered Wood Flooring, available at The Wood Galleries, London. Designed to deliver Rich, Dark Undertones with Light hues of Muted Brown. IMG TAG: Beige Wood Flooring KEYWORD IN BODY CONTENT: YES (2) **3. URL: http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/beiges/vela-oak/ ** H1: Vela – Beige Engineered Oak PAGE TITLE: Vela | Beige Engineered Oak | The Wood Galleries KEYWORD: Beige Engineered Oak META: Buy Vela Beige Engineered Oak Wood, available at The Wood Galleries, London. Crafted from the most widely respected hardwoods in the world. IMG TAG: Engineered Oak Flooring KEYWORD IN BODY CONTENT: YES (1) 4. URL: http://www.thewoodgalleries.co.uk/engineered-wood/darks-blacks/ciro-rustic/ H1: Ciro – Engineered Rustic Wood PAGE TITLE: Ciro | Engineered Rustic Wood | The Wood Galleries KEYWORD: Engineered Rustic Wood META: Buy Ciro Engineered Rustic Wood, at The Wood Galleries, London. Its stylishly classic oak look exudes a sense of luxury that is simply undeniable. IMG TAG: Dark Wood Flooring, The Wood Galleries KEY WORD IN BODY CONTENT: YES (2)
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Faye2340 -
G.A. question - removing a specific page's data from total site's results?
I hope I can explain this clearly, hang in there! One of the clients of the law firm I work for does some SEO work for the firm and one thing he has been doing is googling a certain keyword over and over again to trick google's auto fill into using that keyword. When he runs his program he generates around 500 hits to one of our attorney's bio pages. This happens once or twice a week, and since I don't consider them real organic traffic it has been really messing up my GA reports. Is there a way to block that landing page from my overall reports? Or is there a better way to deal with the skewed data? Any help or advice is appreciated, I am still so new to SEO I feel like a lot of my questions are obvious, but please go easy on me!
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | MyOwnSEO0 -
Why are "outdated" or "frowned upon" tactics still dominating?
Hey, my first post here. I recently picked up a new client in real estate for a highly competitive market. One trend I'm noticing with all the top sites they are doing old tactics such as:
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Jay328
-Paid Directories
-Terrible/Spam Directories
-Overuse of exact text keywords for example: City name + real estate
-Blogroll/link exchange
-Tons of meta key words
-B.S. press releases blog commenting with kw as name Out of all the competition there is only one guy who is following the rules of today. One thing I'm noticing is that nobody is doing legit guest blogging, has great social presence, has awesome on page, etc. It's pretty frustrating as I'm trying to follow the rules and seeing these guys kill it by doing "bad seo". Anybody else find themselves in this situation? I know I'm probably beating a dead horse but I needed to vent about this 😉2 -
How does Google decide what content is "similar" or "duplicate"?
Hello all, I have a massive duplicate content issue at the moment with a load of old employer detail pages on my site. We have 18,000 pages that look like this: http://www.eteach.com/Employer.aspx?EmpNo=26626 http://www.eteach.com/Employer.aspx?EmpNo=36986 and Google is classing all of these pages as similar content which may result in a bunch of these pages being de-indexed. Now although they all look rubbish, some of them are ranking on search engines, and looking at the traffic on a couple of these, it's clear that people who find these pages are wanting to find out more information on the school (because everyone seems to click on the local information tab on the page). So I don't want to just get rid of all these pages, I want to add content to them. But my question is... If I were to make up say 5 templates of generic content with different fields being replaced with the schools name, location, headteachers name so that they vary with other pages, will this be enough for Google to realise that they are not similar pages and will no longer class them as duplicate pages? e.g. [School name] is a busy and dynamic school led by [headteachers name] who achieve excellence every year from ofsted. Located in [location], [school name] offers a wide range of experiences both in the classroom and through extra-curricular activities, we encourage all of our pupils to “Aim Higher". We value all our teachers and support staff and work hard to keep [school name]'s reputation to the highest standards. Something like that... Anyone know if Google would slap me if I did that across 18,000 pages (with 4 other templates to choose from)?
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Eteach_Marketing0 -
Black Hat? Is it really possible my new client paid someone to SEO the word "here"?
I just took on a client and first thing I saw in Webmaster Tools was the dreaded "Unnatural Link Patterns" message dated Apr 7th, 2012. MajesticSEO is reporting 212 backlinks, OSE is reporting 251. Nothing out of the ordinary, in fact they only anchor text is their brand. However, we then ran an SEO PowerSuite Crawl and found 429 backlinks with 78.1% of links use the anchor text "here" and 77.9% of all links point to the same URL. If this is indeed true I can see why they got the message from Google. The company has admitted they hired a service to do SEO for $299/mo for several months but when they saw no results they quit. Could this company really have gone after "here". It not, I can't find anything that would give them the message they got from Google Webmaster Tools.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | Dweber0 -
Best Link Building Practices to Avoid Over Optimizing
With all the new over opting talk, one of the things mentioned is having the same anchored text linking to a page over and over without variation. Is there a good estimate on how many external linking in keywords should be exact versus how many should be in variation? Also, keeping value of pages links in mind. Would it be best to use [Exact] phrase for the higher PR sites or more relevant higher traffic sites? and save the long tail or keyword variation text for the lesser valued sites. When to use exact phrase and when to long tail is my question/discussion I always stay relevant in my link building, and all my links are liking within context. Because I know that relevancy has been an important factor. After watching this video from Matt Cutt's http://youtu.be/KyCYyoGusqs I assume relevancy is becoming even more of an important factor.
White Hat / Black Hat SEO | | SEODinosaur0
