Sub-pages have no pa
-
I took over a website a few months ago which is not performing well at all for chosen keywords. When I first inspected it, I found a rel canonical tag pointing to the homepage on every page. This was quickly deleted and all the pages were fetched in webmaster tools.
3 months later and the website is still performing badly. When I use the mozbar, it shows that all of the sub-pages have a pa of 1. It is only a small site and all of the pages are linked to on the navbar in a simple way. The links are not made using javascript and all the pages are on the sitemap which is submitted to wmt. I have checked that all of the changes that have been made have been indexed as well.
Could it be possible that google still sees the canonical tag even though its not there? I can't think of any other reason why the pages have no pa or why it is so far behind the competitors despite having better content and links.
Also, the site is appropriate for adults, but I found (among the mess left for me) a meta ratings tag set to "general". This has now been deleted, could it negatively affect rankings?
-
Unfortunately, there's no quick fix for reversing canonicals. If Google is indexing the pages, it's probably fine - I'd double check them with a "site:" operator and see if they're showing up correct (titles, snippets, ranking for exact-match terms, etc.). In some cases, I recommend adding self-referencing rel-canonicals (to counteract the old ones) and it never hurts to have a good XML sitemap in place in GWT. Again, though, you said you're getting indexed, so it may be nothing.
If you want to Private Message me or contact support, we can try to sort out why we're still not crawling the other pages.
-
Thanks Tim, Google has been able to access the pages fine, as the all the pages are showing as indexed in WMT. I just think its odd as after 3 months, the site should have been crawled by moz (as with all other websites I've worked on). There is nothing wrong with the linking structure as all the pages are in the nav bar in simple html. As I said, when I took over the website, they messed up big time with the rel canonical tags all pointing to the homepage. After reading this article by moz (http://moz.com/blog/catastrophic-canonicalization), I'm a little bit worried. What is the correct procedure for fixing incorrect rel canonicals? I thought it was simply a case of removing them, but I might be wrong. Thanks again
-
Hi Mark,
A PA of 1 usually just means that Moz hasn't crawled the page yet. This usually happens when pages are brand new, the site has very few links or the site has a poor internal linking structure.
However, it doesn't mean that Google hasn't crawled the site. Moz crawls far fewer pages than Google does. I would recommend looking through your Webmaster Tools account to see if Google is having any issues indexing the page. Within WMT, you can fetch a page as Google Bot to see if Google is able to access the page.
Without more information, it's hard to say why your pages aren't ranking, but I think Webmaster Tools is a good place to start your investigation.
Tim
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
-
Combining products - edit existing product page or 301 redirect to new page?
We want to combine existing products - e.g. 'hand lotion' and 'body lotion' will become 'hand & body lotion'. As such, we'll need to combine the two product pages into one. What would be the best route to take in terms of SEO to do this? My initial reaction is to create a new product page and then 301 or 302 redirect the old products to the new product page depending on if the change is permanent or temporary. Would you agree? Or am I missing something?
On-Page Optimization | | SwankyApple1 -
Should you do on-page optimization for a page with rel=canonical tag?
If you ad a rel=canonical tag to a page, should you still optimize that page? I'm talking meta description, page title, etc.
On-Page Optimization | | marynau0 -
Where to position a new page?
Hi there 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | Enrico_Cassinelli
Our website is about a particular region in Italy, the Langhe area, famous for food and wine (barolo and barbaresco are produced here). We need to rollout a few new pages about cellar/winery tours: one main page with the list of tours, and the various subpages for each tour. We already have a page about travel, and a page about wine (with a sub-page about wineries). The URLs looks like:
langhe.net/travel/
langhe.net/wine/wineries/
(Note: i'm translating from italian here) Now, I'm wondering where is better to position the new pages:
langhe.net/travel/winery-tours/name-of-tour/ or
langhe.net/wine/wineries/tours/name-of-tour/ From an SEO perspective (within my limited experience) the first option has a shorter URL, but the second feels more "natural" to me. What do you think? Thanks 🙂
Best0 -
Locating Duplicate Pages
Hi, Our website consists of approximately 15,000 pages however according to our Google Webmaster Tools account Google has around 26,000 pages for us in their index. I have run through half a dozen sitemap generators and they all only discover the 15,000 pages that we know about. I have also thoroughly gone through the site to attempt to find any sections where we might be inadvertently generating duplicate pages without success. It has been over six months since we did any structural changes (at which point we did 301's to the new locations) and so I'd like to think that the majority of these old pages have been removed from the Google Index. Additionally, the number of pages in the index doesn't appear to be going down by any discernable factor week on week. I'm certain it's nothing to worry about however for my own peace of mind I'd like to just confirm that the additional 11,000 pages are just old results that will eventually disappear from the index and that we're not generating any duplicate content. Unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a way to download a list of the 26,000 pages that Google has indexed so that I can compare it against our sitemap. Obviously I know about site:domain.com however this only returned the first 1,000 results which all checkout fine. I was wondering if anybody knew of any methods or tools that we could use to attempt to identify these 11,000 extra pages in the Google index so we can confirm that they're just old pages which haven’t fallen out of the index yet and that they’re not going to be causing us a problem? Thanks guys!
On-Page Optimization | | ChrisHolgate0 -
Page Title - What is better?
Hi SEO Heads, I have another question if someone would be so kind in answering What page title of the 2 below is better for SEO (i) Chocolate Cake|Chocolate Cake Recipe|Xmas Cake or (ii) Chocolate Cake | Chocolate Cake Recipe | Xmas Cake As you can see (ii) Page Title has a space before and after the | (vertical bar) I know the second page title looks better to human eyes but on some pages I had to forego the space so i could fit my keywords in the page title. is this a good idea? Can anyone help me? Cheers Aidan
On-Page Optimization | | aidanlawlor0 -
Page Title
My website was hacked last November and then again last week. Prior to the hacking we were at number one in Google.co.uk for our main search term "nile cruises' for years. After last November's hacking we dropped to about position 4 and after last week we are at position 7. Ima rebuilding the lost data and I am having to create new Title and Description meta data for each of the indexed pages. I am taking the opportunity to try and ensure my titles and descriptions are good and the correct length, etc but wondered about the best title format. I set our home page title over the weekend as: Nile Cruise | Leading ABTA & ATOL Bonded UK Nile Cruise Specialist I was going to try and cover 3 keyphrases in the title like this: Nile Cruise | Nile Cruises | Nile Cruise Bargains But I thought that might look a bit spammy because the 3 phrases are very similar. I wondered what anyone else might suggest? Thanks, Colin
On-Page Optimization | | NileCruises0 -
Main page deindexed by google.
3 days ago our main page('/') has stopped appear in google results. Rest of pages works fine. Even our main page from canadian version of site with similar content works fine. Some times canadian page appears for key word where we had our com version before. But I think this is just result of disappearing com version. Any suggestion were to look? Messages box in google webmastertools is empty. Could this be the question too long page title? PS: Does any way exist to check if we were punished by Google and reason of this? For Bing and Yahoo everything works fine. PPS: We have just found that "cache:our_site.com" and "info:our_site.com" returns in google our_site.ca. So this should be reason of problem. So now we are looking how to fix this.
On-Page Optimization | | ctam0