All META descriptions gone
-
Hi there,
Since almost a week now, all of my optmized META descriptions has been gone in Google. The last few years Google has always shown all of the optimized META descriptions. My website is an ecommerce site (phone accessories) and all pages have its own unique content (url, text, title, description) and score well in Google. The META descriptions are created by using a template like this:
At [brandname] you find lots of [variable category product] * USP 1 * USP 2 * USP 3
All META descriptions differ from each other only by the variable category product.
Something tells me this is an effect of the Panda 4.0 update. I tested with a category page by replacing the META description for a 100% unique one. Then I asked Google (via Webmaster tools) to reindex the page. Today the new description got indexed. This means uniqueness is important.
My question is: how do I get the optimized META descriptions back? Creating real unique descriptions (means not using a template) for every page is very hard for a webhop since all category pages have the same message to tell (only difference is the type of product), I want to use USP's, and META descriptions of all productpages have been lost too (over 15000 different products).
Please help!
Thanks in advance.Marcel
-
Hi Jane,
Thanks for your clarification. Since a higher number of people have asked about META description and title tags changes I guess this is a Panda effect.
I know what to do next, a lot of rewriting work.
Marcel
-
Hi Marcel,
Not sure that this can be put down to Panda: it could be related since Panda deals solely with on-page, but Google works on so many changes at once that it might not be. There is a team dedicated to working on SERP display, optimising click-through from SERPs, etc. so it would be very difficult to say exactly what this relates to. It's definitely been happening (a higher number of people asking in here about why their descriptions and title tags are changing in SERPs) for a few months now.
-
Thanks for your quick responses.
I am going to test further with some pages to see what is needed to do now. Still this is a odd change of Google, because the descriptions were clear to Google users and managed expectations right.
Can I conclude that this (for me) major META descritpion change is a part of Panda 4.0?
Something I noticed is that the description of the page I tested, got three lines of text instead of two. Three lines wouldmake things easier to make unique descriptions. I am testing with other pages now to see the possibilities of this.
Marcel
-
Hi Marcel
Actually, I think the warning signs for this started back in November 2013, when Matt Cutts was asked about meta descriptions and if we should use templates or make them all unique. See this article and this one.
To summarise those articles, he recommended that you should not use a template as a meta description, as you have expected. He recommended unique meta descriptions for all the pages you want to rank, but for other pages it's totally fine to use no meta description at all. Google can generate a decent description for you if you leave the tag out in your HTML.
However, if you want a page to have your own description I'm afraid you'll need a unique one for each. I'd prioritise those products that are your big sellers or those with the best margin and write them first. I would also remove the template ASAP so that you have no description by default and then add them in when you have the time. That's the only way I can see getting your unique descriptions back I'm afraid. Try to work out a priority system with your team.
Hope this helps.
-
Sometimes they do not choose to utilize the meta description and titles I believe because they may think something is more relevant to return based on the specific user query.
As far as I know, you cannot do anything about what gets displayed by the engine. So long as you have checked that each page has it's own unique meta, then there is not much else that you can do.
Your meta may appear as intended for some searches and not for others is what I am really saying. It is the engine's prerogative as to what is displayed based on the user's query and I am seeing more and more that the engine's are ignoring your page/post specific meta tags when it comes to the display.
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
-
Robots.txt vs. meta noindex, follow
Hi guys, I wander what your opinion is concerning exclution via the robots.txt file.
Technical SEO | | AdenaSEO
Do you advise to keep using this? For example: User-agent: *
Disallow: /sale/*
Disallow: /cart/*
Disallow: /search/
Disallow: /account/
Disallow: /wishlist/* Or do you prefer using the meta tag 'noindex, follow' instead?
I keep hearing different suggestions.
I'm just curious what your opinion / suggestion is. Regards,
Tom Vledder0 -
Are correcting missing meta descrption tags a good use of time?
My modest website (shew-design.com) has pulled up nearly sixty crawl errors. Almost all of them are missing meta description tags. One friend who knows SEO better than me says that adding meta tags to EVERY page is not a good use of time. My site is available at shew-design.com I'm just getting started in being serious about applying SEO to our site and I want to make sure I'm making the best use of my time. The other error I'm getting are duplicate page names within different directories (e.g. getting started (for branding), getting started (for web). Is this a huge priority? Would welcome your feedback.
Technical SEO | | Eric_Shew0 -
Meta Description Being Picked up from another site!?
Hi, when we search for a phrase (which is the most searched for phrase for our company) the meta description which is displayed isnt the one we set, and it hasnt picked it up from any text on the page. The description is incorrect, it says we have an office in a city that we dont, and it just isnt a very good description generally. What has been suggested to us by our website developers is that the description is being picked up by google from a website which lists companies details. The description which is displayed on that website, is the same as the description which is shown for our company in the search results. But is it possible for Google to ignore the meta description which is set in our homepage and the other text on the home page, and pickup the text from another website and use it as our description? Many Thanks
Technical SEO | | danieldunn100 -
Issue Missing Meta Description Tag
Hello Friends, Today I found missing meta description tag when Seomoz update my website crawl diagnostics. I recovered other type missing meta description tag but I don't understand how can I recover this type page. Here is the examples. http://www.example.com/blog/page/2/ http://www.example.com/blog/page/3/ http://www.example.com/blog/page/4/ Links continue...... Thanks KLLC
Technical SEO | | KLLC0 -
Will I still get Duplicate Meta Data Errors with the correct use of the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags?
Hi Guys, One of our sites has an extensive number category page lsitings, so we implemented the rel="next" and rel="prev" tags for these pages (as suggested by Google below), However, we still see duplicate meta data errors in SEOMoz crawl reports and also in Google webmaster tools. Does the SEOMoz crawl tool test for the correct use of rel="next" and "prev" tags and not list meta data errors, if the tags are correctly implemented? Or, is it necessary to still use unique meta titles and meta descriptions on every page, even though we are using the rel="next" and "prev" tags, as recommended by Google? Thanks, George Implementing rel=”next” and rel=”prev” If you prefer option 3 (above) for your site, let’s get started! Let’s say you have content paginated into the URLs: http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1
Technical SEO | | gkgrant
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3
http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4 On the first page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=1, you’d include in the section: On the second page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2: On the third page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=3: And on the last page, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=4: A few points to mention: The first page only contains rel=”next” and no rel=”prev” markup. Pages two to the second-to-last page should be doubly-linked with both rel=”next” and rel=”prev” markup. The last page only contains markup for rel=”prev”, not rel=”next”. rel=”next” and rel=”prev” values can be either relative or absolute URLs (as allowed by the tag). And, if you include a <base> link in your document, relative paths will resolve according to the base URL. rel=”next” and rel=”prev” only need to be declared within the section, not within the document . We allow rel=”previous” as a syntactic variant of rel=”prev” links. rel="next" and rel="previous" on the one hand and rel="canonical" on the other constitute independent concepts. Both declarations can be included in the same page. For example, http://www.example.com/article?story=abc&page=2&sessionid=123 may contain: rel=”prev” and rel=”next” act as hints to Google, not absolute directives. When implemented incorrectly, such as omitting an expected rel="prev" or rel="next" designation in the series, we'll continue to index the page(s), and rely on our own heuristics to understand your content.0 -
Best META Fields to Include on New Site
I am in the process of transitioning sites to a Drupal CMS and am curious to know what META information to provide on each of the new site pages. Currently, this is the set-up I plan on using: My questions to the community are: whether or not I've added all pertinent information, and if there's anything I'm overlooking
Technical SEO | | NiallSmith0 -
Is it a bad that my site has the same title and description for directory listings?
I manually listed my site in a few hundred free directories, two paid directores (Joe ant $40, and dirmania $12), and 50 directories that require a reciprocal link ( I paid for a cheap service that gets around having to do the reciprocal). I made the big mistake of having the title and the description for these as the same or very close to the same...is this a huge problem? Should I have my site removed from the free directories or just let it go? I've since stopped focusing on all the directories, and considering saving up to get in Yahoo directory. Working now on getting legit and relevant links from .edu sites.
Technical SEO | | eugenecomputergeeks0 -
I am wondering if I should use the Meta 'Cache" tag?
I am working on removing unnecessary meta tags that have little impact on SEO and I have read so many mixed reviews about using the Meta 'Cache' tag. I need to informative information on whether or not this tag should be used.
Technical SEO | | ImagetecLP0