Weird indexing problem - Can it be solved?
-
Hi
Been building and optimising sites for 15 years and this is one of the hardest problems I ever came across. So any help would be very much appreciated. Here we go:
For some mysterious reason this URL http://weekend.visitsweden.com/no/ has been indexed as http://weekend.visitsweden.com even if we tried all we can to correct it. The problem is that since the latter points to the first URL with a 301 it refuses to get any page rank. Also it does not get visible in Google at all.
Just a recap of what we have tried so far:
- Add site to webmaster tools
- Add proper sitemap.xml
- Add 301 redirect to the correct URL
An easy way to locate the problem is to search for the main content of the site. As you can see it returns the wrong URL and the correct URL does not even get listed.
Again, any help is very much appreciated.
Kind regards
Fredrik
-
Hi there,
This is definitely a crazy problem! It looks like you've done what you should, but Google's ignoring you.
Here's a theory, though: I don't think that Google loves the idea of there being no "home" page; it probably only expects domain.com/home or domain.com/default.asp or domain.com/index.html as alternatives to domain.com, so seeing http://weekend.visitsweden.com/ redirect to http://weekend.visitsweden.com/no/ could be confusing it.
Is there a reason why you don't want http://weekend.visitsweden.com/ to be the homepage?
Kristina
-
That's very strange. Do you have anything conflicting in your htaccess file and redirect plugin (if you're using one)? Does weekend.visitsweden.com (without the /no/) reside on the same servers and is it using conflicting canonical or redirect tags?
weekend.visitsweden.com/ IS getting indexed. I did a search for "Slottet er et av Skånes eldsteog mest bemerkelsesverdige slottmed anertilbake til 1200-tallet" and weekend.visitsweden.com/ was the #2 result. My tools tell me the page has 0 links though. Thought that was odd too.
Have you tried asking Google to specifically deindex weekend.visitsweden.com?
That's all I can think of.
-
And does it do the same thing if you remove the 301 from .com/ to .com/no/ and leave it without a redirect for a while?
-
Forget to mention, this has been discussed before in this thread:
http://moz.com/community/q/visitsweden-indexing-errorUnfortunately those suggestions did not seem to solve the issue.
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 a fraction of the sitemap get indexed
I have a large international website. The content is subdivided in 80 countries, with largely the same content all in English. The URL structure is: https://www.baumewatches.com/XX/page (where XX is the country code)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Lvet
Language annotations hreflang seem to be set up properly In the Google Search Console I registered: https://www.baumewatches.com the 80 instances of https://www.baumewatches.com/XX in order to geo target the directories for each country I have declared a single global sitemap for https://www.baumewatches.com (https://www.baumewatches.com/sitemap_index.xml structured in a hierarchical way) The problem is that the site has been online already for more than 8 months and only 15% of the sitemap URLs have been indexed, with no signs of new indexations in the last 3 months. I cannot think about a solution for this.0 -
Any way to force a URL out of Google index?
As far as I know, there is no way to truly FORCE a URL to be removed from Google's index. We have a page that is being stubborn. Even after it was 301 redirected to an internal secure page months ago and a noindex tag was placed on it in the backend, it still remains in the Google index. I also submitted a request through the remove outdated content tool https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/removals and it said the content has been removed. My understanding though is that this only updates the cache to be consistent with the current index. So if it's still in the index, this will not remove it. Just asking for confirmation - is there truly any way to force a URL out of the index? Or to even suggest more strongly that it be removed? It's the first listing in this search https://www.google.com/search?q=hcahranswers&rlz=1C1GGRV_enUS753US755&oq=hcahr&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j69i60j0l3.1700j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MJTrevens0 -
Problem with Duplicate Page Wordpress
Hi all My name is Riccardo and i work for a web agency. I'am working on a new client website and i have found this kind of errors through MOZ (Image 1). I checked all the URLs; they work and they remind to the Homepage.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | advmedialab
The website is made with Wordpress. I have already tried to solve this problem with 301 redirect but, as i supposed, it didn't work.
I think that is a problem related to Wordpress URL in Wordpress settings (Image 2). However i would like to know if anybody had the same problem or if there are other possibile causes. Thank you in advance! zDVL0pj aB7MeGe0 -
Can bots identify shmushed keywords?
I remember reading some years ago that domains and pages that have smushed keywords, such as cheapbaseballs.com/redbaseball.html could be identified by Google as "cheap baseballs" and "red base ball". Is this still correct?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CFSSEO0 -
How can I get a list of every url of a site in Google's index?
I work on a site that has almost 20,000 urls in its site map. Google WMT claims 28,000 indexed and a search on Google shows 33,000. I'd like to find what the difference is. Is there a way to get an excel sheet with every url Google has indexed for a site? Thanks... Mike
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Defining Canonical First and Later No Indexing
We found some repetitive pages on site which has mostly sort or filter parameters, tried lot to remove them but nothing much improvement Is it correct way that:- a) We are creating new pages altogther of that section and putting up rel canonical tag from old ones to new ones b) Now, after canonical declared, we will noindex the old pages Is it a correct way to let new pages supercede the old pages with new pages.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Modi0 -
Indexing/Sitemap - I must be wrong
Hi All, I would guess that a great number of us new to SEO (or not) share some simple beliefs in relation to Google indexing and Sitemaps, and as such get confused by what Web master tools shows us. It would be great if somone with experience/knowledge could clear this up for once and all 🙂 Common beliefs: Google will crawl your site from the top down, following each link and recursively repeating the process until it bottoms out/becomes cyclic. A Sitemap can be provided that outlines the definitive structure of the site, and is especially useful for links that may not be easily discovered via crawling. In Google’s webmaster tools in the sitemap section the number of pages indexed shows the number of pages in your sitemap that Google considers to be worthwhile indexing. If you place a rel="canonical" tag on every page pointing to the definitive version you will avoid duplicate content and aid Google in its indexing endeavour. These preconceptions seem fair, but must be flawed. Our site has 1,417 pages as listed in our Sitemap. Google’s tools tell us there are no issues with this sitemap but a mere 44 are indexed! We submit 2,716 images (because we create all our own images for products) and a disappointing zero are indexed. Under Health->Index status in WM tools, we apparently have 4,169 pages indexed. I tend to assume these are old pages that now yield a 404 if they are visited. It could be that Google’s Indexed quotient of 44 could mean “Pages indexed by virtue of your sitemap, i.e. we didn’t find them by crawling – so thanks for that”, but despite trawling through Google’s help, I don’t really get that feeling. This is basic stuff, but I suspect a great number of us struggle to understand the disparity between our expectations and what WM Tools yields, and we go on to either ignore an important problem, or waste time on non-issues. Can anyone shine a light on this for once and all? If you are interested, our map looks like this : http://www.1010direct.com/Sitemap.xml Many thanks Paul
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fretts0 -
Can Javascript be SEO friendly?
Is some Javascript SEO friendly? I know that Google Webmaster Guidelines states you should avoid the use of Javascript, (http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=35769), but does any one know if Google can read some Javascript or generally not?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | nicole.healthline0