Homepage refusing to show up in Google (rest of pages fine)
-
edit
-
Ah, I was wondering since they may have entirely different pricing based upon who you talk to.
-
SiteLock
-
So, on an invoice, do you or the client pay Incapsula or SiteLock?
-
Exactly, I've been told that these problems surfaced around the time the firewall was put up. I've just removed the timthumb file and I'm working on disavowing the spammy links pointing to us. I'm considering ditching sitelock in the next few days and seeing if that helps at all. We were also looking at Sucuri as a firewall option as well.
-
All of the header checks I've done come back with Incapsula. I don't really want to get much further into that for a number of reasons. But if you're actually paying SiteLock that's pretty interesting.
But you're saying the site ranked for it's brand term, at least, before implementing either SiteLock or Incapsula?
-
This is a huge help. I spent some time yesterday going through the site and updating my links to https where possible. Those don't all appear to have indexed yet. The bit about the timthumb exploit is particularly helpful. My theme lets me disable that, and I can get rid of the timthumb php file. I'm still concerned that sitelock could be exaggerating the problem though, we started having these issues with google around when it was implemented.
-
The site is using Incapsula as a CDN and web application firewall. The site still has a timthumb file. So I wouldn't recommend stepping out from behind that right now.
A wildcard search on the domain yields a lot of spam backlinks. Check ahrefs.
-
The entire site appears to index fine. As Patrick pointed out, it appears some of the pages in the index aren't https. But I don't know when you made the move, so things may be chugging right along.
The issue is ranking. But I know what you mean.
So what we have is (not all bad, per se - just what I see):
- Previously hacked site
- Timthumb file
- Some very spammy links
- HTTPS implemented on unknown date
- Moved to CDN / WAF
- Redirects
No doubt, you're going to have to disavow the bad links. Take down requests are nice and all, and you should note them in your disavow submission, but you don't have to manually contact each individual link/domain. It's not really a fire-and-forget process. You can submit it more than once.
I would bet a shiny nickle the attack/hack exploited the timthumb file. The site still uses it. Stop using it. Find an alternative. All it does is resize images.
The https migration (redirects... etc.) is just a confounding factor.
After you've removed the timthumb file, request a security review. Also consider the site may still have issues from the hack. So fetch as google from Webmaster Tools. If you see anything different than the real page, you still have a problem.
Read a little more about recovering from a hacked site here. I think that's more than likely the core of the problem right now.
-
Let me guess - you're using SiteLock after you were hacked to keep them out?
SiteLock creates this issue frequently (we solved it for another Q&A user about a month ago.)
Disable SiteLock, check your settings are all right in Webmasters Tools and Fetch the page in WMT. Add a link to it on Google+ so it gets recrawled quickly.
I only see 1 backlink to the site from Ahrefs (https://ahrefs.com/site-explorer/overview/subdomains?target=www.newstaradhesives.com) and only 2 in Majestic (https://majestic.com/reports/site-explorer?folder=&q=www.newstaradhesives.com)
Very, very low authority & SiteLock - those would be the two I'd start with.
-
It absolutely was very hacked. I'm currently in the process of submitting takedowns manually for those spam posts in google's index. The site has been cleaned up and relaunched since. Could these be harming the indexing of the homepage as well?
-
I think Incapsula is throwing the false noindex tag. But yeah, that's just how Incapsula do. The home page shows just fine with a site: operator.
Judging by the anchor text I see pointed at the site... and the Timthumbs.php file... the site was very very hacked at some point.
Edit: Yep. It was hacked until late last year.
-
Hi Patrick
Thanks for taking a look. If I could ask, where are you seeing this noindex tag and what are you using to see it? I've got my homepage set up in the yoast seo plugin to index and follow, and I had also previously added a into my header just to make sure. My suspicion is that the sitelock firewall installed on our site right now is blocking robots. Does this make any sense?
Thanks again
-
I wanted to attach this image - in my crawl, I am getting a "noindex,nofollow" but your code isn't showing it. I would check with your web development team to see what exactly is happening and how this can be fixed.
-
Hi there
It appears your homepage has a "noindex,nofollow" tag - change this to "index,follow". Make sure this is fixed across the site.
If for some reason that doesn't work (which it will):
Have you checked to see if you have a manual action?
If you have multiple URLs going on with the same content - check your canonical tags and make sure you do a content audit to see if this information can be removed, consolidated, or updated. Your SSL seems to not be configured properly also.
I would also make sure that you do a backlink audit to see if any links can be removed or updated. Also, check your local SEO presence and that everything is on point and consistent. Same with on-site SEO.
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
-
Dead end pages are really an issue?
Hi all, We have many pages which are help guides to our features. These pages do not have anymore outgoing links (internal / external). We haven't linked as these are already 4th level pages and specific about particular topic. So these are technically dead end pages. Do these pages really hurt us? We need to link to some other pages? Thanks
Web Design | | vtmoz0 -
Links not visible in "Google cache text version" but visible in "Fetch as Google" in Webmaster tool
Hi Guys, There seems some issue with the coding due to which Google is not indexing half of our menu bar links. The cached text version of http://www.99acres.com/ is not showing links present in dropdown "All India" , dropdown "Advice" and "Hot Projects" tab in blue bar on top menu whereas these links are visible in "Fetch as Google" in Google Webmaster tool. Any clue to why is there a difference between the links shown in Google webmaster and Google cache text version. Thanks in advance 🙂
Web Design | | vivekrathore0 -
Fixing my sites problem with duplicate page content
My site has a problem with duplicate page content. SEO MOZ is telling me 725 pages worth. I have looked a lot into the 301 Re direct and the Rel=canonical Tag and I have a few questions: First of all, I'm not sure which on I should use in this case. I have read that the 301 Redirect is the most popular path to take. If I take this path do I need to go in and change the URL of each of these pages or does it automatically change with in the redirect when I plug in the old URL and the new one? Also, do I need to just go to each page that SEO MOZ is telling me is a duplicate and make a redirect of that page? One thing that I am very confused about is the fact that some of these duplicates listed out are actually different pages on my site. So does this just mean the URL's are too similar to each other, and there fore need the redirect to fix them? Then on the other hand I have a log in page that says it has 50 duplicates. Would this be a case in which I would use the Canonical Tag and would put it into each duplicate so that the SE knew to go to the original file? Sorry for all of the questions in this. Thank you for any responses.
Web Design | | JoshMaxAmps0 -
Site with no ads hit by Page Layout update?
Hi there! Can a site that has no ads on it be hit by Google's latest Page Layout update? Can it be hit for just one or two keywords? My site (www.ink2paper.com) has a decline in Google organic traffic in early Feb so my suspicion is the Page Layout update. However I have no ads on the site. Digging into GWMT I find that it is only one or 2 keywords that seems to have taken a dive, mainly [photo paper]. I used to get around 80 imps a day for this term. Then on 6 Feb it was down to 50; 7 Feb = 34; 8 Feb just 4 impressions! I got a spike back at usual levels on 10 & 11 Feb, but since then it has been back down to only 5 or so impressions a day. [photographic paper] took a small hit at the start of February, but has nose dived since the start of April. The homepage performs well for Google organic traffic - low bounce (22%) and good ecom conversion rate (14%) - although this is likely to be largely branded traffic. I feel my site is a 'good' result for the search term [photo paper], although there is always room for improvement of course! Any suggestions as to why Google has stopped showing my site for these keywords? All help is greatly appreciated. Cheers,
Web Design | | SimonHogg
Simon0 -
Is there SEO penalties for having .htm homepage?
In the past, I have had very good SEO rankings but have recently slipped. I am trying everything I can. Only my home page has domain/index.htm while all other pages have .html suffixes. I have been reluctant to change the home page worrying that it could further hurt my SEO. QUESTION Does it even matter? If so, will changing home page to .html have any adverse effects for SEO?
Web Design | | Kurtyj0 -
Sites went from page 1 to page 40 + in results
Hello all We are looking for any insight we can get as to why all (except 1) of our sites were effected very badly in the rankings by Google since the Panda updates. Several of our sites londonescape.com dublinescape.com and prague, paris, florence, delhi, dubai and a few others (all escape.com urls) have had major drop in their rankings. LondonEscape.net (now.com (changed after rank drop) ), was ranked between 4th & 6th but is now down around 400th and DelhiEscape.net and MunichEscape.com were both number 1 for several years for our main key words We also had two Stay sites number 1 , AmsterdamStay and NewYorkstay both .com ranked number 1 for years , NewYork has dropped to 10th place so far the Amsterdam site has not been effected. We are not really sure what we did wrong. MunichEscape and DelhiEcape should never have been page 1 sites ) just 5 pages and a click thru to main site WorldEscape) but we never did anything to make them number 1. London, NewYork and Amsterdam sites have had regular new content added, all is checked to make sure its original. **Since the rankings drop ** LondonEscape.com site We have redirected the.net to the .com url Added a mountain of new articles and content Redesigned the site / script Got a fair few links removed from sites, any with multiple links to us. A few I have not managed yet to get taken down. So far no result in increased rankings. We contacted Google but they informed us we have NOT had a manual ban imposed on us, we received NO mails from Google informing us we had done anything wrong. We were hoping it would be a 6 month ban but we are way past that now. Anyone any ideas ?
Web Design | | WorldEscape0 -
Combining web pages and it's affects on SEO?
We are looking into amending a website we are working on to try and combine 2 or 3 current pages onto one page. This site is similar to an estate agents site and currently has images, map, floor plan sub pages etc. Can anyone tell me, if we were to combine these pages and include the above details on one page, how that would affect the current search engine rankings?
Web Design | | SoundinTheory0 -
Dynamic pages and code within content
Hi all, I'm considering creating a dynamic table on my site that highlights rows / columns and cells depending on buttons that users can click. Each cell in the table links to a separate page that is created dynamically pulling information from a database. Now I'm aware of the google guidelines: "If you decide to use dynamic pages (i.e., the URL contains a "?" character), be aware that not every search engine spider crawls dynamic pages as well as static pages. It helps to keep the parameters short and the number of them few." So we wondered whether we could put the dynamic pages in our sitemap so that google could index them - the pages can be seen with javascript off which is how the pages are manipulated to make them dynamic. Could anyone give us a overview of the dangers here? I also wondered if you still need to separate content from code on a page? My developer still seems very keen to use inline CSS and javascript! Thanks a bundle.
Web Design | | tgraham0