Index problems
-
“The website http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/nl/ does not show in the index of Google (site:vaneyckshutters.com/nl/). This must be the homepage in the Netherlands. Previously, the page www.vaneyckshutters.com was redirected to /nl/. This page is accessible now with a canonical tag to http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/nl/ in the hope to let /nl/ be indexed. When we look at the SERPS for keyword ‘shutters’, the page http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/ is shown in Google.nl on #32 and in Belgium #3.
Problem & question: Why is it that /nl/ has not been indexed properly and why is it that we rank with http://www.vaneyckshutters.com on ‘shutters’ instead the/nl/ page?”
-
New update at:
-
Mmm... I wonder if Google decided to do so because of some external factor as, for instance, being the backlinks your website has pointing to www.domain.com and not www.domain.com/nl/, especially if the backlink can be defined as coming from netherland's site or targeting nl audience.
Said that, I still think that maybe your best solution would have been putting all the NL version under the main root and not in a /nl/ subfolder.
Example:
- www.domain.com <<< NL version
- www.domain.com/fr/ <<<< French version
- http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/kwaliteit-shutters/
- http://www.vaneyckshutters.com/fr/applications-de-nos-shutters/
and so on.
Obviously, right now this is not an easy solution, because it implies a sort of migration (tiny and internal, but migration anyway with everything related like 301 from old to new URLs), but possibly is the really valid one.
-
Anyone?
-
Hi Gianluca,
Thanks for your response and thoughts. We have had a 301 redirect from the domain to the /nl/ but that is where the problem began. We had multiple situations.Original situation: .com redirecting (301) to /nl/ => no indexation for /nl/
Solution 1: Delete 301 redirect and add canonical tag to /nl/ and add href lang tags
The ranking has been better when implementing solution 1, but /nl/ has still not been indexed. But the pages after /nl/ are indexed. Strange isn’t it? We see the same trend at store.apple.com redirecting to store.apple.com/us/ but /us/ has not been indexed. Our possible solution #2 was to setup NL content on .com and FR content on /fr/. But I’am afraid that I will lose positions in Belgium (now ranking #3).
-
Hi Gianluca
My apologies here. I can see where my answer lacked when failing to bring up there not being a hreflang tag for the /nl/. My suggestion was to review the hreflang tag resources given, but I failed to mention that putting that hreflang tag in place would be a help to the site.
I understand my error, I appreciate you bringing it up and calling me on it. It won't happen again. Not taken personally at all - I appreciate you doing so, it helps me be more clear moving forward.
Patrick
-
Hi "Happy SEO",
first of all, my question is:
Why do you really need to have the /nl/ subfolder shown in the index, if the root itself is in Dutch by default. Experience tells me that it is much easier to receive links to a domain than a subfolder, so pretending to have this one indexed is somehow adding a difficulty in term of link building.
Said that, if you really want the /nl/ subfolder to be indexed instead of the root domain, why don't simply redirect 301 the domain name to the /nl/ subfolder?
From the little I know about your site, that would be the most logic thing to do
-
Mmm... Patrick, albeit you're sharing good resources and giving good general advices, you are not giving a proper answer... and as a moderator about International SEO Q&A I saw you tend to do this frequently.
For instance, you are talking about the hreflang annotation toward the /fr/ homepage, but you are not advising that it is missing the hreflang annotation to the /nl/ version of the site and URL. Using the hreflang would be probably more effective that using the rel="canonical" in a case like this one.
So, you are not really answering to the problem "Happy SEO" has, which is why Google is indexing the root domain despite of the canonicalization toward the /nl/ subfolder.
Please, don't take it personally, but it is something I had to point it out.
-
Hi there
First, I would make sure that you review international SEO resources and that you have everything tagged properly. Your /fr/ site is being indexed, and your .com has a hreflang tag pointing to the /fr/ page.
I would review your hreflang tags, canonical tags, and your geo-targeting in Search Console for all of your sites. Make sure that all of that is spot on and resubmit your sitemaps to Google.
Hope this helps - good luck!
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 fraction of the AMP pages are indexed
Back in June, we had seen a sharp drop in traffic on our website. We initially assumed that it was due to the Core Update that was rolled out in early June. We had switched from http to https in May, but thought that should have helped rather than cause a problem. Until early June the traffic was trending upwards. While investigating the issue, I noticed that only a fraction (25%) of the AMP pages have been indexed. The pages don't seem to be getting indexed even though they are valid. Accordingly to Google Analytics too, the percentage of AMP traffic has dropped from 67-70% to 40-45%. I wonder if it is due to the indexing issue. In terms of implementation it seems fine. We are pointing canonical to the AMP page from the desktop version and to the desktop version from the AMP page. Any tips on how to fix the AMP indexing issue. Should I be concerned that only a fraction of the AMP pages are indexed. I really hope you can help in resolving this issue.
Technical SEO | | Gautam1 -
Indexing Issue
Hi, We have moved one of our domain https://www.mycity4kids.com/ in angular js and after that, i observed the major drop in the number of indexed pages. I crosschecked the coding and other important parameters but didn't find any major issue. What could be the reason behind the drop?
Technical SEO | | ResultFirst0 -
Why google removed my landing pages from index?
I made new website meko.lv. I put many work to it, to make page SEO friendly, sprites, reduced requests added SSL, got google page speed insights score 100/100, but in 2. october all pages in google webmasters disappeared from index. Could you please look at website and say whats wrong with it? They are all search results present in google but for how long. it is so annoying, you put so many work but in result get high spam score. It is obvious that new pages can not get good links in one month https://meko.lv/ google webmasters google page speed score: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmeko.lv%2F&tab=mobile q1LDHTn
Technical SEO | | Mekounko0 -
Fake Links indexing in google
Hello everyone, I have an interesting situation occurring here, and hoping maybe someone here has seen something of this nature or be able to offer some sort of advice. So, we recently installed a wordpress to a subdomain for our business and have been blogging through it. We added the google webmaster tools meta tag and I've noticed an increase in 404 links. I brought this up to or server admin, and he verified that there were a lot of ip's pinging our server looking for these links that don't exist. We've combed through our server files and nothing seems to be compromised. Today, we noticed that when you do site:ourdomain.com into google the subdomain with wordpress shows hundreds of these fake links, that when you visit them, return a 404 page. Just curious if anyone has seen anything like this, what it may be, how we can stop it, could it negatively impact us in anyway? Should we even worry about it? Here's the link to the google results. https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Amshowells.com&oq=site%3A&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j69i58.1905j0j1&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=91&ie=UTF-8 (odd links show up on pages 2-3+)
Technical SEO | | mshowells0 -
Homepage indexed and cached as the wrong domain
I'm a bit baffled by this one and would love if someone in the community could help provide some clarity! In general, my website (PSG1.com) is indexed and cached correctly. The exception is that the homepage is actually cached as plasticsurgerygroupnewjersey.com, another domain we own. Header checkers all confirm that plasticsurgerygroupnewjersey.com redirects to PSG1.com, not the other way around No canonical is set for that domain. At one time, I used the Moz toolbar to view attributes and it registered PSG1.com as having a response code of both 200 and 301 to plasticsurgerygroupnewjersey.com. However, I cannot replicate this. Any idea why the homepage of PSG1.com is not indexed/cached correctly? I appreciate your wisdom!
Technical SEO | | BTeubner0 -
Sitemap nos being indexed
Hi! How are you? I'm having a problem: for some reason I don't understand, Google Webmasters Tool isn't indexing the sitemaps I'm uploading. One of them is http://chelagarto.com/index.php?option=com_xmap&sitemap=1&view=xml&lang=en . Do you see what could be the problem? It says it only indexed 2 website. I've already sent this Sitemap several times and I'm always getting the same result. I'd really use some advice. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | arielbortz0 -
Site being indexed by Google before it has launched
We are currently coming towards the end of a site migration, and are at the final stage of testing redirects etc. However, to our horror we've just discovered Google has started indexing the new site. Any ideas on how this could have happened? I have most recently asked for robots.txt to exclude anything with a certain parameter in URL. Is there a chance this, wrongly implemented, could have caused this?
Technical SEO | | Sayers0 -
Duplicate content issue index.html vs non index.html
Hi I have an issue. In my client's profile, I found that the "index.html" are mostly authoritative than non "index.html", and I found that www. version is more authoritative than non www. The problem is that I find the opposite situation where non "index.html" are more authoritative than "index.html" or non www more authoritative than www. My logic would tell me to still redirect the non"index.html" to "index.html". Am I right? and in the case I find the opposite happening, does it matter if I still redirect the non"index.html" to "index.html"? The same question for www vs non www versions? Thank you
Technical SEO | | Ideas-Money-Art0