Google's 'related:' operator
-
I have a quick question about Google's 'related:' operator when viewing search results. Is there reason why a website doesn't produce related/similar sites?
For example, if I use the related: operator for my site, no results appear.
https://www.google.com/#q=related:www.handiramp.comThe site has been around since 1998. The site also has two good relevant DMOZ inbound links. Any suggestions on why this is and any way to fix it?
Thank you.
-
Anything ever come of this, folks? Just noticed this about our website (https://www.google.com/#&q=related:epicwebstudios.com), but also noticed MOZ now has related sites appearing. So does Thom's Handiramp site. Still probably not a huge deal but I going nuts trying to understand where the "related" is being generated and how we can help improve the graph by improving our website. FWIW, all of the aforementioned tips have been applied to our site, epicwebstudios.com.
-- David -
With "related:" - you could say all the same things with Moz.com, and we also don't have the related results, but I doubt it's hurting our search rankings at all.
Regarding Dmoz - there's no particular way to get Google to recognize Dmoz listings and include them. They seem to do so sometimes and not others. You can actively prevent them using that listing with the noodp tag, but there's no way to do the reverse and get them to pay attention. One thing you might try is making sure they've actually crawled & indexed the page on Dmoz with your listing recently. If they haven't (you can look at the cache date in Google's results), you might try linking to it, using "Fetch as Googlebot," etc.
-
Hi Rand/Matt, I understand your answer but I really think there is something more there. We have developed tremendous content, our site has been up since 1998. We have good PA and DA and no sense of any type of penguin type penalty. We have in the past dominated the SERPs often at the top slots. Then as Google added "brand" consideration to the mix we've been placed more middle of the first page (some have mentioned that this might be related to a panda hit but I don't think so when I look at the quality of our site versus the quality of the sites beating us). All of our competitors have "related" classifications and those related tags are page, not site related. Interestingly, our URLs will show up from time to time on the competitors related listings. I'm not sure how long this has been going on but I'm thinking that there is some sort of manual tag (I don't think this is a penalty of any sort) that Google has attached to our domain. I truly believe that the lack of a related tag some how is reducing our SERP ranking. I'd love to find an answer to this mystery.
On a related but separate note I've noticed that some of our competitors have another type of notation that shows up right next to the related/cache arrow that references DMOZ of Wikipedia listings. While we don't have a Wikipedia listing we do have a DMOZ listing, but that is not shown by Google either. Do you have any idea how to get Google to recognize our DMOZ posting? (I realize that DMOZ in it self is really pretty useless but if Google is recognizing it as important enough to list with the URL listings for some of our competitors there must be some value there.)
Any help or insight that you can provide would be much appreciated.
-
Hi Thom - unfortunately, I don't have much to give you, but I can say that this isn't necessarily a problem. Tons of sites that do really well in search results, have popular brands, and are legitimate don't have "Related:" results. Moz itself is one, but we've seen others. There may be elements about Google having issues understanding your content or not seeing many powerful links from sources to your site that also link to other places, but we don't know for sure.
Long story short - if you're not seeing other issues with your site in Google, I wouldn't worry about it.
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
-
Changing URLS: from a short well optimised URL to a longer one – What's the traffic risk
I'm working with a client who has a website that is relatively well optimised, thought it has a pretty flat structure and a lot of top level pages. They've invested in their content over the years and managed to rank well for key search terms. They're currently in the process of changing CMS and as a result of new folder structuring in the CMS the URLs for some pages look to have significantly changed. E.g Existing URL is: website.com/grampians-luxury-accommodation which ranked quite well for luxury accommodation grampians New URL when site is launched on new CMS would be website.com/destinations/victoria/grampians My feeling is that the client is going to lose out on a bit of traffic as a result of this. I'm looking for information or ways or case studies to demonstrate the degree of risk, and to help make a recommendation to mitigate risk.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moge0 -
Is Chamber of Commerce membership a "paid" link, breaking Google's rules?
Hi guys, This drives me nuts. I hear all the time that any time value is exchanged for a link that it technically violates Google's guidelines. What about real organizations, chambers of commerce, trade groups, etc. that you are a part of that have online directories with DO-follow links. On one hand people will say these are great links with real value outside of search and great for local SEO..and on the other hand some hardliners are saying that these technically should be no-follow. Thoughts???
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RickyShockley0 -
Will these 301's get me penalized?
Hey everyone, We're redesigning parts of our site and I have a tricky question that I was hoping to get some sound advice about. We have a blog (magazine) with subcategory pages that are quite thin. We are going to restructure the blog (magazine) and feature different concert and have new subcategories. So we are trying to decide where to redirect the existing subcategory pages, e.g. Entertainment, Music, Sports, etc. www.charged.fm/magazine Our new ticket category pages ( Concert Tickets, NY Yankees Tickets, OKC Thunder Tickets, etc) are going to feature a tab called 'Latest News' where we are thinking of 301 redirecting the old magazine subcategory pages. So Sports News from the blog would 301 to Sports Tickets (# Latest News tab). See screenshot below for example. So my question is: Will this look bad in the eyes of the GOOG? Are these closely related enough to redirect? Are there any blatant pitfalls that I'm not seeing? It seems like a win/win because we are making a rich Performer page with News, Bio, Tickets and Schedule and getting to reallocate the link juice that was being wasted in an pretty much useless page that was allowed to become to powerful. Gotta keep those pages in check! Thoughts appreciated. Luke Cn6HPpH.jpg
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | keL.A.xT.o0 -
Does hiding responsive design elements on smaller media types impact Google's mobile crawler?
I have a responsive site and we hide elements on smaller media types. For example, we have an extensive sitemap in the footer on desktop, but when you shrink the viewport to mobile we don't show the footer. Does this practice make Google's mobile bot crawler much less efficient and therefore impact our mobile search rankings?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jcgoodrich1 -
Removing Dynamic "noindex" URL's from Index
6 months ago my clients site was overhauled and the user generated searches had an index tag on them. I switched that to noindex but didn't get it fast enough to avoid being 100's of pages indexed in Google. It's been months since switching to the noindex tag and the pages are still indexed. What would you recommend? Google crawls my site daily - but never the pages that I want removed from the index. I am trying to avoid submitting hundreds of these dynamic URL's to the removal tool in webmaster tools. Suggestions?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeTheBoss0 -
Dynamic 301's causing duplicate content
Hi, wonder if anyone can help? We have just changed our site which was hosted on IIS and the page url's were like this ( example.co.uk/Default.aspx?pagename=About-Us ). The new page url is example.co.uk/About-Us/ and is using Apache. The 301's our developer told us to use was in this format: RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^/Default.aspx$
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GoGroup51
RewriteCond %{QUERY_STRING} ^pagename=About-Us$
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.domain.co.uk/About-Us/ [R=301,L] This seemed to work from a 301 point of view; however it also seemed to allow both of the below URL's to give the same page! example.co.uk/About-Us/?pagename=About-Us example.co.uk/About-Us/ Webmaster Tools has now picked up on this and is seeing it a duplicate content. Can anyone help why it would be doing this please. I'm not totally clued up and our host/ developer cant understand it too. Many Thanks0 -
I'm afraid I may have messed up my site's organization
So I recently started working on an existing site for a company, and I'm afraid I may have done something to lose some backlinks. So to start off, say the website is www.domain.net and when I arrived domain.net and www.domain.net showed up as two separate sites so I changed my web.config file to direct all domain.net to www.domain.net The homepage was called default.asp, and I wanted the homepage to always show up as www.domain.net instead of www.domain.net/default.asp. Of course they both showed the same thing but I couldn't figure it out. So I removed www.domain.net/default.asp from indexing and changed the my internal links to the homepage to point at www.domain.net instead of simply pointing at the file default.asp. So now www.domain.net/default.asp still brings up the page, but I want it to revert to www.domain.net. I'm also a little worried because I noticed that one of my incoming links points at www.domain.net/default.asp and it doesn't get passed along to www.domain.net and I think i may have damaged my sites SEO I guess this is a very complicated and roundabout way of saying this, but how can I get www.domain.net/default.asp to take you to www.domain.net
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bcrabill0 -
Hundreds of thousands of 404's on expired listings - issue.
Hey guys, We have a conundrum, with a large E-Commerce site we operate. Classified listings older than 45 days are throwing up 404's - hundreds of thousands, maybe millions. Note that Webmaster Tools peaks at 100,000. Many of these listings receive links. Classified listings that are less than 45 days show other possible products to buy based on an algorithm. It is not possible for Google to crawl expired listings pages from within our site. They are indexed because they were crawled before they expired, which means that many of them show in search results. -> My thought at this stage, for usability reasons, is to replace the 404's with content - other product suggestions, and add a meta noindex in order to help our crawl equity, and get the pages we really want to be indexed prioritised. -> Another consideration is to 301 from each expired listing to the category heirarchy to pass possible link juice. But we feel that as many of these listings are findable in Google, it is not a great user experience. -> Or, shall we just leave them as 404's? : google sort of says it's ok Very curious on your opinions, and how you would handle this. Cheers, Croozie. P.S I have read other Q & A's regarding this, but given our large volumes and situation, thought it was worth asking as I'm not satisfied that solutions offered would match our needs.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | sichristie0