Local cTLD site not showing up in local SERP
-
I have 1 website with 2 cTLD. 1 is with .be another .nl. Both are in Dutch and pretty much with the same content but a different cTLD.
The problem I have is that the .nl website is showing up in my serp on google.be. So I'm not seeing any keyword rankings for the .be website. I want to be able to see only .nl website serp for google.nl and .be serp on google.be
I've already set up hreflang tags since 2-3 weeks and search console confirmed that it's been implemented correctly. I've alsy fetched the site and requested a re-index of the website.
Is there anything else I can do? Or how long do I have to wait till Google will update the serp?
-
Update: Still no improvements in the results even after all the changes have been implemented. Anyone with other suggestions perhaps?
-
Hi Jacob,
Don't use the canonical across both countries. Google will figure out the correct country targeting eventually. If you do this, it will only hurt you.
You won't be penalized for duplicate content, but you can be omitted from search results (per page) if Google has not figured out the country targeting yet. It might think it is the same content, but be patient.
Another thing you can do is enable people to toggle between the .nl and .be site, and accept (for the time being) that you rank with the 'wrong' site.
I'm pretty sure the fix you mentioned below will help you!
- The canonical url doesn't point to the NL or vice versa. It did have another URL as we're getting data from a different system and using wordpress to generate the userfriendly URL. So The canonical still has a different URL. I've made the change to make it exactly the same as the one shown in the URL. I hope it will help in some way.
-
Hi Linda,
Thanks for the feedback.
- The hreflang format is corret, i just checked again. nl-nl and nl-be.
- The canonical url doesn't point to the NL or vice versa. It did have another URL as we're getting data from a different system and using wordpress to generate the userfriendly URL. So The canonical still has a different URL. I've made the change to make it exactly the same as the one shown in the URL. I hope it will help in some way.
- Geotargeting config was set correctly for each account in Search console from the beginning.
- All backlinks are from .be domains except the one with a high spam score. I've already made the request to remove them.
I'm also thinking about referring the canonical url of both nl and be website to the .be domain as the content is the same. What i'm thinking now is that there is a case of duplicate content and perhaps the .be website is somehow being penalized as the one with the duplicate content which is why the nl website is showing up higher than the .be website. Would this help? I mean if I do this, would Google show the correct domain in the correct engine despite both having same content?
-
Hi Antonio,
I actually meant that if you have duplicate content of some kind, your page example.be/xyz may have:
- a canonical to example.be/xyy
- your hreflang might point to example.be/xyz and example.nl/xyz - this should also be example.be/xyy
Did you also check if you used the right format for the hreflang (nl-be)?
And for geotargeting, it is not set by default, so I'd recommend to set it anyway. It can't hurt.
-
Yes, canonicals maybe are pointing to the .nl site, good point Linda. In the same SF crawl Jacob you can check that.
If the domain is .be, Google Search Console will automatically target the domain to Belgium.
-
- This item it's OK
- Yes, you can check it on Crawl stats under Crawl menu. Just to be sure, check the log. There's any user agent detector that can redirect Googlebot to other page?. Check that using "Fetch as Google" under the same menu, or change the useragent in Screaming Frog and crawl your site if there's a differente between the default SF user agent and Googlebot
- Yes, you should use one method, if the tag under head doesn't work (but should), try with the sitemap annotations
- The Spam score should be addressed, but the quality links are from Belgium? (or Belgium oriented sites?)
-
My experience tells me you might need to wait a bit longer.
Other problems you might have:
- Canonicals not pointing to the same URLs as the hreflangs.
- Geotargeting settings in Google Search Console.
- Belgium backlinks (from .be sites) - but this has been mentioned by Antonio.
-
Hey Jacob:
- Do you use Screaming Frog? would be great to double check if there's any directive with noindex that it's hurting your .be visibility (about a few of your pages are being indexed). The "site:" command it's pretty useful to use it on-the-fly, but I would recommend always to check if the URLs in the sitemap.xml are being indexed. Wait 1-2 days to see if after submiting your sitemap there's any change
- I assume you are using Wordpres in a Apache server running php, so, in your File Manager (cPanel) or your FTP software, go to the root directory (one level up to public_html), you should have a "logs" folder with a couple of compressed files. Un-zip them and open it with Notepad or any text editor. Search for Googlebot in the logs and see the most recent request from Googlebot
- Yoast it's a good plugin, I use it, but for this case, maybe should be good to deactivate this feature of the plugin and search for another than can handle hreflang, or do it manually
- Yes, maybe your .be ecosystem is pointing to the .nl site, check it with Open Site Explorer and if this is the case, request a change of domain of each site owner. If not, you should begin to build those links in a proper way
-
Thanks for the reply Antonio.
- Checked the robots and it's not blocking anything. All pages are being indexed as well. when I use site:website.be I do see the results. It's just that the .nl website seems to overtake the .be results.
- Where could I find the log files from Googlebot?
- I'm using Yoast SEO pluging for the XML sitemaps and there's no indication of the language there. i'll double check again.
- Concerning the backlinking, do you mean link building?
I've submitted my sitemap to search console and I did notice that only a few of my pages have been indexed. But When I use "site:" I do get the pages.
-
In my experience this should take no more than 2 weeks after checking href lang are set up properly (but will depend if Googlebot crawl both sites frecuently), the questions I will ask myself in this case are:
- It's pretty dumb, but sometimes we forget the basics, like: are you blocking the site with the robots.txt? noindex tags? something?
- Double check if the href lang is properly implemented
- In your log files there's any presence of Google bot on both sites?
- Assuming you are using tags in the header for href lang: Have you tried to force the href lang implementation with sitemap.xml? https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/189077?hl=en
- Have you tried to backlink the .be domain from business partners in Belgium?
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
-
Local SEO Over Optimization
We are targeting a bunch of services for our local business that works in and around their location. I'm concerned about over optimization and need some guidance on whether these points should be resolved. The company is based in a city and works mostly in the city but also in the surrounding areas. Currently, the site has 6 services pages (accessible via main nav) targeting the same location i.e. “Made Up Service London”, “Imaginary Service London” (with URLs and H1 tags etc. in place containing this location). However this is soon going to become 9 services pages, I am concerned that the repetition of this one location is starting to look spammy, especially as its where the company is based. Initially, I also wanted pages targeting the same services in other nearby areas. For example “Made Up Service Surrey”, “Imaginary Service Essex”. This has not happened as the info available has been too sporadic. I was going to add links to relevant case studies into these pages to beef up the content and add interest. To that end, we came up with case studies, but after a while, I noticed that these are also largely focused on the primary location. So out of 32 case studies, we have 19 focused on the primary location again with URL’s and H1 tags etc containing the location keyword. So in total, we have 25 pages optimized for the location (soon to be 28 and more if further case studies are added). My initial feeling was that the inclusion of pages targeting services in other locations would legitimize what we have done with the main pages. But obviously we have not got these pages in place and I question whether we ever will. What is my best course of action moving forward?
Local Website Optimization | | GrouchyKids1 -
How to create sites with powerful individual pages to achieve top results.
How to create sites with powerful individual pages to achieve top results . According to MOZ I need to have powerful individual pages to achieve top results my site has a 0 authority so for this reason I need to focus on powerful pages but how do I know if my pages are powerful or not.
Local Website Optimization | | A.V.S0 -
Building a new site and want to be found in both Google.co.uk and Goolge.ie. What is the best practice?
We are building a new site which is a .com site and the client would like to be found in both Google.co.uk and Goolge.ie. What is the best practice to go about this? Can you geo-target two countries with the one site?
Local Website Optimization | | WSIDW0 -
Recommended blogs and sites about local seo
HI.
Local Website Optimization | | corn2015
Can you please tell me some great blogs/sites to read daily about local seo? I'm really wanting to beef up my knowledge in this area to assist local businesses. Corn1 -
Local SEO for National Brands
Hi all, When it comes to local SEO in 2015, I appreciate that having a physical location in the town/city you wish to rank is a major factor. However, if you're a national brand is it still possible to rank for local searches when you're based in one location? The reason I ask is that, although our service is national, the nature of what we offer means that it is not inconceivable that people would search for a local variation of our top keywords. Other than the standard things - location in the content, the H1/H2s, title tag, meta description, url etc. - is there anything national businesses can do to help? Thanks in advance. John
Local Website Optimization | | NAHL-14300 -
Local SEO HELP for Franchise SAB Business
This all began when I was asked to develop experiment parameters for our content protocol & strategy. It should be simple right? I've reviewed A/B testing tips for days now, from Moz and other sources.I'm totally amped and ready to begin testing in Google Analytics. Say we have a restoration service franchise with over 40 franchises we perform SEO for. They are all over the US. Every franchise has their own local website. Example restorationcompanylosangeles.com Every franchise purchases territories in which they want to rank in. Some service over 100 cities. Most franchises also have PPC campaigns. As a part of our strategy we incorporate the location reach data from Adwords to focus on their high reach locations first. We have 'power pages' which include 5 high reach branch preferences (areas in which the owners prefer to target) and 5 non branch preference high reach locations. We are working heavily on our National brand presence & working with PR and local news companies to build relationships for natural backlinks. We are developing a strategy for social media for national brand outlets and local outlets. We are using major aggregators to distribute our local citation for our branch offices. We make sure all NAP is consistent across all citations. We are partners with Google so we work with them on new branches that are developing to create their Google listings (MyBusiness & G+). We use local business schema markup for all pages. Our content protocol encompasses all the needed onsite optimization tactics; meta, titles, schema, placement of keywords, semantic Q&A & internal linking strategies etc. Our leads are calls and form submissions. We use several call tracking services to monitor calls, caller's location etc. We are testing Callrail to start monitoring landing pages and keywords that generating our leads. Parts that I want to change: Some of the local sites have over 100 pages targeted for 'water damage + city ' aka what Moz would call "Doorway pages. " These pages have 600-1000 words all talking about services we provide. Although our writers (4 of them) manipulate them in a way so that they aren't duplicate pages. They add about 100 words about the city location. This is the only unique variable. We pump out about 10 new local pages a month per site - so yes - over 300 local pages a month. Traffic to the local sites is very scarce. Content protocol / strategy is only tested based on ranking! We have a tool that monitors ranking on all domains. This does not count for mobile, local, nor user based preference searching like Google Now. My team is deeply attached to basing our metrics solely on ranking. The logic behind this is that if there is no local city page existing for a targeted location, there is less likelihood of ranking for that location. If you are not seen then you will not get traffic nor leads. Ranking for power locations is poor - while less competitive low reach locations rank ok. We are updating content protocol by tweaking small things (multiple variants at a time). They will check ranking everyday for about a week to determine whether that experiment was a success or not. What I need: Internal duplicate content analyzer - to prove that writing over 400 pages a month about water damage + city IS duplicate content. Unique content for 'Power pages' - I know based on dozens of chats here on the community and in MOZ blogs that we can only truly create quality content for 5-10 pages. Meaning we need to narrow down what locations are most important to us and beef them up. Creating blog content for non 'power' locations. Develop new experiment protocol based on metrics like traffic, impressions, bounce rate landing page analysis, domain authority etc. Dig deeper into call metrics and their sources. Now I am at a roadblock because I cannot develop valid content experimenting parameters based on ranking. I know that a/b testing requires testing two pages that are same except the one variable. We'd either non index these or canonicalize.. both are not in favor of testing ranking for the same term. Questions: Are all these local pages duplicate content? Is there a such thing as content experiments based solely on ranking? Any other suggestions for this scenario?
Local Website Optimization | | MilestoneSEO_LA1 -
Ecommerce Site with Unique Location Pages - Issue with unique content and thin content?
Hello All, I have an Ecommerce Site specializing in Hire and we have individual location pages on each of our categories for each of our depots. All these pages show the NAP of the specific branch Given the size of our website (10K approx pages) , it's physically impossible for us to write unique content for each location against each category so what we are doing is writing unique content for our top 10 locations in a category for example , and the remaining 20 odd locations against the same category has the same content but it will bring in the location name and the individual NAP of that branch so in effect I think this thin content. My question is , I am quite sure I we are getting some form of algorithmic penalty with regards the thin/duplicate content. Using the example above , should we 301 redirect the 20 odd locations with the thin content , or should be say only 301 redirect 10 of them , so we in effect end up with a more 50/50 split on a category with regards to unique content on pages verses thin content for the same category. Alternatively, should we can 301 all the thin content pages so we only have 10 locations against the category and therefore 100% unique content. I am trying to work out which would help most with regards to local rankings for my location pages. Also , does anyone know if a thin/duplicate content penalty is site wide or can it just affect specific parts of a website. Any advice greatly appreciated thanks Pete
Local Website Optimization | | PeteC120 -
Launching Hundreds of Local Pages At Once or Tiered? If Tiered, In What Intervals Would You Recommend?
Greeting Mozzers, This is a long question, so please bare with me 🙂 We are an IT and management training company that offers over 180 courses on a wide array of topics. We have multiple methods that our students can attend these courses, either in person or remotely via a technology called AnyWare. We've also opened AnyWare centers in which you can physically go a particular location near you, and log into a LIVE course that might be hosted in say, New York, even if you're in say, LA. You get all the in class benefits and interaction with all the students and the instructor as if you're in the classroom. Recently, we've opened 43 AnyWare centers giving way to excellent localization search opportunities to our website (e.g. think sharepoint training in new york or "whatever city we are located in). Each location has a physical address, phone number, and employee working there so we pass those standards for existence on Google Places (which I've set up). So, why all this background? Well, we'd like to start getting as much visibility for queries that follow the format of "course topic area that we offered" followed by "city we offer it in." We offer 22 course topic areas and, as I mentioned, 43 locations across the US. Our IS team has created custom pages for each city and course topic area using a UI. I won't get into detailed specifics, but doing some simple math (22 topic areas multiplied by 43 location) we get over 800 new pages that need to eventually be crawled and added to our site. As a test, we launched the pages 3 months ago for DC and New York and have experienced great increases in visibility. For example, here are the two pages for SharePoint training in DC and NY (total of 44 local pages live right now). http://www2.learningtree.com/htfu/usdc01/washington/sharepoint-training
Local Website Optimization | | CSawatzky
http://www2.learningtree.com/htfu/usny27/new-york/sharepoint-training So, now that we've seen the desired results, my next question is, how do we launch the rest of the hundreds of pages in a "white hat" manner? I'm a big fan of white hat techniques and not pissing off Google. Given the degree of the project, we also did our best to make the content unique as possible. Yes there are many similarities but courses do differ as well as addresses from location to location. After watching Matt Cutt's video here: http://searchengineland.com/google-adding-too-many-pages-too-quickly-may-flag-a-site-to-be-reviewed-manually-156058 about adding too man pages at once, I'd prefer to proceed cautiously, even if the example he uses in the video has to do with tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of pages. We truly aim to deliver the right content to those searching in their area, so I aim no black hat about it 🙂 But, still don't want to be reviewed manually lol. So, in what interval should we launch the remaining pages in a quick manner to raise any red flags? For example, should we launch 2 cities a week? 4 cities a month? I'm assuming the slower the better of course, but I have some antsy managers I'm accountable to and even with this type of warning and research, I need to proceed somehow the right way. Thanks again and sorry for the detailed message!0