Meta refresh - nojavascript url
-
seomox is telling me that I am getting a page that is not being indexed or crawled and since the crawl status code is 200 and there are no robots the meta-refresh url must be the problem.
the meta refresh url is different than the on page report card url as it's the nojavascript url which my developer says should be ok. see his comments below.
The is redirecting to http://mastermindtoys.com/store/nojavascript.html only in case if the JavaScript is disabled in the client browser. This is the right way to do it, I don’t understand why this might be a problem, otherwise MM has to implement Noscript pages that have a real content. I didn’t get what’s wrong about accessibility. The code 200 means it is accessible, and yes there is nothing to access if JavaScript is disabled on browser. I think there are no modern retail sites that would do any sensible business with the scripting disabled in browsers.The H1 is really present 2 times and second occurrence can be removed, though I highly doubt about importance of this change.Regarding duplicates – what URLs are considered duplicates? Can you please send me examples?I am not aware of canonical URL problem for MM site unless we consider old .asp links as duplicate links of the canonical product pages. I would appreciate if SEOMoz gave us an example what they mean.I suspect that the page is not getting indexed as a result of this or I'm just not getting a good score. Which is it?
-
We all wish the tools were perfect. The reality is they are software and will be upgraded over their lifetime. This particular issue is a pretty narrow focus.
If it is indeed just an issue with the SEOmoz crawler I would recommend reporting it to the help desk so they have an opportunity to investigate the matter and hopefully list it as a bug which can be addressed.
-
Thanks Kent. I appreciate the effort you made. If this ia a seomoz crawler issue and google handles it well, I would be disappointed in seomoz and wonder why they wouldn't answer this?
-
I am not a coding expert but I did check several other quality websites: att.com, verizonwireless.com, sprint.com. All three sites use iframes to present the page used when javascript is disabled. None use the meta refresh tag.
Example: <noscript><iframe src="http://view.atdmt.com/iaction/m0nssc_20HomePageNextel_1" width="1" height="1" frameborder="0" scrolling="No" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" topmargin="0" leftmargin="0"></iframe>noscript>
I would presume the crawler is simply seeing the meta refresh tag and not considering the tag is wrapped in a
<noscript>tag. It could be this is an issue with the SEOmoz crawler and Google MAY handle the situation better. I would suggest asking your developer if he could present the page in an iframe as the sites mentioned above do.</p> <p>Your developer's solution is fine from a coding perspective. It may be an issue from a SEO point of view. It would require specific testing to make a determination of this issue.</p></noscript>
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
-
Two URL's for the same page
Hi, on our site we have two separate URL's for a page that has the same content. So, for example - 'www.domain.co.uk/stuff' and 'www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff' both have the same content on the page. We currently rank high in search for 'www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff' for our targeted keyword, but there are numerous links on the site to www.domain.co.uk/stuff and also potentially inbound links to this page. Ideally we want just the www.domain.co.uk/things/stuff URL to be present on the site, what would be the best course of action to take? Would a simple Canonical tag from the '/stuff' URL which points to the '/things/stuff' page be wise? If we were to scrap the '/stuff' URL totally and redirect it to the 'things/stuff' URL and change all our on site links, would this be beneficial and not harm our current ranking for '/things/stuff'? We only want 1 URL for this page for numerous reasons (i.e, easier to track in Analytics), but I'm a bit cautious that changing the page that doesn't rank may have an affect on the page that does rank! Thanks.
On-Page Optimization | | Jaybeamer2 -
Meta Title Pipes and Spacing
I've been doing optimization on a clients website and want to make sure I'm maximizing my characters. Does anyone have any feedback on the spacing in between the pipes ( | ) ? IE: Internet Marketing Company | Denver SEO | Brand Name Do the spaces before and after the pipes play a role in whether the search engines can distinguish the keyword or is it all considered one word if there is no spaces such as: IE: Internet Marketing Company|Denver SEO|Brand Name Any information will be super helpful. Thanks for your help!
On-Page Optimization | | RezStreamSEO0 -
Removing old URLs that are being used for my on page optimization?
Is there a way to remove old URL's that are still being used for my keywords for my on page optimization? They are giving me grades of F since they no longer exist and if I change the URL to the current one, the grade becomes an A, but they are still showing after the new crawl.
On-Page Optimization | | Dirty0 -
To enter keyword meta tags or to not enter keyword meta tags?
I've been doing SEO for awhile, but new to SEOMoz. I'm surprised that SEOMoz does not recommend keyword meta tags. I didn't enter them for the longest time because I know Google doesn't care about them. However, I did read that other search engines DO use them. And therefore that is why you should have them. I teach my customers about SEO, and I know it would be much easier for them not to enter or worry about the keyword meta tags. However, I would love to hear opinions here. And to Bing/Yahoo put any weight into them or is it only really small search engines? Thanks! Hilary
On-Page Optimization | | endlessrange0 -
Does the keyword meta tag not matter anymore?
In the SeoMoz report generated, it recommended removing the meta keywords tag as it was no long relevant? why is google no longer considering this?
On-Page Optimization | | mancmusicman0 -
Meta Descriptions - Duplicate Content?
I have created a Meta Description for a page that is optimized for SERPS. If I also put this exact content on my page for my readers, would this be considered duplicate content? The meta description and content will be listed on the same page with the same URL. Thanks for your help.
On-Page Optimization | | tuckjames0 -
Page URL Hiearchy
So I have read on here that page URL Hiearchy is important. My question is from a search engine standpoint which of the following methods would be the best to use (or another if not listed) COMPACT and naturally hierarchical MountainBiking.com MountainBiking.com/adventures ( a list of the pages below ) MountainBiking.com/adventures/in whistler (for each page) MountainBiking.com/adventures/in utah OR VERBOSE but reptetive MountainBiking.com MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking adventures ( intro + a list of the pages below ) MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking Adventures/Mounting Biking adventures in whistler MountainBiking.com/Mountain Biking Adventures/Mountain Biking Adventures in Utah It seemed like the blog I read suggested the compact form, but it seems to me that the verbose (though admittedly a bit clunky) seems better so far as exact keyword match etc. Experience and or advice on this?
On-Page Optimization | | bThere0 -
Absolute URLs
Hi, this is a very basic question but I want to confirm, as I remembered it was consider a good practice to use the absolute version of your links when linking to other pages of your site, not for any issue related to passing authority or PageRank, but because if someone scraps your content then they would take the links as well (as if they didn't remove them). Have the practices for internal linking with absolute or realtive URLs changed in any way? Which is the best way? absolute or relative? is there any harm for using the relative version? Relative: Absolute: [](<strong><em>http://www.cheapdomain.com/myfolder/mypage.html)[](<strong><em>http://www.cheapdomain.com/myfolder/mypage.html) [Thanks!](<strong><em>http://www.cheapdomain.com/myfolder/mypage.html)
On-Page Optimization | | andresgmontero0