Incorrect Spelling Indexed In Meta Info - Can't Change It
-
Hi,It would be great if a member of the community could help me to resolve this issue.Google is indexing an incorrect spelling on of our key pages and we can't identify the reason why.- The page in question: https://newbridgesilverware.com/jewelleryAs you can see from the attached image, the Meta Title is rendered to contain the keyword "jewelry" (the American spelling.) We want this to read as "jewellery" - the British-English spelling. Yet in the page source the word is given in the meta title as "jewellery". Nowhere in the page source or on the page itself does the American spelling appear - yet Google still renders it in the Meta Title.Can anyone identify why this is happening and offer any possible solutions?Much appreciated
-
Hi John,
could you please give us a feedback and tell if any of the suggestions the community offered to you was of help?
Thank you.
-
Did you implemented the hreflang annotation using the sitemaps.xml methodology?
I'm asking because in this page https://newbridgesilverware.com/jewellery I don't see any hreflang in the code.
Another question... you're talking about a version for UK/IE and one version for the US, but I see only one site and sub folders like it could be /us/ for the United States ecommerce version.
So... are you dynamically changing the content (included meta titles) depending on user IP?
Because if it is so, then the hreflang doesn't work at all and you should, instead, check out this help page by Google https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/6144055?hl=en, which is about Locale-aware crawling by Googlebot.
However, to be totally sincere, that Google is advising in red in that same page this: We continue to support and recommend using separate locale URL configurations and annotating them with rel=alternate hreflang annotations... makes me recommend you to forget dynamic serving and create two separate versions of your ecommerce and, once done, implement the hreflang annotations.
-
Just a bump on this one.
We added Href Lang Tags last week (one unique to the US, one that would appear only to those in the UK & Ireland) and had the site recrawled and reindexed, but this issue is still appearing with the American spelling appearing in the Meta Info in Google's index - despite being present nowhere on the page or the page source.
Anyone have any ideas on possible resolutions to this one?
-
Hi Logan,
No, this is the only page with dynamic content causing an issue.
The US is one of the key markets, alongside the UK & Ireland so unfortunately dynamic content like this would be ideal.
No target country is set, but I will put this suggestion to the team. Thanks.
-
Are there other pages that have dynamic content based on location? If this is the only one, this is probably too big of a project for such a small problem.
Are you targeting the US market as well? If you're only looking to market to UK/Ireland, you might just want to take out that dynamic content.
Have you set a location for your site in Search Console? Doing so might help Google better understand your site and shift the meta data for UK/Ireland properly.
-
Hi Logan,
Many thanks for your suggestion, I will put that to the team.
The only differences in content will be the spelling of jewelry vs jewellery. This is already the case, throughout the page.
On Google, both the meta description and the URL are correctly displaying as "jewellery" as it should for the UK & Ireland. The issue with the US spelling is only impacting the Page Title itself...
-
In that case, you might have some difficulties getting this resolved. What's seems to be happening is Google is finding your US version and indexing those regardless of location. If you want to serve different content based on location, there should be a unique URL for each country. You can then specify to each version of Google (.com, .ie, or .co.uk) with hreflang tags which URL should be in which index. I'm not exactly sure how you're swapping out the meta data, but it seems like Google is only acknowledging your US versions.
-
Hi Alick,
Many thanks for your response.
Are you based in the USA? What I should have mentioned is that the website was built for Meta Information to be inputted for both US and UK & Ireland audiences.
So any searches from the US should infact render jewelry, whereas from my location (in Ireland), it should render jewellery. When I check the source code, there is only the jewellery spelling and no appearances of jewelry at all within the source code.
-
Hi Logan,
Are you based in the USA? What I should have mentioned is that the website was built for Meta Information to be inputted for both US and UK & Ireland audiences.
So any searches from the US should infact render jewelry, whereas from my location (in Ireland), it should render jewellery. When I check the source code, there is only the jewellery spelling and no appearances of jewelry at all within the source code.
-
As Alick pointed out in his screenshot, the title tag does use the American spelling, 'Jewelry'. Google will not correct what they show in SERPs until they're provided with something different. When searching the source code, I also found 15 other instances of the American spelling on your site, which mostly appear in the navigation. I'd recommend changing the navigation links to reflect this as well
-
Hi,
Google cached version showing that 'Jewelry' used in meta title (6th may 2017). It will be fixed when Google crawl your page again. I'm also attaching cached version image.
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
-
Can't support IE 7,8,9, 10\. Can we redirect them to another page that's optimized for those browsers so that we can have our site work on modern browers while still providing a destination of IE browsers?
Hi, Our site can't support IE 7,8,9, 10. Can we redirect them to another page that's optimized for those browsers so that we can have our site work on modern broswers while still providing a destination of IE browsers? Would their be an SEO penalty? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dspete0 -
Moving html site to wordpress and 301 redirect from index.htm to index.php or just www.example.com
I found page duplicate content when using Moz crawl tool, see below. http://www.example.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | gozmoz
Page Authority 40
Linking Root Domains 31
External Link Count 138
Internal Link Count 18
Status Code 200
1 duplicate http://www.example.com/index.htm
Page Authority 19
Linking Root Domains 1
External Link Count 0
Internal Link Count 15
Status Code 200
1 duplicate I have recently transfered my old html site to wordpress.
To keep the urls the same I am using a plugin which appends .htm at the end of each page. My old site home page was index.htm. I have created index.htm in wordpress as well but now there is a conflict of duplicate content. I am using latest post as my home page which is index.php Question 1.
Should I also use redirect 301 im htaccess file to transfer index.htm page authority (19) to www.example.com If yes, do I use
Redirect 301 /index.htm http://www.example.com/index.php
or
Redirect 301 /index.htm http://www.example.com Question 2
Should I change my "Home" menu link to http://www.example.com instead of http://www.example.com/index.htm that would fix the duplicate content, as indx.htm does not exist anymore. Is there a better option? Thanks0 -
Client wants to remove mobile URLs from their sitemap to avoid indexing issues. However this will require SEVERAL billing hours. Is having both mobile/desktop URLs in a sitemap really that detrimental to search indexing?
We had an enterprise client ask to remove mobile URLs from their sitemaps. For their website both desktop & mobile URLs are combined into one sitemap. Their website has a mobile template (not a responsive website) and is configured properly via Google's "separate URL" guidelines. Our client is referencing a statement made from John Mueller that having both mobile & desktop sitemaps can be problematic for indexing. Here is the article https://www.seroundtable.com/google-mobile-sitemaps-20137.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RosemaryB
We would be happy to remove the mobile URLs from their sitemap. However this will unfortunately take several billing hours for our development team to implement and QA. This will end up costing our client a great deal of money when the task is completed. Is it worth it to remove the mobile URLs from their main website to be in adherence to John Mueller's advice? We don't believe these extra mobile URLs are harming their search indexing. However we can't find any sources to explain otherwise. Any advice would be appreciated. Thx.0 -
Why isn't www.devonshiredentalcare.co.uk ranking?
Hi, devonshiredentalcare.co.uk was hit badly by one of Google's algorithm updates due to some prior poor seo (by another company). We took this client on and followed all of Google's guidelines and after a lot of work, managed to lift the penalty. It's been almost a year since the penalty was lifted, but it seems to be impossible to get this website ranking for 'Dentist Glasgow', they are currently page 4 in the SERPs! They have 33 Google reviews, we've built good quality links and citations, they have a 'Grade A' for on page optimisation in moz, we are also about to make the website responsive due to the recent mobilegeddon update. Do you have any further suggestions to help get this website ranking? Thanks in advance, Faye
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | dentaldesign0 -
Acceptable use of availability attribute 'preorder' value in rich snippets schema markup and Google Shopping feed?
Hello all, Could someone please advise on acceptable use of the availability attribute 'preorder' value in rich snippets schema markup for our websites and the Google Shopping feed? Currently all of our products are either 'in stock' or 'out of stock', also mentioned was 'available for order' but I found that in the 2014 Google Shopping update, this value will be merged with 'in stock' here 'We are simplifying the ‘availability’ attribute by merging ‘in stock’ with ‘available for order’ and removing ‘available for order’. The products which we would like to mark as 'preorder' have been in stock and then sold out, however we have a due date for when they will come back into stock, so therefore the customer can preorder the product on our website i.e. pay in advance to secure their purchase and then they are provided with a due date for the products. Is this the correct use of the 'preorder' value, or does the product literally have to never have been released before? The guidance we have is: 'You are taking orders for this product, but it’s not yet been released.' Is this set in stone? Many thanks in advance and kind regards.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | jeffwhitfield0 -
Meta Tags (again)
Hey, I know this has been discussed to death but look back through previous postings there doesn't seem to be a consensus on the exact Meta tags that an eCommerce site should include, specifically whether to remove the keyword tag or not since it is believed that Yahoo potentially still makes use of it. Currently our homepage has the following Meta Tags: <title>Buy Printer Cartridges | Ink and Toner Cartridge for Inkjet and Laser Printers</title> Description" content="<a class="attribute-value">Visit Refresh Cartridges for great prices on ink cartridges, toner cartridges, ink, printers and accessories.</a>" /> Keywords" content="<a class="attribute-value">ink cartridges, cheap cartridges, inkjet cartridges, inkjet ink cartridges, ink cartridge, printer ink cartridges, laser cartridges, toner, laser printers</a>" /> Content-Type" content="<a class="attribute-value">text/html; charset=iso-8859-1</a>"/> author" content="<a class="attribute-value">Ink Cartridges, Inkjet Cartridge, Printer Cartridge, Toner Cartridges Refresh Cartridges</a>" /> expires" content="<a class="attribute-value">0</a>" /> robots" content="<a class="attribute-value">noodp,index,follow</a>" /> Language" content="<a class="attribute-value">English</a>" /> Cache-Control" content="<a class="attribute-value">Public</a>" /> verify-v1" content="<a class="attribute-value">sJXqAAWP6ar/LTEOMyUgG6nqothxk62tJTid+ryBJxo=</a>" /> viewport" content="<a class="attribute-value">width=1024</a>" /> This is too messy but before I do something drastic that I'll possibly regret please can you confirm that, in your opinion, I am best to remove everything with the exception of this: <title>Buy Printer Cartridges | Ink and Toner Cartridge for Inkjet and Laser Printers</title> Description" content="<a class="attribute-value">Visit Refresh Cartridges for great prices on ink cartridges, toner cartridges, ink, printers and accessories.</a>" /> Content-Type" content="<a class="attribute-value">text/html; charset=iso-8859-1</a>"/>
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisHolgate
viewport" content="<a class="attribute-value">width=1024</a>" /> I realise there is a verify-v1 tag in there but this can be done through a file on our server so while cleaning up that might as well go. Would there be an argument for keeping any of the other tags or are they all pretty much redundant now? Many thanks! Chris0 -
Is it worth changing themes to be Responsive, and risk a SERP change?
I've got a site that ranks #1 for it's term. It's Worpress on Thesis 1.85. The site is not responsive and cannot be because Thesis 1x is not (and Thesis 1x is a dead end). I really would like my site responsive, but I fear changing things might affect my #1 rank. The least impactful change I could do is move to Thesis 2.x, but I have come to really dislike the company and hate to get locked in again. There are other frameworks I would prefer to move to, but their impact on my pages' source would be much more. So, my question is, is it worth moving to a new theme (keeping the layout looking exactly the same, although the "source" would look different) just to make the site responsive? Is it that important?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | bizzer0 -
How to make an AJAX site crawlable when PushState and #! can't be used?
Dear Mozzers, Does anyone know a solution to make an AJAX site crawlable if: 1. You can't make use of #! (with HTML snapshots) due to tracking in Analytics 2. PushState can't be implemented Could it be a solution to create two versions of each page (one without #!, so campaigns can be tracked in Analytics & one with #! which will be presented to Google)? Or is there another magical solution that works as well? Any input or advice is highly appreciated! Kind regards, Peter
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ConversionMob0