Strange cache - what could be the reason
-
The cache of one of our site is being displayed in a strange way in Google. The site in question is - http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/ The cache is shown like this -
Title is shown first
description
Followed by URL
What could be the reason for this.
Normally, cache is shown in a box like this ..... in a rectangular box
This is Google's cache of .... . It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on...
-
Thanks. Understood.
-
I was thinking that Google first caches a site, and then includes the site in it's index.
The mechanics of how Google actually works is not public information. We have to make decisions based upon the glimpses of information that is shared along with our experiences and testing results.
With the above understood, Google defines the noarchive tag as "noarchive: prevents Google from showing the Cached link for a page". So technically they could still make the cached page available by other means but not offer the link.
My experience is Google clearly has all the data from your site. If they crawl your site and index it, they capture all the information. They are choosing to not make any cached copies of the site available due to the noarchive tag. Your experience in this instance clearly indicates Google not only does not present the "cached" link in SERPs but blocks users from seeing the cache through other means as well.
In short, I agree with you. I believe your page is cached but Google is preventing the cache from being viewed.
-
Thanks Ryan for your time and patience.
Don't you think the issue here is that the page is indeed cached, but NOT showing the cached link due to the tag mentioned by me. How can a page be in Google's index, but not cached.
I was thinking that Google first caches a site, and then includes the site in it's index.
-
Yes to both questions.
I mean the page is in Google's index and not cached.
The noarchive meta tag is designed specifically to prevent search engines from caching a web page.
-
You mean that page is in Google's index, but NOT cached.
I just came across this tag
is the issue has something to do with this tag ?
I replied late because i am in a different time zone.
-
When I enter the search query you offered, cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/, I see a single normal search result. There is nothing wrong with the result except you are wanting to see the cached page, not the search result. The issue is, the cached page does not exist. Google SERPs shows no cache. The system cannot provide what it does not possess.
It appears Google is thinking, well we don't have the cache that is being requested, so we'll offer the next best thing, the search result to the live page which the user can click on. It makes perfect sense to me.
You are comparing the result for your page with other pages and asking about the differences. In the example you offered, www.bidvolt.com/drywall-contractors.php is a cached page. It has an SEO issue in that both the www and non-www URLs work.
When I look at the non-www cache it comes up with a standard "your search did not match any documents" message. This url, as entered, lacks any result matches in Google. If you enter the same URL adding in the www subdomain, you will see the cached page.
The result is different because in this example the page is not in Google's index, where your page is in the index. From what I am seeing the results are logical, sensible and normal.
-
So how exactly are you viewing the "cache"?
I am viewing the cache using Google toolbar. Please enter the below line in Google and you will understand what i am trying to say
cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/
and view the result. If it's not cached as you are saying, then why is it being shown like this. If a page is not cached, it does not show like this.
If a page is not cached, it should show like this -
-
Perhaps we can find some common ground upon which to agree.
http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/ is not currently cached in Google. The screenshot I shared shows the page is not cached.
The natural way to view cache is to click the "Cached" link in a search result page. You are not clicking that link. So how exactly are you viewing the "cache"?
I am taking a guess that you are attempting to access the cache directly through another means, and therefore you are not seeing the desired result.
The reply offered earlier where you said "I have added the image of the cache" does not have any image attached. Perhaps if you could share a complete image it would clarify things.
-
If you open the page http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/, and view it's cache, you will understand what i am trying to say. It shows
cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/
Web Development India - UG Webmart6 Jul 2011 – UG Webmart specializes in custom web development, open source solutions and Organic SEO services.
www.ugwebmart.com/en/What i mean by normal cache ( cache which is normally shown ) is what is being shown when you view of http://www.ugwebmart.com/ ( home page )
The difference in the cache of two pages is what i would like to know
If there is no cache, it should have been shown blank
-
You are searching the cache for www.ugwebmart.com/en/. The problem is, there is no cache for the page, which is why your results are appearing that way.
Notice the second result does not have the word "cache" next to it.
-
I have added the image of the cache.
-
Atul, I took a look at the cache for the URL you offered and it appears normal to me. Can you offer a search term or the exact page that is showing the issue? As Steven suggested, a screenshot would be most helpful.
-
Do you have a screen capture of the cache result that you see it as appears as normal for me an its a little difficult to determine what you're describing
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
-
Strange URL redirecting to my new site
Hi all, I recently relaunched a site on a brand new URL - www.boardwarehouse.co.uk. I've spent the last couple of weeks building some backlinks as well as developing a basic content strategy. We've started ranking for a few of our less competitive keywords which is great, however there's a strange site which either redirects or is mirroring our content. I'm at a complete loss as to what's causing this to happen and what i can do to stop it. On the attachment - my content is top and second. The fourth result is the offending site. Any help/ advice would be most helpful! Thanks in advance, Alick 0BSyNn6
Technical SEO | | Alick3000 -
Why is Google's cache preview showing different version of webpage (i.e. not displaying content)
My URL is: http://www.fslocal.comRecently, we discovered Google's cached snapshots of our business listings look different from what's displayed to users. The main issue? Our content isn't displayed in cached results (although while the content isn't visible on the front-end of cached pages, the text can be found when you view the page source of that cached result).These listings are structured so everything is coded and contained within 1 page (e.g. http://www.fslocal.com/toronto/auto-vault-canada/). But even though the URL stays the same, we've created separate "pages" of content (e.g. "About," "Additional Info," "Contact," etc.) for each listing, and only 1 "page" of content will ever be displayed to the user at a time. This is controlled by JavaScript and using display:none in CSS. Why do our cached results look different? Why would our content not show up in Google's cache preview, even though the text can be found in the page source? Does it have to do with the way we're using display:none? Are there negative SEO effects with regards to how we're using it (i.e. we're employing it strictly for aesthetics, but is it possible Google thinks we're trying to hide text)? Google's Technical Guidelines recommends against using "fancy features such as JavaScript, cookies, session IDs, frames, DHTML, or Flash." If we were to separate those business listing "pages" into actual separate URLs (e.g. http://www.fslocal.com/toronto/auto-vault-canada/contact/ would be the "Contact" page), and employ static HTML code instead of complicated JavaScript, would that solve the problem? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.Thanks!
Technical SEO | | fslocal0 -
Google rankings strange behaviour - our site can only be found when searching repeatedly
Hello, We are experiencing something very odd at the moment I hope somebody could shed some light on this. The rankings of our site dropped from page 2 to page 15 approx. 9 months ago. At first we thought we had been penalised and filed a consideration request. Google got back to us saying that there was no manual actions applied to our site. We have been working very hard to try to get the ranking up again and it seems to be improving. Now, according to several serps monitoring services, we are on page 2/3 again for the term "holiday lettings". However, the really strange thing is that when we search for this term on Google UK, our site is nowhere to be found. If you then right away hit the search button again searching for the same term, then voila! our website is on www.alphaholidaylettings.com page 2 / 3! We tried this on many different computers at different locations (private and public computers), making sure we have logged out from Google Accounts (so that customised search results are not returned). We even tried the computers at various retail outlets including different Apple stores. The results are the same. Essentially, we are never found when someone search for us for the first time, our site only shows up if you search for the same term for the second or third time. We just could not understand why this is happening. Somebody told me it could be due to "Google dance" when indices on different servers are being updated, but this has now been going on for nearly 3 months. Has anyone experienced similar situations or have any advice? Many thanks!
Technical SEO | | forgottenlife0 -
Robots.txt Download vs Cache
We made an update to the Robots.txt file this morning after the initial download of the robots.txt file. I then submitted the page through Fetch as Google bot to get the changes in asap. The cache time stamp on the page now shows Sep 27, 2013 15:35:28 GMT. I believe that would put the cache time stamp at about 6 hours ago. However the Blocked URLs tab in Google WMT shows the robots.txt last downloaded at 14 hours ago - and therefore it's showing the old file. This leads me to believe for the Robots.txt the cache date and the download time are independent. Is there anyway to get Google to recognize the new file other than waiting this out??
Technical SEO | | Rich_A0 -
500 error codes caused by W3 Total Cache plugin?
Hello Everyone, I operate a site (http://www.nationalbankruptcyforum.com) that has been receiving 500 error codes in Webmaster Tools as of late. This morning, webmaster tools showed 129 500 crawling errors. I've included one of the URLs that contained an error message here: http://www.nationalbankruptcyforum.com/marriage-and-bankruptcy/do-my-wife-and-i-both-have-to-file-for-bankruptcy/ I've been getting these errors now for about 3 weeks and they've mostly been on obscure, strange URLs (lots of numbers etc.) however, this morning they started showing up on pages that will actually be trafficked by users. I'm really not sure where they're coming from, although I do believe it's a software issue as I've had my hosting company take a look to no avail. I have had some development work done recently and am running the W3 Total Cache plugin (my site is built on WP). I also run the Yoast SEO plugin and rely on it to publish an XML sitemap among other things. Anyone have any idea where these 500 errors originate from? Thanks, John
Technical SEO | | oconn1460 -
Every time google caches our site it shows no website.
Our site <cite>www.skaino.co.uk/</cite> seems to be having real issues with being picked up with Google. The site has been around for a long time but no longer even ranks on google if you search for the word 'Skaino'. This is odd as its hardly a competitive keyword. If I do a site:www.skaino.co.uk then it shows all the pages proving the site has been indexed. But if I do cache:www.skaino.co.uk it shows a blank cache. I'm starting to worry that Google isn't able to crawl our site properly. If it helps to clarify we have a flash site with a HTML site running underneath for those who cant view flash. Im wandering if I've missed something glaringly obvious. Is it normal to have a blank google cache? Thanks AJ
Technical SEO | | handygammon0 -
Bing Cache
How can you see what pages are cached by bing. I'm basically looking for these google approaches for bing: cache:domain.com site:domain.com Thanks Tyler
Technical SEO | | tylerfraser1 -
Google caching meta tags from another site?
We have several sites on the same server. On the weekend we relocated some servers, changing IP address. A client has since noticed something freaky with the meta tags. 1. They search for their companyname, and another site from the same server appears in position 1. It is completely unrelated, has never happened before, and the company name is not used in any incoming text links. Eg search for company1 on Google. Company1.com.au appears at position 2, but at position1 is school1.com.au. The words company1 don't appear anywhere on the site. I've analysed all incoming links with a gazillion tools, and can't find any link text of company1, linking to school1. 2. Even more freaky, searching for company1.com.au at Google. The results at Google in position 1 for the last three days has been: Meta Title for school1 (but hovering/clicking actual goes to URL for company1)
Technical SEO | | ozgeekmum
Meta Description for school1
URL for company1.com.au Clicking on the cached copy of result1, it shows a cached version of school1 taken on March 18. Today is 29 March. Logically we are trying to get Google to spider both sites again quickly. We've asked the clients to update their home pages. Resubmitted xml sitemaps. Checked the HTTP status codes - both are happily returning 200s. Different cookies. I found another instance on a forum: http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/10578/incorrect-meta-information-in-google Any ideas?0