Moz/Google does not recognize text on Wix website
-
My client's website was built on Wix and despite having substantial content on web pages, Moz is claiming that there is very little-to-no content: Sufficient Characters/Words in Content.
Does anyone know how to fix this issue? I've run a word count tool and it gives the same results.
Website: pesclinical.com
-
Sorry, I must not have been clear. The site/page has words - one of the first paragraphs has 92 words and 472 characters without spaces, so that isn't the issue.
The issue is that Moz/Google cannot see the text - they think the page has no words on it.
-
Hard to say without seeing the website. I would recommend having 500+ words on any page you want to rank on Google (may have to have more depending on competition). Sometimes there can be a misreading if you have written content with a widget that displays on a page vs having it directly on the specific page's content.
It is also important to remember that while the content length is important, I would argue content quality and content depth should be more of a focus. Check out this recent Moz post- https://moz.com/blog/influence-googles-ranking-factor.
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
-
Why Google de-rank a website.
Hi, I was inspecting a website which is covering the topic of best wheelbarrow of 2021, it is a new website and and starts ranking on google. But, after few days it got de-rank automatically and Moz is also not showing any result to that. I was wandering why this just happened and what should I do if I made my website and will not face this kind of situation?
Technical SEO | | Moeen22330 -
Text to code ratio<10% warning from website audit by SiteChecker.Pro - how important is it?
Hi to everyone, I used Sitechecker.Pro for a website audit of a client website https://bizpages.org and there was this warning (not an error!): TEXT TO CODE RATIO<10% https://sitechecker.pro/app/main/project/1839063/audit/summary How important is this to achieve good ranking? What are good ratios? I undestand that more text needs to be added to improve it? fcdcfbe438
Technical SEO | | astweb0 -
How long does Google/Bing take to index
Hello we have 2-3 new pages being submitted every night to google/bing via our sitemap. Two issues I am noticing. Wondering if anyone else has same issues. a) 22 URL submitted via sitemap but only 1 indexed in two weeks. there are no errors showing b) If i submit manually using "Fetch As Google" and request indexing - the page gets indexed right way but after a day it seems to be unindexed - it will show up when i search (site:domain.com) but then disappear from the results doing the same search a few days later. Is this normal or do i have a problem that needs addressing? thank you
Technical SEO | | sancarlos0 -
How preproduction website is getting indexed in Google.
Hi team, Can anybody please help me to find how my preproduction website and urls are getting indexed in Google.
Technical SEO | | nlogix0 -
How to improve ranking of a website again, after being penalized by Google?
The ranking of our website has gone down in past 2 months. The reason,
Technical SEO | | TGA123
I believe is that we had more than 300,000 spammy comments posted on it
(the website is based on wordpress) so Google treated it as
un-monitored forum and penalized. We have deleted the older comments
and new comments can no longer be posted. Need suggestions on what else
should we do to rank better. Any advice would be very welcome.0 -
/~username
Hello, The utility on this site that crawls your site and highlights what it sees as potential problems reported an issue with /~username access seeing it as duplicate content i.e. mydomain.com/file.htm is the same as mydomain.com~/username/file.htm so I went to my server hosts and they disabled it using mod_userdir but GWT now gives loads of 404 errors. Have I gone about this the wrong way or was it not really a problem in the first place or have I fixed something that wasn't broken and made things worse? Thanks, Ian
Technical SEO | | jwdl0 -
Google Sitelinks
We have an e-commerce site that has about 50k pageviews of our main shop page every week. However in our Google sitelinks we have one for 'Shop'. However, for the Shop sitelink Google is linking to a random URL that we have never & would never use as a URL and not to our Shop page. I can't work out why Google would pick up this random url as we have so many links etc to the main shop page. Why are they not linking to the right page? I have blocked that url in webmaster tools and done a redirect but I want to understand why it happened in the first place. It included 'swedish+fish' so it seems weirdly spammy?! Any thoughts would be really helpful (and I am only mildly techy). Many thanks
Technical SEO | | ahamill0 -
OK to block /js/ folder using robots.txt?
I know Matt Cutts suggestions we allow bots to crawl css and javascript folders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNEipHjsEPU) But what if you have lots and lots of JS and you dont want to waste precious crawl resources? Also, as we update and improve the javascript on our site, we iterate the version number ?v=1.1... 1.2... 1.3... etc. And the legacy versions show up in Google Webmaster Tools as 404s. For example: http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/global_functions.js?v=1.1
Technical SEO | | AndreVanKets
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/jquery.cookie.js?v=1.1
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/global.js?v=1.2
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/jquery.validate.min.js?v=1.1
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/json2.js?v=1.1 Wouldn't it just be easier to prevent Googlebot from crawling the js folder altogether? Isn't that what robots.txt was made for? Just to be clear - we are NOT doing any sneaky redirects or other dodgy javascript hacks. We're just trying to power our content and UX elegantly with javascript. What do you guys say: Obey Matt? Or run the javascript gauntlet?0