Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.

Your browser does not seem to support JavaScript. As a result, your viewing experience will be diminished, and you have been placed in read-only mode.

Please download a browser that supports JavaScript, or enable it if it's disabled (i.e. NoScript).

Unsolved Product search menu Canonical tag and missing description errors

Moz Pro

2880

iPharm last edited by

We have recently migrated to an entirely new website, Moz is now picking up many meta data issues, the bulk of these are from descriptions and missing canonical tags from product search pages (i.e, customer searches for a product and the search results page is the one being picked up, is this is a big issue for the site's overall SEO rating and if so what can be done to resolve this?
1 Reply Last reply
Reply Quote 0

Got a burning SEO question?

Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.

Start my free trial

Browse Questions

View

From

Sorted by

With category

Explore more categories

Related Questions

Rel: Canonical - checking advice provided by SEO agency

seo canonical canonical duplicate

Hey all, We have two brands one bigger and one smaller that are on 2 different domains. We are wanting to repost some of the articles from the smaller brand to the bigger brand and what was a bit of curve ball, our SEO agency advised us NOT to put a rel: canonical on the reposted articles on the bigger brands site. This is counter to what i'm used to and just wanted to confirm with the gurus out there if this is good advice or bad advice. Thanks 🙂
Technical SEO | | Redooo

0
Unsolved Moz Pro crawl signaling missing canonical which are not?

moz pro crawl errors wrong insight canonical

Hi,
I'm trying MozPro considering using it.
One of the tool which is appealing is the crawl and insights.
After quick use, I really question many of the alerts, for instance, I got a "missing canonical tag" on this url: https://vintners.co/wine/grawu_gto#2020 but when I check my markup, there's clearly a canonical tag: <link rel="canonical" href="https://vintners.co/wine/grawu_gto"> Anybody can explain?
I asked Moz Pro staff when being onboarded but didn't get an answer...
Honestly, I'm questioning the value of these crawls, or may be I miss something?
Moz Pro | | rolandvintners

0
Unsolved Missing Title Issue

missing title metadata

Hi, Moz reports 520 Missing Titles in Metadata issues. On of it is :
https://www.giftstoindia24x7.com/l/cochin.aspx But the page has a valid title. Why is Moz reporting this page for missing title ? Thanks, Amit
Product Support | | giftstoindia

0
"Duplicate without user-selected canonical” - impact to Google Ads costs

google ads canonical

Hello, we are facing some issues on our project and we would like to get some advice. Scenario
We run several websites (www.brandName.com, www.brandName.be, www.brandName.ch, etc..) all in French language . All sites have nearly the same content & structure, only minor text (some headings and phone numbers due to different countries are different). There are many good quality pages, but again they are the same over all domains. Current solution
Currently we don’t use canonicals, instead we use rel="alternate" hreflang="x-default": <link rel="alternate" hreflang="fr-BE" href="https://www.brandName.be/" /> <link rel="alternate" hreflang="fr-CA" href="https://www.brandName.ca/" /> <link rel="alternate" hreflang="fr-CH" href="https://www.brandName.ch/" /> <link rel="alternate" hreflang="fr-FR" href="https://www.brandName.fr/" /> <link rel="alternate" hreflang="fr-LU" href="https://www.brandName.lu/" /> <link rel="alternate" hreflang="x-default" href="https://www.brandName.com/" /> Naturally this si reflected in ""Duplicate without user-selected canonical” . Issue
We create the same ad in Google Ads for 2 domains. So the content is mostly identical, ads are identical, target URLs differ only in domain. Yet Google Ads “Quality score” is different (10/10 vs. 6/10) and “Landing page experience” is very different (Above average vs. Average). Some members of our team think lower “Landing page experience” increases the Google Ads costs, which I personally don't believe, but I want to double check. Question: Can “Duplicate without user-selected canonical” issue decrease the “Landing page experience” rating and as result can it cause higher Google ads costs? Any suggestions/ideas appreciated, thanks. Regards.
Paid Search Marketing | | Alex_Pisa

0
503 Error or 200 OK??

So, in a Moz crawl and a Screaming From crawl, I'm getting some 503 Service Unavailable responses on the some pages. So I go to the pages in question, and the Moz bar is showing a 200 OK. The SEOBook http status checker (http://tools.seobook.com/server-header-checker/) also shows a 200 OK. What gives? The only reason I'm looking at this is because rankings plummeted a couple of weeks ago. Thanks! UPDATE So, I decided to use the mozbar to set the user agent as Googlebot and when I tried to access the pages in question I receive this message. I don't think this is an issue... anyone else have much experience here? Your access to this site has been limited Your access to this service has been temporarily limited. Please try again in a few minutes. (HTTP response code 503) Reason: Fake Google crawler automatically blocked Important note for site admins: If you are the administrator of this website note that your access has been limited because you broke one of the Wordfence firewall rules. The reason you access was limited is: "Fake Google crawler automatically blocked". If this is a false positive, meaning that your access to your own site has been limited incorrectly, then you will need to regain access to your site, go to the Wordfence "options" page, go to the section for Firewall Rules and disable the rule that caused you to be blocked. For example, if you were blocked because it was detected that you are a fake Google crawler, then disable the rule that blocks fake google crawlers. Or if you were blocked because you were accessing your site too quickly, then increase the number of accesses allowed per minute. If you're still having trouble, then simply disable the Wordfence firewall and you will still benefit from the other security features that Wordfence provides. If you are a site administrator and have been accidentally locked out, please enter your email in the box below and click "Send". If the email address you enter belongs to a known site administrator or someone set to receive Wordfence alerts, we will send you an email to help you regain access. Please read our FAQ if this does not work.
Moz Pro | | wiredseo

0
Need advice interpreting these changes in my search traffic

I've recently made a few changes to my site based on some advice from the seomoz tool. I've noticed some changes in the traffic data (see attached image) which I can't completely explain. First, the good news is that total organic search visits is up 2%. I assume this is the most important metric and I'm obviously happy with total increase in organic search. At the same time the number of number of URL's entered on search is down 1%. I think this can be explained by the fact that I removed some duplicate pages (like archives that had the same content as the blog post pages, etc.) The part that I don't quite understand is that total number of non paid keywords sending search is down 3%. That seems like an unexplained decrease that I can't really account for. Any ideas on how to interpret this? Is it also possible that a single week's results can be misleading about how well your SEO efforts are paying off? 20120711-j4ti8ynwi1hn4rbrsppe167m6.jpg
Moz Pro | | schof

0
'Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical', Critical Factor but appears correct on page

Hi, Trying to get the following page ranked unsuccessfully.... http://www.joules.com/en-GB/2/Collections-Quilted-Jackets/c01c02.r16.1 Instead a product page is being ranked, shown below.... http://www.joules.com/en-GB/Womens-Quilted-Jacket/Navy/M_HAMPTON/ProductDetail.raction When I run the on page report card it advises that the Rel Canonical tag needs to point to that page, but we have checked and it looks to be doing that already. Has anyone else had an issue like this? Thanks, Martin
Moz Pro | | rockethot

0
Crawl Diagnostics finding pages that dont exist. Will Rel Canon Help?

I have recently set up a campaign for www.completeoffice.co.uk. Im the in-house developer there. When the crawl diagnostics completed, i went to check the results, and to my surprise, it had well over 100 missing or empty title tags. I then clicked it to see what pages, and nearly all the pages it say have missing or empty title tags, DO NOT EXIST. This has really confused me and need help figuring out how to solve this. Can anyone help? Attached image is a screen shot of some of the links it showed me on crawl diagnostics, nearly all of these do not exist. Will the relation Canonical tag in the head section of the actual pages help? For example, The actual page that exist is: www.completeoffice.co.uk/Products.php Whereas, when crawled it actually showed www.completeoffice.co.uk/Products/Products.php Will have the rel can tag in the header of the real products.php solve this?
Moz Pro | | CompleteOffice

0