File from godaddy.com
-
Hi,
One of our client has received a file from godaddy.com where his site is hosted. Here is the message from the client-
"i submitted my site for Search Engine Visibility,but they got some issue on the site need to be fixed. i tried myself could not fix it"
The site in question is - http://allkindofessays.com/
Is there any problem with the site ?
Contents of the file -
bplist00Ó k 0_ WebSubframeArchives_ WebSubresources_ WebMainResource L x Ï Ö Ý ] ¨ ¯ ¼ Û 6 SÓ @ F¡ Ó / :¡ Ó )¡ Ò ¡ Ô _ WebResourceResponse_ WebResourceData_ WebResourceMIMEType^WebResourceURLO cbplist00Ô Z[X$versionX$objectsY$archiverT$top † ¯ "()0 12DEFGHIJKLMNOPTUU$nullÝ !R$6S$10R$2R$7R$3S$11R$8V$classR$4R$9R$0R$5R$1€ € € € € € € € Ó #$%& [NS.relativeWNS.base€ € € _ ¢http://tags.bluekai.com/site/2748?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fsegment-pixel.invitemedia.com%2Fset_partner_uid%3FpartnerID%3D84%26partnerUID%3D%24_BK_UUID%26sscs_active%3D1Ò*+,-Z$classnameX$classesUNSURL¢./UNSURLXNSObject#A´ þ¹ –5 ÈÓ 3456=WNS.keysZNS.objects€ ¦789:;<€ €€ € €€ ¦>?@ABC€ € € € € € \Content-TypeSP3PVServerTDate^Content-LengthYBK-ServerYimage/gif_ nCP="NOI DSP COR CUR ADMo DEVo PSAo PSDo OUR SAMo BUS UNI NAV", policyref="http://tags.bluekai.com/w3c/p3p.xml"_ Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS)_ Sat, 10 Sep 2011 20:23:21 GMTR62T87dfÒ*+QR_ NSMutableDictionary£QS/\NSDictionary >Ò*+VW_ NSHTTPURLResponse£XY/_ NSHTTPURLResponse]NSURLResponse_ NSKeyedArchiverÑ]_ WebResourceResponse€ # - 2 7 R X s v z } € ƒ ‡ Š ‘ ” — š ¢ ¤ ¦ ¨ ª ¬ ° ² ´ ¶ ¸ ¿ Ë Ó Õ × Ù ~ ƒ Ž — ¦ ¯ ¸ º Á É Ô Ö Ý ß á ã å ç é ð ò ô ö ø ú ü ( 2 < Å å è í ò 4 8 L Z l o … ^ ‡O >GIF89a ÿÿÿ!ÿ NETSCAPE2.0 !ù , L ;Yimage/gif_ ¢http://tags.bluekai.com/site/2748?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fsegment-pixel.invitemedia.com%2Fset_partner_uid%3FpartnerID%3D84%26partnerUID%3D%24_BK_UUID%26sscs_active%3D1Õ _ WebResourceTextEncodingName_ WebResourceFrameNameO 6
-
I'm guessing it's a report from GoDaddy related to the Search Engine Visibility package? See a few more details at http://www.godaddy.com/search-engine/seo-services.aspx and that might explain it.
-
Thanks But why did the client received this file from godaddy.com
-
Plenty of coding errors - get your developer to go through this list and make sure it's W3C compliant. Then I'd advise you show less latest essay additions since it ruins the look of the site(in my opinion).
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
-
Site:www.domainname.com - does not find homepage in Google (only inner pages - why?)
When I do a Google search on site:www.domainname.com, my clients homepage does not appear. Other inner pages do. The same thing happend a while ago and I did 'fetch by google' in Search Console. After that the homepage was indexed again when I did a site:www.domainname.com search. But now (2 weeks later), it's gone again. When I search on the brand name of the website in Google it does find the homepage. I don't know why it doesn't find the homepage when I do a site: search. Any ideas? [see images where you can see the problem] XTrDn 2doHF
Technical SEO | | robk1230 -
Where does rel=canonical go? One file that manages sort order, view, filters, etc...
Where do I put the rel=canonical when the search.cfm (using URL re-write) page is the one and only page, just using url parameters to control sort, filter, view, etc. Do I just put the rel=canonical at the top of the search.cfm page? The duplicate content issues I am getting are: https://www.domain.com/tx/austin/ https://www.domain.com/tx/austin/?d=25&h=&s=r&t=&v=l&a= Just want to be clear since Moz Pro is picking up both URL's but it's only really one file, search.cfm Thanks in advance for your help.
Technical SEO | | ErnieB0 -
.com or local tld ?
Hi I have a webshop for my own clothing and boots brand.
Technical SEO | | mikehenze
The boots brand is changing name soon and i will move it to another domain. I will off course 301 the boot related urls to the new domain to pass on link juice. But now i have the option to go for bootbrand.com/uk bootbrand.com/nl bootband.com/de or use the local tld which i own allready. Bootbrand.nl bootbrand.de etc Knowing that i own both .com and the local tld's what would be the best option for SEO?0 -
File name same as folder name, ok?
Is it ok to have a folder and file name to be both the same e.g domain.com/xyz-products/ domain.com/xyz-products.php File name would be a page that lists a number of products and then within the folder there would be x-product.php, y-product.php etc
Technical SEO | | NeilD0 -
How can I prevent duplicate content between www.page.com/ and www.page.com
SEOMoz's recent crawl showed me that I had an error for duplicate content and duplicate page titles. This is a problem because it found the same page twice because of a '/' on the end of one url. e.g. www.page.com/ vs. www.page.com My question is do I need to be concerned about this. And is there anything I should put in my htaccess file to prevent this happening. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | onlineexpression
Karl0 -
Domain.com and domain.com/ redirect(error)
When I view my campaign report I'm seeing duplicate content/ meta for mydomain.com and mydomain.com/ (with a slash) I already applied a 301 redirect as follows: redirect 301 /index.php/ /index.php Where am I messing up here?
Technical SEO | | cgman0 -
Submitting Sitemap File vs Sitemap Index File
Is it better to submit all sitemap files contained in a Sitemap Index File manually to Google or is it about the same as just submitting the Master Sitemap Index File.
Technical SEO | | AU-SEO0 -
Converse.com - flash and html version of site... bad idea?
I have a questions regarding Converse.com. I realize this ecommerce site is needs a lot of seo help. There’s plenty of obvious low hanging seo fruit. On a high level, I see a very large SEO issue with the site architecture. The site is a full page flash experience that uses a # in the URL. The search engines pretty much see every flash page as the home page. To help with issue a HTML version of the site was created. Google crawls the Home Page - Converse.com http://www.converse.com Marimekko category page (flash version) http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko Marimekko category page (html version, need to have flash disabled) http://www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko Here is the example of the issue. This site has a great post featuring Helen Marimekko shoes http://www.coolmompicks.com/2011/03/finnish_foot_prints.php The post links to the flash Marimekko catagory page (http://www.converse.com/#/products/featured/marimekko) as I would expect (ninety something percent of visitors to converse.com have the required flash plug in). So the flash page is getting the link back juice. But the flash page is invisible to google. When I search for “converse marimekko” in google, the marimekko landing page is not in the top 500 results. So I then searched for “converse.com marimekko” and see the HTML version of the landing page listed as the 4<sup>th</sup> organic result. The result has the html version of the page. When I click the link I get redirected to the flash Marimekko category page but if I do not have flash I go to the html category page. ----- Marimekko - Converse All Star Marimekko Price: $85, Jack Purcell Helen Marimekko Price: $75 ... www.converse.com/products/featured/marimekko - Cached So my issues are… Is converse skating on thin SEO ice by having a HTML and flash version of their site/product pages? Do you think it’s a huge drag on seo rankings to have a large % of back links linking to flash pages when google is crawling the html pages? Any recommendations on to what to do about this? Thanks, SEOsurfer
Technical SEO | | seosurfer-2883190