Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
canonical has now been requested on home page.
SC only shows 1096 404's due to be fixed soon.
Some pages have wrong canonicals, for example:
http://physiotherapystore.com/a60.html has a canonical to http://www.physiotherapystore.com/a60.html?SID=km31jh6kvjfcs45oq0s2qltdc3 which is incorrect. We have a few of these that are in dev to be fixed.
I'm still not sure though if these issues could have caused a huge sudden drop in traffic?
Thanks
Thank you,
Do you recommend I go into the redirect file and add in www where it is not already there?
I am aware of meta description and there is a sitemap here: http://www.physiotherapystore.com/sitemaps/physio/sitemap.xml
Search Console data doesn't go back far enough to see the sudden drop in traffic.
Hi Guys,
I am currently working on a site that's organic traffic suffered ( and is still suffering ) a huge drop in organic traffic.
From a consistent 3-400 organic visits a day to almost zero. This happened as soon as the new site went live. I am now digging to find out why.
301s were put in place ( over 2, 500 over them ) and there are still over 1,100 outstanding after review search console this morning.
Having looked at the redirect file that was put in place when the new site went live, it all look OK, apart from the redirects look like this...
http://www.physiotherapystore.com/ to http://physiotherapystore.com/
Where the new URL is missing www. - I am concerned this is causing a large duplicate issue as both www. and non www. work fine.
I am right to have concern or is this something not to worry about?
Hey Tom! How are you?!
The canonicals on your example may have had a brief disappearance, however please look at the below exaple where the canonical was implemented but ignored,
Hi,
We have rel=canonical set up on our ecommerce site but Google is still indexing pages that have rel=canonical.
For example,
http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/novelty.html?colour=7883&p=3&size=599
http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/novelty.html?p=4&size=599
http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/children.html?colour=7886&mode=list
These are all indexed but all have rel=canonical implemented. Can anyone explain why this has happened?
Hi Lewis,
Firstly thank you for taking your time to respond in depth to my question.
Since reading your response, I have done the following...
Identified the parameters that should NOT be indexed, these are; 'brand=', 'min=' and 'max='
The colour filter 'colour=' is to be kept indexed. I have reviewed the website and found that users cannot currently select to filter more than on colour, which eliminates Google from indexing multiple colour filters in one URL.
However, users can still filter by colour and brand, hence why I have requested ours devs to meta noindex any URL that contains the 'brand=' parameter as well as any URLs that have the 'min/max=' parameters as these are price filters.
I have also requested rel=next/prev to be implemented correctly.
The above should drastically reduce our indexed content.
As well as this, I have added the following parameters into Search Consoles' URL Parameter tool as 'No Crawl', 'brand, min, max' - although I understand this is not a guaranteed fix, it was my first option with no immediate dev time over the weekend.
Now the only URLs in need of a canonical is the colour filtered URLs as 'brand, min max' are all noindex. I have asked dev to ensure the canonical points back to page 1 for now, however I am looking into a view-all page option so the canonical would point to that.
A good learning curve all of this!
Hi Guys,
Wondering if I can get some technical help here...
We have our site britishbraces.co.uk , built in Magento. As per eCommerce sites, we have paginated pages throughout.
These have rel=next/prev implemented but not correctly ( as it is not in is it in ) - this fix is in process.
Our canonicals are currently incorrect as far as I believe, as even when content is filtered, the canonical takes you back to the first page URL. For example,
http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/x-style.html?ajaxcatalog=true&brand=380&max=51.19&min=31.19
Canonical to...
http://www.britishbraces.co.uk/braces/x-style.html
Which I understand to be incorrect.
As I want the coloured filtered pages to be indexed ( due to search volume for colour related queries ), but I don't want the price filtered pages to be indexed - I am unsure how to implement the solution?
As I understand, because rel=next/prev implemented ( with no View All page ), the rel=canonical is not necessary as Google understands page 1 is the first page in the series.
Therefore, once a user has filtered by colour, there should then be a canonical pointing to the coloured filter URL? ( e.g. /product/black )
But when a user filters by price, there should be noindex on those URLs ? Or can this be blocked in robots.txt prior?
My head is a little confused here and I know we have an issue because our amount of indexed pages is increasing day by day but to no solution of the facet urls.
Can anybody help - apologies in advance if I have confused the matter.
Thanks