Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey there!

I actually haven't ever seen this happen before, but I think I have a fair explanation for why it's showing up that way! We began rolling out our new index with updated link metrics (including DA) on March 7th, which is showing seochat.com with a DA of 65. While I can't verify the previous DA value from out last index, I have a hunch that it was 66 and that this mention is using that older DA value because it was collected and documented prior to the new index being released.

It certainly does look a little funky, but I hope this helps to give some context! Cheers

Hey Dandelion!

We do send a signal to our partners when a listing is cancelled, but that message is effectively just saying "this listing is no longer being managed by Moz". From that point, each aggregator has a different way that they treat that and respond. Most aggregators just metaphorically shrug their shoulders, dissociate our service with the listing in their database and move on, but a couple (namely, Acxiom and Localeze) elect to revert the listing back to its previous form.

I can totally see how the result could feel like a malicious action from our side, but I assure you that we're taking the most mild action possible with each of out partners to simply relinquish ownership of that listing.

I hope this helps to provide some color to the way those relationships work! Let me know if you have any further questions!

Hiya!
I'm afraid we don't have a report quite like that, at the moment, but it's definitely something we're eager to build! I can't make any promises, but it does sound like it's on our roadmap.

Apologies for the inconvenience in the meantime, but I hope this helps to clarify. Party on.

Hi there!
Solid question! This is likely stemming from the fact that sites like YouTube and Pinterest are absolutely massive. Since we aim for our link index to show results from large numbers of sources and not get diluted by all of the millions of links from enormous sites, we limit the number of pages crawled on each domain to ~50,000.

As a result, there could certainly be links on those domains pointing to your site that we're not reporting on because they are buried deeper within the site structure than the links to your competitors. I hope this helps to explain! Feel free to hit me up with any further questions or concerns!

Heya!
You can create a campaign solely for a subfolder (or even a subdomain) by selecting the +Advanced setting in the campaign set-up; just click the check box there and it will limit our campaign audit to the pages on that specific subfolder (or subdomain).

From there, you can see in your Campaign Settings where if you've set it up for just that chunk of your site, or for the entire root domain. Our ability to report link metrics by subfolder is admittedly a bit limited, but keyword rankings and crawl will be fully representative of the section of your site you've specified.

I've created a short video here that will show you the steps in doing this in your own campaign. Give me a shout if you need any other details!

Hey Mark!

I'm afraid our tools do have limitations with recognizing non-latin character sets. It's definitely something we'd love to accommodate better, but at the moment, we simply don't have the ability to fully support the majestic tongues of Scandanavia. Apologies for the shortcoming!

As for our link index goes, we generally try to aim for reporting the most prominent and authoritative backlinks for your site, rather than acting as a complete backlink profile. It's a possibility that we haven't heavily-indexed the sites that are currently linking to you, or that the pages linking back to your site are buried deeper within the structure of the linking site, but it's a little tough for me to speak to specific details for a certain site. If you'd like, you can certainly send some examples over to us at help@moz.com for us to take a bit of a deeper look.

Happy weekend!

Howdy!
I'd say the 'Links' section of the Moz Glossary would be a solid place to start.

Hey Ian,

So sorry for any trouble generating your credentials! Unfortunately, we had a series of outages this week that were likely the culprit here.

It looks like you were able to successfully get your key up and runnin' by now, but let me know if there's anything else you need help with! Cheers

Glad you're excited to learn more about Moz Pro! I'd recommend signing up for a 1-on-1 demo with one of our Onboarding Specialists to help get yourself more familiarized with our reports.

You can sign up here: https://mozonboarding.youcanbook.me/

Well, shoot. Apparently, I'm not quite is familiar with UTF-8 characters and that distinction as I thought. Totally my mistake.

The line for our tools falls closer to english character sets. Even seemingly small modifiers like accents can throw off our ability to accurately count or detect matches on pages. So, when it comes to Hebrew characters, we simply don't have a good way to handle it.

It's no trouble at all, yamayamax! Happy to help any time

Hi there!
While I'm afraid I'm not able to help troubleshoot the code that's generating the call you're having trouble with, perhaps the folks over on our Mozscape Developer Discussion Group would be able to!

If you'd like to either drop an example call in here or send a sample call over to help@moz.com, I can certainly help identify what call parameters might be causing the 403 response for that specific call.

Hey Michal! 
I'm really sorry you're running into this issue! Unfortunately, it looks to be cropping up because of the non-latin characters being used on the page. Our crawler has a very difficult time interpreting non-UTF-8 characters, and often reports counts and matches poorly when looking at pages comprised of them.

I'm terribly sorry for the inconvenience! It's definitely something that we're looking to address down the road, but I'm afraid we don't have the resources to improve that functionality at the moment.

Yep, that certainly can be confusing, but there is potentially a good reason for it! Allow me to explain.

The score within your listing report is representative of what our system observes at this exact moment. So, it is a snapshot in time of how your listing distribution looks. This means that if, for example, one of our partners had an API outage at the time which caused them to be unable to report your listing's status to us, then that listing would appear as blank within your listing report and be reflected as such in the snapshot score.

However, issues like the one that I described above are completely temporary and do not impact your actual listings on those sites. So, we also include a "golden" score on your dashboard which is calculated with the best status we've observed from each aggregator over a longer timeframe. This score is intended to give you a more normalized impression of your listing score which is not impacted by unimportant volatilities.

I would say that both are useful in their own context, but you're absolutely right that it's not especially clear. I'll see if there's anything we could do to articulate that difference a bit better.

Hi there!
Thanks for reaching out! Spam Score is calculated on a subdomain-specific basis, based on the pages that we've observed within that subdomain. So, every page within a single subdomain would display the same Spam Score. Without knowing more about the specific site you're looking at, it's a little tough to say exactly what the best course of action is.

I'd definitely encourage you to check out this video from Rand when considering how to evaluate and apply Spam Score within the context of your site: https://moz.com/blog/understanding-and-applying-mozs-spam-score-metric-whiteboard-friday

I hope this helps! Feel free to let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. Have an awesome day!

Hi there!
You're doing everything right! This just happens to be a bit of clunkiness that occurs between when you add your on-page optimization pairing and your next weekly update. Once the first weekly campaign update rolls through after adding your optimization keyword+URL combo, you should see those values populated as you'd normally expect.

I'll definitely relay your feedback about this process, though! I hope this helps to explain!

Hi there!
While our crawler doesn't support rel="prev" or "next" tags as a means of resolving duplicate content, we do recognize canonical tags. In this case, it looks like the reason we're reporting these as duplicates is because the canonical tag on http://www.bikecation.co.uk/categories/cycling-climbs/page/2?showall=1 is pointing to http://www.bikecation.co.uk/categories/cycling-climbs/page/2 rather than http://www.bikecation.co.uk/categories/cycling-climbs.

I hope this helps!

Hi there!
I popped into your account to take a look at your Moz Local listing and also found your Facebook page directly on Facebook. From what I can tell, it looks like there's currently no phone number listed on the Facebook page, which is a piece of the NAP that we'd need to be visible on the page in order to associate it with your listing.

If you 'd be able to add or surface that on your Facebook page, then we should be able to start picking it up right away. For privacy's sake, I didn't want to give any specifics on the public forum about your business or Facebook page, but if you need any more guidance in this process, you can feel free to shoot us a message over to help@moz.com. Cheers!

Hi there! 
Don is absolutely right that spam score values varying by subdomain, as that's how we make distinctions for the metric.

With that being said, spam score of a given subdomain is not particularly easily influenced by the types of sites that are linking to it. Most of the 17 possible spam flags (which can be viewed here: https://moz.com/researchtools/ose/spam-analysis/flags?subdomain=www.penn-criminallawyers.com) are reflective of on-site factors within the subdomain itself. So, while I agree that spam score is not particularly well-adjusted to speak to the fact that http://www.penn-criminallawyers.com/ has some serious issues with their inbound links, it's worth noting that they didn't necessarily have to have cultivated all of those backlinks for themselves. I'm certainly not trying to go down the rabbit hole of spam conspiracy theories, but simply accounting for the fact that anyone can create a link to any site (unless disavows are involved), and it could be rash to judge a subdomain's "spammyness" based purely on their inbound external link profile.

Spam score is based on these 17 flags based on correlation (not causation) research that was done by Moz's data scientists, and it also makes the acknowledgement that there will be penalized sites with low spam , as well as non-penalized sites with a high spam score. For more context on that, I'd highly recommend that anyone looking into using spam score watch this explanation from Rand on the topic: https://moz.com/blog/understanding-and-applying-mozs-spam-score-metric-whiteboard-friday

To clarify, am I advocating that http://www.penn-criminallawyers.com/ is not a spammy site based on what spam score says? Nope. I'm not even speaking to that topic at all. For all I know, it certainly could be (and maybe I'm even inclined to think it is).

Am I saying that spam score is a value you should take at face value without doing any digging into the specific subdomains, themselves? Certainly not. I would stress doing serious research any time you're looking into spam, credibility or disavowing; it's simply there to serve as a potential source of guiding information.

Hope this helps!

Hi Trevor!

As it turns out, we do have a cache on our index to help stop valid links from falling out of our view. However, we're not able to guarantee that all links we've previously indexed will be re-indexed within that cache period. So, it can certainly still happen that links will drop out of our index. In general, this helps to promote a stable index, while still preserving freshness and relevance of links that we report on.

As far as metrics like DA and PA go, it's always important to remember that these are relative metrics, rather than absolute. While it always feels good to see them climb higher and higher, a consistent score or even a drop doesn't necessarily mean that there has been no improvement. I'd definitely recommend checking out this post by Rand on ways to consider these metrics: https://moz.com/community/q/da-pa-fluctuations-how-to-interpret-apply-understand-these-ml-based-scores

Hiya!

With respect to locations for rankings, there are 3 things I wanted to touch on. First, when collecting your rankings, Moz makes no assumptions whatsoever about your physical location. The location information that we use is specified by the campaign settings that you enter, whether that comes in the form of the country-specific search engines that you're tracking within your campaign settings or the locations that you've specifically assigned to keywords for local tracking.

As far as these national keywords go, Moz is querying the search engine in a process that completely strips personalization from the query. This means that it's more representative of a national average for all searchers in the country, but it also means that you may not be able to reproduce these exact SERPs within your browser because your location is factored into your search results.

For local keywords, I can't speak to the exact method that we utilize to represent local searches, but I can say that (at least for Google) we no longer utilize cookies to make location-specific determinations.

I hope this helps to explain!

I'm afraid that I don't have enough experience with Google Search Console to comment on why those links might be displaying differently than expected. If at any point you need any extra help looking through Open Site Explorer's results, feel free to pop some URLs in here or send them straight over to help@moz.com.

I'm afraid that our tools regularly encounter issues with non-Latin characters that I would expect you would end up running into. Concerning RTL languages in general, I don't believe that there are any that features of our tools that make accommodations for the different order used by these languages. So, I wouldn't think Moz would be a great fit for sites in those languages.

Sorry for the inconvenience!

Yep, that's a correct interpretation of what Localeze and Acxiom do when you cancel your Moz Local listing!

I can haz question?

Oh good! I'm glad you were able to find the source!

We actually use a set of dynamic IPs, so there's not a range that I'd be able to provide. I'm afraid the best things I could suggest would be to ask them to whitelist our user agents, dotbot and rogerbot.

I would expect that to take care of the issue

Ah, yep, that would do it!

That configuration is currently blocking every bot known to man from accessing every portion of your site. Here's an awesome resource to help with robots.txt setup: http://www.robotstxt.org/robotstxt.html

If you were looking to allow all robots to access all pages on your site, then this command would do the trick:

User-agent: *

Disallow:

(Without the blank line between commands. Q&A formatting be damned. )

Hi Ross!
On-Page Grader should definitely function for https sites, in general. For example, https://moz.com looks to be working just fine.

If you're getting that response from On-Page Grader, it's usually related to some sort of blockage. I'd recommend checking through your robots.txt to make sure that rogerbot and dotbot aren't being blocked, that your SSL is all looking good, and that the site isn't blocking Amazon Web Services (AWS).

Hmm that sounds like pretty abnormal behavior to me. Would you be able to give me an example of a domain where you're seeing that happen?

If you'd rather not make it public information, then you could always send a message into help@moz.com as well

Screenshot removed

HOW DARE YOU ENTER OUR SECRET STAGING LAIR!

I'm just kidding, that definitely sounds like a major Moz-stake on our side. If you could shoot an email over to help@moz.com with any extra info about how you made it to the staging subdomain, we'll work to get that fixed up right away! As a side note, I really appreciate your discretion on this matter. Thanks!

Hi there!
While it is rather peculiar for this statistic to have jumped so rapidly, it looks to be stemming from a more extensive indexing of the site's internal links, which you can see here: https://moz.com/researchtools/ose/comparisons?site=www.propchill.com

I can't necessarily speak to why all of those internal links were indexed this time around, but I do hope it helps to clarify where those links were being found!

I'd expect it to be more consistent moving forward, but it will likely never be void of fluctuations. That's just part of the nature of the metric.

For an in-depth look at DA, I'd recommend checking out this post: https://moz.com/community/q/what-s-the-story-on-mozscape-updates

Hi there!
I'm afraid our API currently doesn't have the capability to grab historical data. So, you would only be able to fetch link data for the current index. Hope this helps to clarify!

Hi Chris! 
I'm afraid that we don't have any sort of API or bulk upload process for On-Page Grader. Perhaps someone else would know about a non-Moz tool that could speed that process up for you! Cheers

Sweet deal! I'm glad you were able to get everything sorted out!

Yep, that change in links would be related to the new index update, as Heiko said.

As a note, this index is roughly the same size as its most recent predecessor, but we've done some serious re-focusing, in terms of the emphasis that we're placing on different sites. So, I would expect a bit of momentary turbulence in link counts, as we're now prioritizing sites/links differently.

With respect to metric drops, I would recommend looking at things like DA/PA trends in the reference frame of other similar sites, rather than treating it like an absolute value.

I'm sorry if I wasn't particularly clear!

I was asking if the site is blocking or restricting access to AWS in any way. Our On-Page Grader is powered by AWS, so blocking it would cause us to be unable to access the page.

Aloha!
Is there any chance that the site is blocking Amazon Web Services (AWS). That's usually the culprit in cases like these.

Hi Melinda! 
I'm afraid we don't have a way to duplicate custom reports. So, the only way to pull it off would be to manually recreate the same report with monthly timeframes selected. I apologize for the inconvenience, but I hope this helps to clarify!

Hi there!
I agree that something does look funky here. I've never actually seen a site with a Domain Authority of 1 when we seem to have indexed numerous links for the site. There's actually a fresh index update scheduled to roll out quite soon, so I'm interested to see if the update has any effect on the score, as a number of issues with quality have been addressed.

If you're not seeing a change after the next index update, then please shoot us a message at help@moz.com to so we can get in touch with our engineers about this issue. Thanks!

Aloha! 
With respect to the 3 different sets of the homepage's metrics, that would be related to how the pages resolve. If the pages resolve separately (like http://www.sassandgrace.co.uk/ and http://sassandgrace.co.uk/), then their page-specific metrics could be different. So, you could consider creating only a single version of your homepage to help condense these values for the future.

As far as links showing up in the index are concerned, there could be a couple of reasons why they're not displayed yet. Our index is updated on a roughly monthly basis, so if your site (or the links pointing to it) are newer, then they likely wouldn't yet be included in our index. Another thing to note is that our index is focused on the most authoritative links we can find. So, I'd recommend focusing your linking efforts towards cultivating quality backlinks from prominent pages of authoritative sites, and you'll likely increase your chances of being indexed by Mozscape!

Hi Dan!
With respect to the campaign updates, I'm certainly happy to help get that sorted out, but I'm afraid that I'll need a bit more info in order to investigate. Would you be able to send an email to help@moz.com with some background on which campaign you were seeing this for?

As far as the On-Page Optimization changes go, I'd say that it has to do with the new grading scale, rather than the crawler missing elements previously. Along with swapping over to a numerical score, the list of factors has changed, as well as the weighting of each factor. So, I believe that the different scores that you're seeing are simply comparing the new rubric to the old rubric.

I'm not totally sure what you're referring to on the topic of on-page opportunities, but any clarification you can provide would be very helpful!

My question submission form looks to be functioning normally, so I'm inclined to think that it could be a browser issue on your side.

Without having the client's site to be able to check, I'd guess that the reason you're not seeing these links popping up within Open Site Explorer is due to the size of Yellow Pages' site in conjunction with the way that we compile our index.

When we crawl through a site during the indexing process, we limit the number of pages that we'll crawl on a single domain in order to help us sample a broader and more diverse link landscape (or Mozscape, if you will ). There are a few million pages on Yellow Pages' domain, and since we elect to cap out indexing a single domain around ~50,000 pages (I'm uncertain of the exact value), only a relative handful of the most prominent pages on the domain would be included to avoid index saturation. I hope this helps to explain what you're seeing there!

Hi there!
I'll follow up with you in your support conversation, so as not to send out any personal info. Talk to you shortly!

After creating a fresh test campaign for the site, I'm still seeing a 400 response being served to rogerbot from https://unplag.com/. While I'm not able to pinpoint the exact setting that is causing the site to serve that response, I'd recommend checking your server logs to verify the response that is being served.

Duly noted!

In the case of the Facebook page, it looks like it's not being included in your Moz Local listing because the name on the page isn't a match to the Google+ page which was used to validate your listing. If you were able to change the Facebook name from Detroit Deluxe to Detroit Deluxe Paint Body and Car Restoration, then you should see it included within your listing report.

I'm sorry that you're feeling frustrated with the process. As far as the functionality of the system goes, the general timeframe for updating listings can occur in as little as a day or so, but some of our partners can take up to 8-12 weeks to be fully updated. This is talked about within this list of frequently asked questions on the topic of Moz Local: https://moz.com/local/faq