Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Are the pages blocked from crawling at all? I've seen that happen when Google can't crawl a page, but knows of it because of a followed link from elsewhere.

This sounds like the start of a good YouMoz post.

Something else to think about -- what benefit do you get from checking your keyword rankings on an hourly basis? Does that give you the information you need to help make your site make money? Or does it take away from time you can spend improving your site?

Actually, you may be featured on the home page as the fastest growing blog that day or something. I had that once a few years back when Matt Cutts linked to one of my posts on my wordpress.com blog in the comments of his post. Because of the traffic from that post, it hit an algorithm in wordpress.com and the post/domain was linked to from wordpress.com itself.

Generally, if you can fix it with code, that tends to be a bit better than the canonical tag, from my understanding. I've emailed Dr. Pete and asked him to contribute to this thread as well, as he's an expert on canonical tags.

Is your campaign set up with or without the www subdomain? If your campaign is set up for non-www and the results you're seeing are on www, that would be the reason (and it's a common reason).

We have more details about our rankings report at http://moz.com/help/pro/rankings. If that doesn't answer your question, it's best to submit a ticket to the help desk and see if there's some type of error. Thanks!

I agree with the suggestion to make the page be a helpful reference, with sales being almost a side aspect of the page. My current favorite website for examples is https://www.webstaurantstore.com/guide/541/types-of-table-tops-and-bases.html. This page gives a lot of helpful information when selecting a table top and base for a restaurant (which bases are easy to clean around, but might take up more space, and so on). They do have links to product pages at the end, but the selling is not the main focus (yet I imagine it's still fairly effective). That's something other sites can link to that has good information, and you can get links from good sites.

Were you thinking of the "How to Create Presentations Like Rand" post at http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-create-presentations-like-rand?

Many people aren't in DMOZ, and Google will still alter their meta titles and descriptions to match the search query. Google employees have said that one of the reasons the titles are changed in the SERPs is if they look spammy (not saying that yours are, just stating what they have said).

We apologize for the delay. We encountered some unexpected difficulties, but we hope to be able to release this index in the next day. We will know more in the next 3-4 hours, and I will update this post as I have more information.

I am closing this thread, and will keep http://moz.com/community/q/why-still-the-moz-index-showing-next-update-on-august-26-2013 updated. We'll also keep you posted on Twitter. Thanks for your patience!

Also, Google doesn't show SEOs or web designers in the local results, and hasn't for several years.

http://searchengineland.com/google-hides-seos-web-designers-32671

You might reach out to brentdpayne on Twitter. He worked for the Tribune for a number of years and gave SEO training to reports and may have some resources and tips he could share with you.

Hi Steve,

How are your GA numbers doing now? Did you figure out what was causing the jump? Have they stayed high, or come back down? If you give us an update, we can try to help troubleshoot this for you a bit more.

Hi! We know this is an issue right now and are working on it. The help desk will chime in when we've got an update. Thanks!

Hi Jen,

We don't have a date for plans to expand to Canada at the moment, but we do know there is quite a demand for it. I'm not sure about a similar tool for Canadians, but I'm going to ask Miriam to take a look at this question, as she's our local expert.

Keri

I'm not sure this is quite the best strategy to use. A 302 isn't meant to pass link juice, though I believe Bing will treat it as a 301 if it sees it there long enough. Instead of spending the time to create over 1000 subdomains, it is generally a better use of time to just create the content on the main domain itself.

Google may be pulling information from a table. I've seen it on other sites in Q&A, and they're doing it on my own site too (see attached image). All of the information that they're displaying I have in an actual table on my site, and I've done nothing else other than put it in a table.

7kgUW.gif

We can look at hyperlinking the question, as we'll be doing some more tweaks to the emails.

One of the feature we did add was having the question title in the subject line, so messages about different didn't get lumped together in gmail anymore.

Have you tried contacting abuse@craigslist.org? That's where to report things like this.

Flagging software and services would be a violation of their TOS as well (see Use at http://www.craigslist.org/about/terms.of.use).

Enough words to give a better explanation than your competitor, and to make people want to link to your page. This isn't an exact science, but it's like I had teachers tell me -- write until it is done.

The zig-zag tears are just showing that they've snipped part of the middle of the page out -- they're showing you stuff that matches your query at the top and bottom of your pages, and removing some of the stuff from the middle that doesn't match your query.

You'll see the same thing in print regarding graphs if something is taken out of the X-axis.

On the first screenshot, I'm thinking that maybe images aren't loading. I'll make sure that we have links back to the question that are in text and not just images in the future, but not sure exactly when that rollout will be. Thanks for letting us know!

I haven't used it for those purposes, but Craigslist would also want to know about that type of spam. If you're going to complain about a TOS violation, it's best that you not also violate their TOS.

Give them as much information as possible -- search queries that show the ads from the same person, how you identify it as the same person/entity, and make sure the queries don't have any false positives.

CheckDog will do 100 pages of spell checking for free http://checkdog.com/.Don't know of any place that does grammar checking. I wonder if there are any mechanical turk third party providers that do that?

In my case, I run a forum with thousands of pages of user generated content. I can't afford the spell checking services for that amount of content, and I'm OK with leaving things in the user's original voice. What I did do was go into Google Analytics and export my top content by page title, 500 titles at a time. I copied and pasted the spreadsheet column with the titles into Word, and found the spelling errors in the titles of the posts. I went back and corrected those.

So sorry to hear about the battles going on. I've seen some of those, and they're no fun.

One thing that may be of help: last month Google rolled out new user access to GWT, including a way to let view without changing any settings (Barry Schwartz writes about it at http://www.seroundtable.com/google-webmaster-tools-users-14838.html). Is there a chance IT would let your team have a read-only view if you let them know it was now available?

Hi Thomas,

If you could send a screenshot over to our help team, that'd be great. Thanks!

Keri

Are you talking about local results, and having Yelp and Yellow Pages show up in search results for local searches, or are you talking about searching for things like book reviews and directories are in the results?

For SEOmoz, I know some of our most popular (in terms of thumbs and comments) posts have been well over 2000 words. Adam, I don't have that post. What I do have is a roundup of 2011 posts by likes, tweets, etc. and you can look at those individually and see length (http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-best-of-2011-posts-people-who-rocked-our-world).

I'd look more, but I've got a backlog of other Q&A questions due to being on the road. Driving from SF to Seattle today and tomorrow. Halfway there, and way behind on email and Q&A.

Hi Diane,

There is no one tool that is going to show you 100% of the links to your site. Google Webmaster Tools will show you a fair many, but even they do not show you all of the links that they know about. Still, that is probably the most complete information you will get.

Open Site Explorer is generally updated every month, and does not crawl the entire web, so the links it lists will be more delayed and fewer than what you see in GWT. The advantage that OSE has is that you can see links going to sites that are not your own (where you do not have access to GWT because it's not your site) and SEOmoz adds additional metrics that look at the value of the page the link is on.

Have you received any warnings about your links in Google Webmaster Tools, or are you wanting to know about the links just in general?

Hi Mark,

We're sorry you've been seeing these problems for so long. On our end, we know of problems with the Keyword Difficulty Tool and Rank Tracker since Friday of last week, and Mozbar/OSE since early this (Thursday) morning.

We'll be keeping our Twitter feed updated with the status as we know it. We're still tracking down what happened to OSE right now.

We have two completely different crawling systems. We have on crawler for your website, where you enter in your URL and we crawl your site looking for problems. We have a different crawler for OSE that goes and looks at the web in general and crawls for links. The two crawlers do not talk to each other, so it is actually understandable that OSE may not have data on the site. OSE doesn't have the same index size as Google, so we don't see all the links that are actually out there (though we're working all the time on improving this!).

Michael Gray has a good post about this at http://www.wolf-howl.com/seo/get-photos-for-your-website/

No, it's Google has work to do, they admitted it was their fault and something went wrong in their classifier.

If you can give us some context as to where you've seen it used, we can help better explain what it means in that case. It could actually mean a lot of different things.

If you download the CSV report, we list the referring page there. We know it isn't obvious and we're working on making this a little easier to find.

You wouldn't set up reciprocal links, but instead find ways to get more valuable one-way links. The links section of the blog is a good place to look for ideas on getting good links.

Stephanie Chang wrote a great post about this on the blog a few weeks back at http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-should-you-handle-expired-content

Using site:yourdomain.com in Google, and then going to the end of the results and telling it to show you all of the results, is a good first start. It should get you enough to get an idea of why there are duplicated pages.

The Moz crawl can also help you figure it out, as often with ecommerce you'll have URLs for sorting products by price, name, pagination parameters, etc. We'll throw up a flag when we see a bunch of duplicate content or duplicate titles.

Also look for the easy stuff, such as non-www doesn't direct to www. Fix that, and you've cut your pages in half.

The Just Discovered does rely on Twitter. Google Webmaster Tools is getting better at showing newer links, and showing recent links. Have you dug around in there yet?

One of the answers on this thread may help you too. http://www.seomoz.org/q/has-anyone-used-facebook-to-promote-their-website

I'm looking at the URL and going off of memory -- I think that's just for the search appliance and not for Google in general. You might want to look further at the documentation, but I think that's just for their search appliance and not the web as a whole.

First step is that you want to verify your site in Google Webmaster Tools. You can then go into GWT and see if Google has left you any type of notice.

For Twitter, we do have a partnership between Followerwonk and Buffer (more info at http://moz.com/blog/followerwonk-partners-with-buffer). Other than that, no, we don't at this time.

Great answer Andrea! Diane, Rand talked about exactly this concept during his Mozcation presentation Wednesday (nice meeting you there Andrea). What works for one site may not work for another. Use this as a resource to get some ideas as to what to test, but then test and see if it works for you.

I believe the cause is on our end. We made Roger more picky about this type of thing, but are telling him to loosen up today and he should stop bugging you about it as much on the next crawl.

Keri

OSE looks at Facebook likes for your page/domain, NOT for your Facebook page on the Facebook domain. If you look at it that way, does it explain the numbers?

For example, OSE shows moz.com has having a couple of thousand likes, compared to our FB page on Facebook.com that has 151,000 likes.

It could be some of each. I know it's frustrating when you don't see those links that you know are there, but the good news is that Google does see them. The good news is that we're getting indexes out there faster than we ever did before, so it's every 1-2 weeks these days instead of 4-6 weeks.

I don't have ideas -- but I bet the person answering the main phone lines for the company has ideas! So would the sales and customer service reps. See if you can meet with them and pick their brains. What are the most common questions they get tired of answering? What are some misconceptions people have about the industry? What would they love to have a blog post about to where they could just point people to the post instead of having to re-explain the same thing over again?

We made some tweaks to Roger, and he got a bit more sensitive and started displaying that error when he shouldn't have. We released another update today, and your next crawl should look OK again.

If you download the CSV, you'll get the referring URL in the spreadsheet.