Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi,

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I would tend to agree with your point that the title tags should be written in the necessary language, however the the duplicate title tags are all branded products with heritage and reputation, which will not change no matter what the language is.

What are your thoughts on this?

Nick

Hi,

I am working on a large global site which has around 9 different language variations.

We have setup the hreflang tags and referenced the corresponding content as follows:

(We have not implemented a version X-default reference, as we felt it was not necessary)

Using DeepCrawl and Search Console, we can see that these language variations are causing duplicate title issues. Many of them.

My assumption was that the hreflang would have alleviated this issue and informed Google what is going on, however i wanted to see if anyone has any experience with this kind of thing before.

It would be good to understand what the best practice approach is to deal with the problem.

Is it even an issue at all, or just the tools being over-sensitive?

Thank you in advance.

Hi,

I am running a technical audit on a site which is causing me a few issues.

The site is small and awkwardly built using lots of JS, animations and dynamic URL extensions (bit of a nightmare).

I can see that it has only 5 pages being indexed in Google despite having over 25 pages submitted to Google via the sitemap in Search Console. The beta Search Console is telling me that there are 23 Urls marked with a 'noindex' tag, however when i go to view the page source and check the code of these pages, there are no meta robots tags at all - I have also checked the robots.txt file.

Also, both Screaming Frog and Deep Crawl tools are failing to pick up these urls so i am a bit of a loss about how to find out whats going on.

Inevitably i believe the creative agency who built the site had no idea about general website best practice, and that the dynamic url extensions may have something to do with the no-indexing.

Any advice on this would be really appreciated. Are there any other ways of no-indexing pages which the dev / creative team might have implemented by accident? - What am i missing here?

Thanks,

This one is pestering me and i am on the fence, so i thought i'd ask the trusty Moz community for their opinion.

I am running a technical / onsite audit for a client who has quite a pretty, creative and animated homepage with lots of overlaid imagery.

As its primarily imagery, including their glossy typography and clickable links, the page does not have a H1. Now i know this goes against best practice, however it's unlikely the page will ever be served as an SEO landing page (in current format), so what are people's thoughts on leaving as is without a H1, considering we are not going to try and ranking the landing page for any particular keywords.

Let us know your thoughts!

Thanks

So my question is...

I have a adopted a site which currently ranks quite well for some industry competitive keywords with a number of poor quality landing pages which specifically target a singular keyword.

I am wondering if its worth merging some of these pages together into one authoritative, better quality landing page targeting multiple keywords (as the intent for some of these keywords are largely the same).

What i don't want to do is jeopardise the existing rankings in doing so.

The alternative option would just be to improve the content on the existing landing pages without merging.

What are peoples thoughts on this? Are there any positive case studies out there where merging has had a positive effect?

Any help would be great.

Regards,

Hi Guys,

I am currently working with an eCommerce site which has site-wide duplicate content caused by currency URL parameter variations. Example:

https://www.marcb.com/

https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=3

https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=2

https://www.marcb.com/?setCurrencyId=1

My initial thought is to create a bunch of canonical tags which will pass on link equity to the core URL version. However I was wondering if there was a rule which could be implemented within the .htaccess file that will make the canonical site-wide without being so labour intensive.

I also noticed that these URLs are being indexed in Google, so would it be worth setting a site-wide noindex to these variations also?

Thanks

I am doing some content analysis with over 200 URLs to go through!

Does anybody know of, or can recommend any bulk on-page word count checkers which would help with the heavy lifting?

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

So this might sounds like a silly question...

A client of mine has a duplicate content issue which will be fixed using canonical tags. We are also providing them with an updated URL structure meaning rwe will be having to do lots of 301 redirects.

The URL structure is a much larger task that than the duplicate content so i planned to set up the canonicals first.

Then it occurred to me id be updating the canonical tags with the urls from the old structure which brings me to my question.

Will the canonical tags with the old urls redirect credit to the new urls with the 301? Or should i just wait until we have the new url structure in place and use these new urls in the canonicals?

Thanks!