This was indeed the problem - such a simple issue, but helps us in future to be wary of that stumbling block Thanks!
Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Posts made by Nobody1560986989723
-
RE: Difference between search volume in KWT and Impressions in GWT
-
RE: Difference between search volume in KWT and Impressions in GWT
Ah, that may well be it. I didn't do the first stage keyword research, a colleague did, so we may have to refine it. I will have a look through the data again and will get back to you.
Thanks for the reminder.
-
Difference between search volume in KWT and Impressions in GWT
Hi there,
Sorry I've been a bit quiet of late, we're going through a huge rebranding exercise as well as staying on top of client work.
Anyway. I've got an issue with keyword research phase of a client remarketing.
Trying to decide which keywords to target (aren't we all?) The client has 3 months of back data in Google Webmaster Tools, which helps us to see Impressions, CTR and actual click-throughs etc.
Now, they rank #1 on Google.com for a certain keyword (logged out, of course).
According to Google Keyword tool (Logged in) there are 2.7million searches per month for this keyword. With the average CTR being 18% for a #1 keyword that should be bringing in 400k visits.
However, take the same keyword in Google Webmaster Tools and the impressions are actually around 1,600 per month with a CTR of 9%.
Different CTR's for different sectors I can accept. What I don't get is the vast difference between the impressions in GWT compared to the alleged search volume coming from the Keyword tool.
Really need to understand this so we can better select keywords and judge approximate traffic expected if ranking #1 for a keyword.
Any help would be really useful. Thank you!
-
RE: Duplicate meta descriptions
No problem, glad I could help - and I agree the Yoast plugin is a good one but if you're a paying member of SEOmoz, follow up using it with the on-page optimiser so you have a variety of angles covered.
-
RE: Duplicate meta descriptions
Maybe for now then, use the Description you can provide via the theme you're using and use Yoast for the other bits?
-
RE: Duplicate meta descriptions
Hmmm. Which URLs is SEOmoz saying are containing the duplicate meta description?
And have a look in Wordpress under 'plugins' and see if there are two 'SEO' plugins, as you might be able to disable one if one has shipped with the theme you're using.
Another experiment might be to temporarily apply a different theme and re-run the SEOmoz tool and see if you still have duplicate META DESCRIPTIONs as that would help you to see if it is the theme causing the problem.
-
RE: Rel=Canonical, WWW vs non WWW and SEO
Okay... two main points I think here
- Yes, which domain/sub-domain the links are pointing to makes a difference - so if you have a www version and your links point to the non-www version then it's not quite as great. (Still has value for your site, though, it's important to remember). So you need to decide which is the most important and keep the canonicalisation (is that a word?) consistent throughout.
- In Wordpress you should be able to change the direction of the redirect, have a shuffle around the 'settings' section and you should be able to find it.
Hope this is helpful.
-
RE: Duplicate meta descriptions
Hi there!
What you need to do is note down which two pages are causing the duplicate META DESCRIPTION and then log into Wordpress and go and edit those posts or pages.
At the bottom of the page editor are boxes for title and meta description, so you will need to change one or both of them and then republish the page.
Let me know if you need screenshots as I have a couple of clients who we use Yoast's SEO plugin as a part of managing the on-site SEO.
Thanks,
Martin
-
RE: Is it bad to have same page listed twice in sitemap?
Firstly, do you mean a HTML sitemap (i.e. a sitemap page on a website) or an XML sitemap (one that is submitted to Google/Bing for indexing)?
If both links go to the same page, then it's not duplicate content. Duplicate content is the same stuff on different URLs.
If an internal sitemap has two links redirecting to one end page then this is highly inefficient and the links should point directly to the end page.
That being the case, then only one link is really needed.
If... after all that you meant an XML sitemap, then it's not duplicate content to have it listed twice, but it should be only listed once in this case.