Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
I'm afraid I don't have an insight into how Google crawls with lazy loading.
Which works better for your user, pagination or lazy loading? I wouldn't worry about lazy loading and Google. If you're worried about getting pages indexed then I would make sure you've got a sitemap that works correctly.
I would try and message them on every way that is listed here: https://kb.yoast.com/kb/support/
This is just a guess, but are you using a page builder (drag and drop) by any chance?
With lazy loading, the code can actually still be seen in the source code. That's what Google uses, so you should be fine with using this as it's becoming a common practice now.
Remove those "sample" pages and add more quality content.
It looks like it's a new site, and the quality of the site probably isn't helping you, for example: http://www.scribidocampus.com/blog/scribido-sample-blog-four/ I would remove those sample blogs and update it with relevant content.
Everything I can see is all link based though. So this is a link metric correct?
If so, how does a site have a DA of 26 but no link profile.
I would do the redirect to be safe then in the future make sure you run noindex on any development sites.
Hi Andy,
I see this:
"We calculate this metric by combining all of our other link metrics—linking root domains, number of total links, MozRank, MozTrust, etc.—into a single score."
Which leads me to believe that it is a link based metric.
Tom
I'm asking this for a guy over at SEOchat: http://forums.seochat.com/new-user-seo-questions-answers-123/unusual-change-domain-authority-486962.html
Here's what his post says:
Exclamation Unusual Change in Domain authority
Guys and Girls,
I'm having a weird issue in one of my sites , thing is the site had DA 11 in July and however when check on September Site is having 26 without me doing any type of link building and there are no new posts for this month as well. When checked using open site explorer there are no backlinks indexed in their Mozcape index as well.
Site: http://www.beijingtravelchannel.com/
Can you give me any plausible reasons for this to happen, so that i can check them out.
Thanks in Advance.
It shouldn't do as its just an iframe, if that were the case then every site that that used addthis would have a problem (which I know for a fact isn't true as two large sites I work with use it and have no issues).
As far as I'm aware, iframes do not pass on any of their attributes through to a website showing an iframe. The main reason I was curious about your reply was that screaming frog hadn't had any issues, I can understand myself having a small slip up, but a bit of software rarely does.
Back to the original question though, it is curious why there's no indexing by Google, Bing seems to have picked it up, and three days ago atleast. i can't see reason (in my brief look earlier) as to why it shouldn't be. So I came to the conclusion it hadn't been crawled or it had incredibly poor content (which I can't verify as I don't know Norwegian)
A friend just confirmed it, as you're using developer tools, what you're seeing is actually the fully loaded page, including iframes. So the noindex you have found is addthis. https://gyazo.com/abbdecc7e3d6a2d1f4d3acf65a48e65b
To actually check the source code, right click then click view source. That's the code for the specific site instead of loading all of the extra code you've been seeing. I would strongly advise you do like that from now onwards as the way you are doing is incorrect.
You know what, I don't think I am wrong.
Have a look at this source code from Bing's cache, can you see it there? http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.oldermann.no%2F&d=4558460857156532&mkt=en-GB&setlang=en-GB&w=Zicz6YAWVXgY8u0BPAR9qKRHF8OEn7o5 (Disclaimer I got my friend to check as I'm on a mobile)
This gyazo was just taken for example: https://gyazo.com/93c71c3767c57b74cb9f8b482c23c38
Just ran it through this too, showing the same thing: http://www.seoreviewtools.com/bulk-meta-robots-checker/
oh oh and so you know I think I know why you've found the noindex, you're looking at the for addthis.
Yes, I would have a seperate robots.txt files.
Unfortunately it's when Google feel like it:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/47334?hl=en
"We only show sitelinks for results when we think they'll be useful to the user. If the structure of your site doesn't allow our algorithms to find good sitelinks, or we don't think that the sitelinks for your site are relevant for the user's query, we won't show them."
Why would a content delivery network be a last resort? Cloudflare is something you can setup within under half an hour.
I would look at your host, as a "shared server" isn't exactly top tier hosting and Joomla is quite a heavy application.
I've had a quick look, I've been able to crawl it without any issues, the meta robots and robots.txt doesn't seem to be conflicting with anything at all.
It just doesn't look like it's even been found by Google.
Bing doesn't look to be having any issues indexing it: http://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Aoldermann.no&go=Submit&qs=n&form=QBLH&pq=site%3Aoldermann.no&sc=0-17&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=B677970FF39F4A62A9B040806CF19EE0
What's the quality of the content on the site like? Have you "fetched as google" in the search console?
As mentioned by Thomas, I would really have a look at cloudflare, their free plan for me personally performs much better than other paid content delivery networks.
Hi,
I'm going to ask the obvious question, how long have you had the canonicals?
For example, that was crawled on the 2nd of September, yet if you search the code then you can't see any canonicals. I would personally give it a few weeks to let Google to update.
Tom (yep, the same one from SEO Chat)
Have you thought about using a CDN such as cloudflare?
From purely a customer point of view, I would setup a brand new website for this second business. I would much prefer the appearance that a company is a specialist in a single field than attempting to do everything.
I've got to agree, an a/b test on these pop-ups would be a perfect solution.
It looks like they're using a custom wordpress theme.
You may be able to find a similar one here: https://themeforest.net/category/wordpress/corporate/directory-listings
I'd say that 5kb is definately worth it! Even on bandwidth alone, if you get that image downloaded 10 times that's 50kb in bandwidth saved.
The answer shouldn't be "what does it take to get a green light" it should be "what's the quickest we can get it for our user". The ideal speed should be under two seconds to load a page.
Personally I think a 301 redirect would be the best.
I've been using: http://page-explorer.com/
It's currently in beta but it's a good one. The developer is really friendly and will help where he can to add new features. Pricing is looking to be competitive on launch too.
They've had a few posts on some domain forums:
http://www.domainnameforum.org/showthread.php?t=97639
https://www.namepros.com/threads/problem-with-tradenames-com.755117/
Just got this status page email: http://health.moz.com/incidents/p9q8yk49kh25
However, the canonical is only an advisory tag. I've had few cases where people have relied on their canonical tag when their site has numerous product url types (as above with category in the url and just product url) which has many references to these different urls elsewhere (onsite and offsite) and they are now indexed as both versions, which is not always ideal. It also means that reporting tools such as Screaming Frog only show the true URLs on the site. It's also saving crawl budget as it doesn't have to crawl the category produced url and the canonical url.
Whilst it's not a major issue, it's something I would look at changing.
A tool that I use for some reporting is: https://agencyanalytics.com/ however I only use this with some automated reports for customers who don't want to use GA or search console so I'm not sure what their social analytics is like.
They do have a free trial so perhaps worth giving it a go?
What I've suggested will be avoiding these duplicate urls? Here's some actual examples, going via a tier two category I get the following product url:
https://www.symectech.com/epos-systems/customer-displays/pole-mounting-kit-94591.html
With a canonical of:
https://www.symectech.com/pole-mounting-kit-94614.html
Yet when going from https://www.symectech.com/epos-systems/?limit=32&p=2 (a tier 1 category) I get the canonical url.
So if there are products listed in multiple tier two categories then that's multiple urls for the same product. With the suggestion I made, there would only be one variation of this product url (the canonical)
Just going through Laura's list as a checklist for ones that are applicable:
Nothing that I can see, that's causing a major issue.
The main thing I can see is that the product urls and canonicals are different, is there anyway of listing the product urls as their canonical versions in the category?
Just incase you haven't seen, I've added a link to a useful Yoast guide for amp seo in wordpress: https://yoast.com/setting-up-wordpress-for-amp-accelerated-mobile-pages/
This is a plugin that you may be interested in: https://wordpress.org/plugins/amp/
Another post to add, https://yoast.com/setting-up-wordpress-for-amp-accelerated-mobile-pages/
Hi Rachel,
Glad the resources were helpful, re-reading my response, I did forget to add that you can also specify your target here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/62399?hl=en
Best of luck with the multilingual site, anymore questions please do ask.
Tom
I'm not sure if this is of any help to you? https://moz.com/community/q/without-robots-txt-no-crawling
Are you able to post the domain here? I'd be happy to take quick look around it for you.
Just to expand on this, I found the following quote from a Moz member of staff:
"I wish I could give you IP addresses, but they change all the time since we host Roger in the cloud. There's not even a reliable range of IPs to give you. You can totally whitelist the useragent rogerbot, but that's the only reliable information about the crawler you can go off of. I hope that helps but let me know if there's any other solution you can think of. Thank you! "
From a previous question: https://moz.com/community/q/is-there-a-whitelist-of-the-rogerbot-ip-addresses
Unfortunately this is all I can find: https://moz.com/help/guides/moz-procedures/what-is-rogerbot with no IP range shown.
Not a problem Britney!
Probably not the right place to ask the question, but it's related to what you posted, have you got a source for the below? I would love some more information on it.
Thanks,
Tom
Hi Andrew,
You can use the hreflang tag, this will tell Google that this is your site in a different language. Useful post for you here: https://hreflang.org/what-is-hreflang-a-primer/
My biggest question though, is how you are translating, will it be human translation or machine translation? See: http://searchengineland.com/how-machine-translation-has-a-habit-of-mangling-multilingual-seo-91759 for a bit more detail.
I've had a look at your site (it's in the htaccess)
I've run a crawl on your site, there doesn't seem to be any redirect chains, which is good, so you've got no issues with what you have above.
However on a side note, I wouldn't rely on 301 redirects, you still have a lot of "old" links that are going through 301 redirects, I would update these so they don't need to pass through a redirect.
Hi EcommerceSite,
Can't see an answer to your question so far, are you still having issues?
If you want to send me a pm with your url then I'll have a look at this for you.
Tom
Going by: "First, the hreflang tags are implement properly. UK page pointing there, US page pointing there. Further down the page, there are canonical tags - except the UK canonical tag points to the UK page, and the US version points to the US page. "
It looks like you're doing it fine, however just use the chart on the site Nikhilesh linked:https://hreflang.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/mobile-hreflang-canonical.png
I would personally link your logo to the canonical version of your homepage (which would commonly be abc.com) As you want to pass as much "juice" directly to the canonical version of the homepage.
Just to expand on the other comments, the tag is used for styling, (http://www.w3schools.com/TAGs/tag_small.asp)
So the h1 would still apply, it is just styled different to the "standard" h1 style.
Just to echo what Laura has said, if you can share a URL that would be great so we can help you get to the source of the problem.
Try running a tool like screamingfrog (https://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/) to check the issues above that Laura has mentioned, as doing a lot of those by hand can be quite time consuming.
Also, do you have a drop in rankings with your pages falling out the index?
