Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I use SF pro, but saw nothing regarding whether or not analytics is installed. (Can't log in to main analytics, as don't have access)

The GAchecker link I mentioned worked a treat.

Found this just after I posted.

http://www.gachecker.com/

I'll leave link, in case anybody searches the same question.

Morning Moz!

Is there such tool, to view if your site has Google Analytics script by page? (I mean page by page, so to crawl an entire site)

It's a 500+ page website, so i'm trying to avoid viewing source of each individual page.

Thank you!

It's very hard to pinpoint whether doing it had a positive affect. I'm going to say if it did, it was extremely minimal. It's 'nice' for site visitors to see the site is verified I guess.

I'd still do it again, as Google said it's worthwhile. Just a shame it's taken so long, and we couldn't measure success of failure.

I've done it on another site since, which was far smoother, rankings and traffic remained the same though.

Hi,

It took roughly 4 months to fully recover.

The dent in the graph doesn't look that significant, but the spike towards Christmas is way into the 300,000 mark..

Paid traffic paid a valuable part in keeping traffic steady (as you can see).

Regards

Alex

fP0haB7

Does anyone have more information on one why this might be?

Thanks in advance!

GyuYc5F.png

Do MOZ have an affiliate platform?

If so, it's hiding from me, would somebody care to point me the right way?

Shall I assume this is the page / they MOZ don't have a direct affiliate program?

https://moz.com/partners 

Many Thanks

Hi all,

Looking through Analytics yesterday, I saw that my website had a huge increase in direct traffic in sessions. However, they apparently spent 0 seconds on the website in total so that raised plenty of red flags.

Does anyone have reasons why this might be? Spam or bug?

Thanks in advance!

Thanks Dirk!

Hi there,

Does anyone know if placing canonical tags in the body instead of the header of a page will still "take"? The system we are on means that making an editable header is no easy business and I was just wondering how big of a difference it makes to have it in a different area.

Thank you in advance.

Found this just after I posted.

http://www.gachecker.com/

I'll leave link, in case anybody searches the same question.

I thought so! Thanks, Patrick, have a good weekend.

Ah, that's a shame. It does our Images sitemaps / Web sitemaps without issue.

I would have thought it would have been okay with any videos. You could ask their support to test it, on the off-chance it collates the information you need it to, they're very good and get back to you within 24 hours.

Thank you for your responses. Just to update you all to say after the rankings dip, they're more or less back to where they were, fingers crossed the rise continues. Regards

Excuse the short reply.

Add sitemap to your robots.txt - And submit it to Google WMT.

Just use a free one if you're in the middle of developing?

Strange, assuming you weren't logged into google when checking?

Have you got analytics for the .net? Or is it simply fowarded?

That's about as comprehensive an answer as I could have hoped for. Thanks Ryan, really appreciated.

This made me say "What!" With some other words following.
http://moz.com/community/q/https-sitewide-move-has-resulted-in-huge-rankings-drop

Not specifically SEO, but when comments nowadays suggest link farming, also makes me go "What".

What makes you say 'what', White?

I would really try to avoid using 302's if possible, they can end up being more trouble than they're worth.

Setting up 301 redirects is a pain but helps the moving process to be a lot smoother. Nobody enjoys putting together a redirect list but it's a necessity, have 1000 still to get through myself!

If you're using Chrome, there are a few decent extensions for this. They highlight nofollow links with a red border or something similar but they aren't always 100%. Hope this helps.