Search Results

Search found 5639 results on 226 pages for 'drupal seo'.

Page 123/226 | < Previous Page | 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130  | Next Page >

  • Single page not appearing in Google Search

    - by Dan
    Description I have a static franchise website which has various sub pages each dedicated to an individual franchisee. For each franchisee the page, the only thing slightly similar between all of them are the page titles, they follow this structure: <title> Welcome to THE_COMPANY - PRODUCT_DESCRIPTION Services, THE_LOCATION </title> THE_COMPANY and PRODUCT_DESCRIPTION are the same across all franchisees, however THE_LOCATION changes depeding on where they are located in the UK. Each franchisee page has the following <meta /> tags: <meta name="DC.creator" content="user"/> <meta name="DC.format" content="text/html"/> <meta name="DC.language" content="en"/> <meta name="DC.date.modified" content="2014-01-23T11:22:31+00:00"/> <meta name="DC.date.created" content="2014-01-23T11:22:09+00:00"/> <meta name="DC.type" content="Page"/> <meta name="DC.distribution" content="Global"/> <meta name="robots" content="ALL"/> <meta name="distribution" content="Global"/> The main content on each franchisee page is completely different. The Problem There is one particular franchisee page, located in Area A.. Which will not appear in Google Search results at all. However every single other franchisee (if you Google Search for "THE_COMPANY, THE_LOCATION" is number 1). And if I do the same search on Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo, the Area A franchisee is the first result on all of them. Has Google for some reason black listed one page on the site? What I Have Tried Ensuring the page is referenced in my sitemap.xml file 'Fetching as Google Bot' the link www.the_company.co.uk/areaa When that came back as OK I would submit to index Resubmitting the sitemap.xml file in Webmaster Tools Linking to the Area A page from another pages content For this I also waited about 3 weeks before checking again to give Google time to re-index Making a change to the page content and waiting another 2 / 3 weeks Removing the page completely and recreating it with an alternative URL The closest thing I have found to this issue is this StackOverflow question but this particular franchisee has existed for almost a year, it used to appear on Google searches however no longer does. I'm guessing the Panda update wasn't too happy with something on the page, but it hasn't effected anything else on the site and I am at a loss for things to try. I would greatly appreciate any information or thoughts as to what could have caused this Thanks. Update In line with Daniel Fukudas answer below, I have followed some of his steps but everything seems to check out alright: HTTP Headers HTTP/1.1 200 OK => Date => Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:31:29 GMT Server => Zope/(2.12.16, python 2.6.6, linux2) ZServer/1.1 Content-Length => 40078 Expires => Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT Content-Type => text/html;charset=utf-8 Content-Language => en Vary => Accept-Encoding Connection => close Robots <meta /> tag: <meta name="robots" content="ALL"/> I have updated this <meta /> tag to read content="INDEX" instead now. robots.txt: User-agent: * Disallow: User-Agent: Googlebot Disallow: /*sendto_form$ Disallow: /*folder_factories$ Using site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk: Searching for 'AREA A site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk' does not return the page, but regardless of that searching just for site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk will not necessarily return every indexed page, or so I understand... Update It appears Google likes to drop pages every now and then from the index, despite my steps above, I left the site alone and the page appeared back in the SERPs by itself.

    Read the article

  • Panda 4: Reducing #indexed pages. How much is enough?

    - by Noam
    I've been hit by panda 4 (40% decrease). I didn't see any change during panda 1-3. From what I've read it and when compared to my site, the change is probably due to the fact that I have over 30M pages indexed on Google, and they've starting seeing that as some sort of bad indication. Although I feel all of the pages have a unique value that Google should crawl, it seems I should make some tough calls and deduce the indexed pages according to some prioritization I will conduct. The question is what should be my target, or what factors should help me figure out a relevant target. How many pages should I try to reduce to? - 25M - 15M - 1M - 2000 Is it enough to add noindex to low priority pages or should I also remove all internal linking to them?

    Read the article

  • Can I use Google Search to determine if my website contains original or copied content?

    - by Bas van Vught
    I have a few websites from customers that have (partially) the same content as other websites. I plan on rewriting all content that is not original, but how do I know if my websites have original content, or content that's been copied from another website? My customers say all the content is original, but I have my doubts to be honest. They often let other people who don't work there anymore write content for the sites. What I did so far is copy a line from my website that can be found in other websites as well and pasted it into Google Search. If my website is the first link, would it be considered the original source?

    Read the article

  • Submitting new site to directories - will Google penalize?

    - by Programmer Joe
    I just started a new site with a forum to discuss stocks. I've already submitted my site to DMOZ. To help promote my site and to help people who are looking for stock discussion forums to find it, I'm thinking of submitting my site to a few more directories but I'm hesistant because I know Google will penalize a site if it believes the backlinks to the site are spammy and/or low quality. So, I have a few questions: 1) If I submit my site to directories with a PR between 4 and 5, will those backlinks be considered spammy/low quality? I noticed most free directories have a PR between 4 and 5, but I don't know if backlinks from those directories would be considered spammy by Google. 2) I'm thinking of submitting it to Best of the Web and JoeAnt, but these are paid. Does anybody have any experience with these two paid directories? Are these two directories considered higher quality by Google?

    Read the article

  • Will these type of 403 errors affect my ranking?

    - by Gkhan14
    Let's say I have a directory that has a 403 forbidden error for all of the content in it, however a few of the images in the subdirectoies of the main diretory do NOT have a 403 forbidden error. Will this fact affect my ranking? For example: test.com/system/ (HAS 403 ERROR FOR ALL FILES) - test.com/system/pie/ (HAS 403 ERROR FOR ALL FILES) - test.com/system/pie/image.png (DOES NOT HAVE A 403 ERROR, AND THIS IMAGE IS EMBEDED ON A PAGE ON test.com e.g(test.com/pie/)) This sort of pattern repeats for about 10 different images. This directory is like a secret "system", however all of the content on the main site (test.com) is still accessible to everyone from the public.

    Read the article

  • Forum vs Q&A system

    - by danie7L T
    I would like to know what are the parameters that I have to take into consideration before deciding whether I should incorporate to a website a "Q&A system" or a full forum ? I think forums allow better search capabilities (you can easily dig out old posts) over the "Q&A system", but the latter offer simpler / faster interaction between the users and the site owners. I should add that only a few people (site owners + authorized people) could answer the questions, the user will be on a read-only basis. Anyone can help me decide between the two solutions ? Thank you in advance NB: There is also the impact on the SEOs, are they the same for forums and Q&A systems?

    Read the article

  • Google suddenly only indexes https and not http

    - by spender
    So all of a sudden, searches for our site "radiotuna" give out the result as an HTTPS link. https://www.google.com/?q=radiotuna#hl=en&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=radiotuna&oq=radiotuna&gs_l=hp.12...0.0.0.3499.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.LnOvBvgDOBk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=177c7ff705652ec3&biw=1366&bih=602 We only use https for the download of two specific files (these urls are resources used for autoupdate functionality of an app we distribute). All other parts of the site should be served over http. We wouldn't like to see any other traffic over https, nor any of our site links to appear in search engines as https. I'd like to address this issue. It seems that the following solutions are available: hand out an https specific robots.txt as such: User-agent: * Disallow: / and/or at app-level, 301 permanent redirect all requests (except the two above) to HTTP if they come in as HTTPS. My concern with the robots method is that, say (for some reason) google decided not to index http pages, disallowing https pages might mean that google has nothing left to index with disastrous consequences for our ranking. This means I'm inclined to go with a 301 redirect. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How to test robots.txt in googlebot to find out what is being indexed

    - by Amar Jarubula
    This question is a continuation for this answer How to check if googlebot will index a given url? As was told I did go to the Webmaster Tools and tested contents of my robots.txt file. However this is just giving me the info if that content is good enough or not. However for my scenario I need to test whether disallowing some patterns is being indexed or not. For example I have something like this below in my robots.txt disallow:/pattern* My understanding is the URLs with word pattern should not crawled, but how do I test this pattern is enforced while indexing the website?

    Read the article

  • Canonical links for huge websites

    - by Florin
    Let's say I have 5 products that are identical but the product code, the product color specifications and the product image. The title, meta and description are identical (by the way the color is in a select form). I made 4 products link canonical to the 1 that is the master based on many factors. If the master becomes inactive or without a stock one product from the other 4 will become the new master and the rest will become canonical to it. The question is if that by becomeing master from canonical will the site suffer a penalty from Google or it will work just fine? What will Google think about this strategy?

    Read the article

  • 302 Moved Temporarily or 301?

    - by user11221
    I have a question on redirects. HTTP status code checker tool shows "HTTP/1.1 302 Moved Temporarily" for the home page url http://someurl.com (just a namesake url). Also, this url opens up http://www.someurl.com/general/index. As you can see, a non-www url to a www url redirect is happening. My questions are: Is a 302 redirect acceptable for the home page? Will this affect the site showing up in search results in anyway? Isnt redirection to /general/index a bad practice?

    Read the article

  • GA and Unique visitors again

    - by DDEX
    I take care of a company intranet and measure the traffic with GA. I am absolutely sure that there are no more than 5000 URLs in our company and it is impossible to check the intranet from outside the company network. Yet when I check the number of Unique Visitors (UV) in the last year GA says there were 36.500 of them...How is that possible? I thought UV should measure each URL only once in the given time period. Could anybody explain how this actually works? Can it be that the cookie trackers expire after some time and are counted more then once?

    Read the article

  • How can one keep an ecommerce site active?

    - by Mantorok
    So, you build an e-commerce site, all your products are on there, but then very little changes which obviously causes your site to become less active, and ultimately not ranking as highly in search engines. Is there anything that can be done to keep it active? I'm aware that inbound links are important and I guess these come over time, are there any other recommended means of keeping the site active?

    Read the article

  • curious about the cached old domain

    - by jogesh_p
    i am a bit curious about my new Domain, actually i had a domain before let say http://example.com before expiration of that domain i bought a new one, with the name http://another-domain.com i uploaded all of my content on the second domain, but now when i search in google about some query related to my another-domain.com then i also find my old domain that is http://example.com is this provide the dulplicate content error to my http://another-domain.com ?? or any kind of penalty by Google

    Read the article

  • Local Business Listing Dashboard

    - by Steve
    I operate a website for a West Australian company, and the company has listings in local business directory websites. Currently we are listed in: www.HotFrog.com.au www.Google.com/Places www.TrueLocal.com.au www.StartLocal.com.au www.localstore.com.au www.communityguide.com.au www.yelp.com.au www.aussieweb.com.au Do you know of any method for examining account stats (profile views, profile clicks etc) within a dashboard, so I can see at a glance how each of our listings is going? I'd be happy to build a dashboard if necessary, but I'm not confident I currently have the skills to accurately display only the correct concise information. Would I use iframes? See if they have APIs? Is there a dashboard framework I could use?

    Read the article

  • Recovering from an incorrectly deployed robots.txt?

    - by Doug T.
    We accidentally deployed a robots.txt from our development site that disallowed all crawling. This has caused traffic to dip dramatically, and google results to report: A description for this result is not available because of this site's robots.txt – learn more. We've since corrected the robots.txt about a 1.5 weeks ago, and you can see our robots.txt here. However, search results still report the same robots.txt message. The same appears to be true for Bing. We've taken the following action: Submitted site to be recrawled through google webmaster tools Submitted a site map to google (basically doing everything possible to say "Hey we're here! and we're crawlable!") Indeed a lot of crawl activity seems to be happening lately, but still no description is crawled. I noticed this question where the problem was specific to a 303 redirect back to a disallowed path. We are 301 redirecting to /blog, but crawling is allowed here. This redirect is due to a site redesign, wordpress paths for posts such as /2012/02/12/yadda yadda have been moved to /blog/2012/02/12. We 301 redirect to wordpress for /blog to keep our google juice. However, the sitemap we submitted might have /blog URLs. I'm not sure how much this matters. We clearly want to preserve google juice for URLs linked to us from before our redesign with the /2012/02/... URLs. So perhaps this has prevented some content from getting recrawled? How can we get all of our content, with links pointed to our site from pre-and-post redesign reporting descriptions? How can we resolve this problem and get our search traffic back to where it used to be?

    Read the article

  • How to include high resolution version of thumbnail

    - by neak
    I'm running a tube site that has a thumbnail for each post/video (running via Wordpress, 500k posts). When I first created the thumbnails they were a fairly large size, around 640px in width each and because of that I was seeing a lot of traffic from Google Images. After streamlining the site and resizing all of the thumbnails down to 170px rather than scaling them down I'm worried that Google isn't going to rank the images as high as they would be at a larger resolution, so is there a way to include the higher res versions and serve them to be indexed instead of the smaller ones?

    Read the article

  • When will my old page stop appearing on Google?

    - by Bane
    I recently bought a new address for my Blogger blog, from yannbane.blogspot.com to www.yannbane.com. However, www.yannbane.com addresses do not appear when they are searched for! Is this natural? How much time will it take for Google to update its index? yannbane.blogspot.com 301's to www.yannbane.com. Both are added to my Webmaster Tools account, but it shows no data for www.yannbane.com (strangely). And, finally, is there something I could do to speed up the process?

    Read the article

  • Several domains using 302 redirect to our domain

    - by Yamaha32088
    I am wondering what implications we can run into if one of our dealers is redirecting several of their domains using a 302 to our domain. The reason they are doing this is because they want to have time to build on their current sites but still want some content on the domains they own. Currently our domain is under a Manual Penalty for back links that we are working on removing. I do not like the idea of them linking back to our site but I need logical reasons other than "because I don't want you to".

    Read the article

  • Moving a Drupal between linux servers, best practice to avoid file-ownership problems

    - by zero
    I want to port over a Drupal commons 6x24 from a local LAMP-stack to a production webserver. Both systems run OpenSuse Linux. How do I do this, what are the most important steps. How should I handle file-ownership. It's important for me to have to have full control of the file ownership. If I use the wwwrun account, I frequently run into problems, due to a very strict webserver-admin. See for example the long history of looking for fixes and solutions see this thread and even more interesting see this very long and impressive thread here. All troubles I run into have to do with file-owernship and permissions. This is my current setup; Note: This was just a quick hacked installation - quick and dirty. Well my interest is after the general options i have in the port of a drupal from linux to linux linux-vi17:/srv/www/htdocs/com624 # ls -l insgesamt 224 -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 45285 19. Jan 00:54 CHANGELOG.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 925 19. Jan 00:54 COPYRIGHT.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 206 19. Jan 00:54 cron.php drwxrwxrwx 2 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 includes -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 923 19. Jan 00:54 index.php -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1244 19. Jan 00:54 INSTALL.mysql.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1011 19. Jan 00:54 INSTALL.pgsql.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 47073 19. Jan 00:54 install.php -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 15572 19. Jan 00:54 INSTALL.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 14940 19. Jan 00:54 LICENSE.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1858 19. Jan 00:54 MAINTAINERS.txt drwxrwxrwx 3 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 misc drwxrwxrwx 35 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 modules drwxrwxrwx 4 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 profiles -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 1470 19. Jan 00:54 robots.txt drwxrwxrwx 2 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 scripts drwxrwxrwx 4 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 sites drwxrwxrwx 7 root www 4096 19. Jan 00:54 themes -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 26250 19. Jan 00:54 update.php -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 4864 19. Jan 00:54 UPGRADE.txt -rwxrwxrwx 1 root www 294 19. Jan 00:54 xmlrpc.php linux-vi17:/srv/www/htdocs/com624 # thx to BetaRides answer here a quick overview on the drush functionality with rsync http://drush.ws/ core-rsync Rsync the Drupal tree to/from another server using ssh. Examples: drush rsync @dev @stage Rsync Drupal root from dev to stage (one of which must be local). drush rsync ./ @stage:%files/img Rsync all files in the current directory to the 'img' directory in the file storage folder on stage. Arguments: source May be rsync path or site alias. See rsync documentation and example.aliases.drushrc.php. destination May be rsync path or site alias. See rsync documentation and example.aliases.drushrc.php. Options: --mode The unary flags to pass to rsync; --mode=rultz implies rsync -rultz. Default is -az. --RSYNC-FLAG Most rsync flags passed to drush sync will be passed on to rsync. See rsync documentation. --exclude-conf Excludes settings.php from being rsynced. Default. --include-conf Allow settings.php to be rsynced --exclude-files Exclude the files directory. --exclude-sites Exclude all directories in "sites/" except for "sites/all". --exclude-other-sites Exclude all directories in "sites/" except for "sites/all" and the site directory for the site being synced. Note: if the site directory is different between the source and destination, use --exclude-sites followed by "drush rsync @from:%site @to:%site" --exclude-paths List of paths to exclude, seperated by : (Unix-based systems) or ; (Windows). --include-paths List of paths to include, seperated by : (Unix-based systems) or ; (Windows). Topics: docs-aliases Site aliases overview with examples Aliases: rsync

    Read the article

  • OpenSearchDescriptions good or bad signal in Google's eyes?

    - by JeremyB
    I noticed a site using this tag: <link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" title="XXXXXXXXX" href="http://www.XXXXXXXXXX.com/api/opensearch" /> As I understand it (based on http://www.opensearch.org/Home), this tag is a way of describing search results (so you use it on pages which contain search results) to make it easier for other search engines to understand and use your results. Given that Matt Cutts has said Google generally frowns on "search results within search results" is using this tag a bad idea on a page that you hope to achieve a good ranking in Google?

    Read the article

  • Picking the Right Keywords For SEO Success

    It is important to realize that picking the right key words is crucial to your SEO success. Always remember that for search engine optimization, your end goal is to rank high in the search engines for key words most relevant and valuable to your web site. For example, if you run a pet dog business, you naturally want to rank high for key words such as 'pet dogs', 'dogs for sale', 'pet dogs for sale'. Better yet, you can narrow down the key words to target very specific niches such as 'chihuahua pet dogs, pet dogs for sale in Brooklyn' etc.

    Read the article

  • How can I decrease relevancy of Creative Commons footer text? (In Google Webmaster Tools)

    - by anonymous coward
    I know that I may just have to link the image to make this happen, but I figured it was worth asking, just in case there's some other semantic markup or tips I could use... I have a site that uses the textual Creative Commons blurb in the footer. The markup is like so: <div class="footer"> <!-- snip --> <!-- Creative Commons License --> <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/"><img alt="Creative Commons License" style="border-width:0" src="http://i.creativecommons.org/l/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/80x15.png" /></a><br />This work by <a xmlns:cc="http://creativecommons.org/ns#" href="http://www.xmemphisx.com/" property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL">xMEMPHISx.com</a> is licensed under a <a rel="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/">Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License</a>. <!-- /Creative Commons License --> </div> Within Google Webmaster Tools, the list of relevant keywords is heavily saturated with the text from that blurb. For instance, 50% of my top-ten most relevant keywords (including the site name): [site name] license [keyword] commons creative [keyword] alike [keyword] attribution [keyword] I have not done any extensive testing to find out rather or not this list even matters, and so far this doesn't impact performance in any way. The site is well designed for humans, and it is as findable as it needs to be at the moment. But, out of mostly curiosity: Do you have any tips for decreasing the relevancy of the text from the Creative Commons footer blurb?

    Read the article

  • Removing 301 redirect from site root

    - by Jon Clements
    I'm having a look at a friends website (a fairly old PHP based one) which they've been advised needs re-structuring. The key points being: URLs should be lower case and more "friendly". The root of the domain should be not be re-directed. The first point I'm happy with (and the URLs needed tidying up anyway) and have a draft plan of action, however the second is baffling me as to not only the best way to do it, but also whether it should be done. Currently http://www.example.com/ is redirected to http://www.example.com/some-link-with-keywords/ using the follow index.php in the root of the Apache2 instance. <?php $nextpage = "some-link-with-keywords/"; header( "HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently" ); header( "Status: 301 Moved Permanently" ); header("Location: $nextpage"); exit(0); // This is Optional but suggested, to avoid any accidental output ?> As far as I'm aware, this has been the case for around three years -- and I'm sorely tempted to advise to not worry about it. It would appear taking off the 301 could: Potentially affect page ranking (as the 'homepage' would disappear - although it couldn't disappear because of the next point...) Introduce maintainance issues as existing users would still have the re-directed page in their cache Following the above, introduce duplicate content Confuse Google/other SE's as to what the homepage actually is now I may be over-analysing this but I have a feeling it's not as simple as removing the 301 from the root, and 301'ing the previous target to the root... Any suggestions (including it's not worth it) are sincerely appreciated.

    Read the article

  • PageRank is the Best Indicator of Competition Strength For a Keyword in SEO - New Verifiable Theory

    The major argument against PageRank in SEO is that pages with zero PageRank can be in the top positions even for highly competitive keywords. However, we are left with requiring an explanation as to why "PageRank is Google's view of the importance of this page." It becomes apparent that either Google is misleading us or we have all been misinterpreting Google's statement. From extensive evaluation of the top Google search engine results pages for hundreds of keywords, the author observed that those high positioned web pages with PageRanks of zero have a home page with higher PageRanks, usually three or more.

    Read the article

  • One site being on a subdirectory of another. Does google count this against you?

    - by Mick
    I have created two similar websites (relating to monetary systems). So far, one appears to be loved by Google and the other hated. I'm struggling to work out why. This is a mystery to me because both sites were created by me with the same design philosophy, both in pure html. Both are packed to the rafters with references to, and information about, their respective subjects. One issue I'm worried may be the cause is to do with the location of the sites. I got a web hosting package from hostmonster.com for the successful one, but less liked one is just an "add-on" which sits on a subdirectory of the successful one. I wonder if Google somehow detects this and treats it as a less significant website? EDIT: Just to clarify, even though one site is an add-on that sits on a subdirectory of the other, the URL is arranged to look like it is a root. I.e. the unpopular site can be accessed directly with a simple www.myunpopularsite.com name, without specifying any subdirectory. EDIT: Just in case its important... say the popular site is called pop.com and the unpopular one unpop.com. In the webspace I've purchased, there is a directory called public_html. This is where I put the index.htm and all the other files of my popular site. When I purchased the add-on unpop.com. I made a subdirectory of public_html called unpop. It is within this "public_html\unpop\" that I place the index.htm and all the other files of my unpopular site. Typing www.unpop.com into the address bar of a browser links directly to the contents of "public_html\unpop\" and the user is not aware that this site is sitting on a subdirectory of another site. BUT if you type "www.pop.com/unpop" into the address bar of a browser you DO see the unpopular site.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130  | Next Page >