Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.

Category: Technical SEO Issues

Discuss site health, structure, and other technical SEO issues.


  • Hello Dirk, Thanks again for all of your help. So, I ended up not having the redirect setup correctly (I'm a noob!). For whatever reason, I could not setup the redirect using the redirect icon through the panel. I ended up accessing the .htaccess file (which was tough to find because it was hidden!). and I added this code. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.YourDomain.com$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://YourDomain.com/$1 [R=301,L] All of my redirects are now redirecting from www. To non-www. I'll have to wait for my next crawl to verify that the duplicate content has cleared, however, the redirect is indicating on httpstatus.io. Thanks for your assistance Dirk! B/R Will

    | MarketingChimp10
    0

  • Hi Joricia, What do you use for transcribing? I've tried Dragon but it's video transcription function is useless. Don't really have the money to get everything manually transcribed. Thanks, Jim

    | DigitalAnarchy
    0

  • Denise Ahh right, sorry about that. There is no plugin I'm aware of. You might want to try this method though: http://www.bloggingspell.com/add-schema-org-markup-wordpress/

    | evolvingSEO
    1

  • Also wanted to point out, John Mueller from Google just asswered a very similar question here: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/webmasters/RTfC0dCd8B8/discussion - not sure if this is the same exact situation but thought it might help.

    | evolvingSEO
    0

  • Hi Neil, I quite like Sucuri as a tool for monitoring a website as to whether or not it has been blacklisted by any of the malware/hacked tools.  I don't know this to be fact, but my professional observation is that even if a manual action has not been placed by Google but those other web sources say "We don't trust this site" then that can have a negative impact on that site's rankings even though Google hasn't reviewed it manually. We've had sites that were repaired also stay on one platform or another's blacklist for weeks after the problem was removed just based on how those tools work, some may require clean scans for two weeks, for example, before fully signing off that the site has been repaired and that the malware or whatever won't just pop back up due to poor server security. I would check out those sources first, make sure you don't see a blacklist by any of those big security companies, and then work on disavowing any of the bad links to the now deleted pages, and making sure you clean up your indexation so any 404'd pages are properly forwarded and the sitemap is cleaned back up so as not to be throwing errors. A little spring cleaning after those types of issues goes along way, especially if you're 100% sure you aren't blacklisted by any of the website scanning tools.  I wish we knew exactly how they interfaced with Google, or how much weight they gave, but I have observed what you are describing and found that it wasn't Google's shit list but say Norton has the site flagged and Google doesn't, it's a pretty safe bet that Google at least knows about it and they become a little wary. Hope this helped!  Cheers.

    | MatthewEgan
    0

  • Hi Tormar, That's really up to you, as that page will no longer have an effect on your search results or your site. If you'd like to save some server space or keep your directories tidy, feel free to remove the original page once you've got the 301 in place. And if this is permanent, definitely,_ definitely _use a 301 over a 302.

    | MattRoney
    0

  • Your last idea about temporarily redirecting them would be the best way to handle this situation. 302 redirects will send the right signals to search engines, and they'll know to come back later and check on them again.

    | LoganRay
    2

  • No problem! And yes, nowadays SEO is a lot about user experience.

    | DmitriiK
    0

  • Thanks all for your great suggestions!

    | KatherineWatierOng
    0

  • That's odd. Is there a theme conflict? If I was you I'd want to understand root cause. You don't want future theme or plugin updates overriding your fix and putting you back in the same place.

    | DonnaDuncan
    0

  • Hi Neil, What you could do is have your host set the unused domain (.com) as a parked domain, or just park it yourself in the domain management if your host has one. Then just do a redirect from the unused to the used. Then you won't have to worry about the root folder. As a parked domain you won't be creating a "coming soon page" nor would you want to, since its redirected to the actual domain you'll be using. As for other considerations, at this stage I would just say be sure you want to launch with .co.uk over .com. The co.uk is better for UK specific sites, and .com is better for a worldwide audience. However, it sounds like you already know this. Hope this helps, Don

    | donford
    0

  • Google's official recommendation is just to unblock js/css and let it figure it out since it's smart enough now. I personally like to give as many suggestions/clues to follow as possible so that it doesn't get confused. IMO, the onclick/href hybrid is probably the best for user experience. With proper canonicals set up (so that Google only indexes 1 version and avoids any duplicates), it's also my suggested method for SEO.

    | OlegKorneitchouk
    0

  • I totally agree with Linda. it won't hurt your site or won't penalize. I think the best solution for this is, just simply ask your partner site to change the product description rel= "author" as your site name. It will help the both sites.

    | Jubaer96
    0

  • For the "globe car" keyword, google shows the result from your meta description. But for "globecar" keyword, I think it's showing the result from your G+ business listing page. It should be happening for Structured Data (schema) or as it's your brand name.

    | Jubaer96
    1

  • I am having this very problem but it is probably a fundamental misunderstanding of search engines so bear with me. I have used Yoast SEO to turn on "noindex, follow" for archives and categories but not for www.cpresearch.net/blog.  The reason is that I am presuming that indexing the blog is necessary to find posts besides the current ones.  If that is not the case, what link is Google following to find the cannonicalized posts after they scroll from the one I list on the homepage.  And do I need to be indexed by Google daily to make sure my cannonicalized URLs are indexed?  I fear they will be orphaned... Thanks for any insight.

    | Paul-Gross
    0

  • Hi Niek, You know, this is a very tricky one, as frankly, I wouldn't advise reporting the business as closed to Google, given that you don't really want to send a signal to them that the place has gone out of business, even if you're no longer operating as a local company. Normally, I'm helping business owners who want to be sure they're doing well locally, so this question is reverse engineering for me. Obviously, you can't force Google to show a different type of knowledge panel (like the one they show for Hubspot) and I do confirm that what they are showing for a branded search for your business is a local-type knowledge panel which clicks over to the local data in the Maps view, but if you were to try to close the listing, it might not be the right thing to do. I seldom make a recommendation like this, but if I were in your shoes, I'd see if I could get Joy Hawkins at Imprezzio Marketing to consult with me. She has made a special study of particular aspects of Google listings, including closing them, duplicates, etc. She would be the person I'd reach out to for some consulting time to see if you can erase a local footprint without harming your overall signals to Google that this business is, in fact, in operation but simply not in local operation anymore. Hope this recommendation is helpful.

    | MiriamEllis
    1

  • It looks fine to me.  You're using rel next/prev correctly, you've got plenty of text on the page.  You're correctly setting rel canonical to the numbered page.  All looks good to me.

    | MichaelC-15022
    0