Welcome to the Q&A Forum

In my experience a couple of spaces and the order of attributes don't matter at all. Google will understand just as easily and your developers won't have to jump through extra hoops.

Yes, search for whitesource on google (dont want to post the full link), this is the website but as far as robots.txt i do not have noindex or nofollow on my website. In addition, I also cannot get a cache on the "fetch as google" tool in the Search Console - im only getting the request header details, without the html

Hi Moz Team, Can anyone please reply me? Thanks!

It's not normal. To start, I'd check to make sure the content: is unique canonicalized to itself has incoming links no redirects isn't blocked from indexing I'd also check to see if you've had any site outages that may have prevented crawlers from accessing your content. If your site is fairly new and/or has little traffic, it's possible you're running out of crawl budget before search engines get to those pages.

Nevermind guys I got it to work. Added a CNAME as a method of validation if someone is interested.

Thanks for the input, guys!

Thanks!

Nice happy to hear that do you work with Greg Reindel? He is a good friend I looked at your IP that is why I ask? Tom

If the crawler is returning 404 errors, it's because it can't find those pages when following links. Since those pages don't exist, you won't find them in your WP dashboard either, Myflgreen. The next step is to determine if they should exist (i.e they've been deleted accidentally), in which case you need to rebuild them. If in fact they don't exist on purpose, you then need to look at the pages that contain the links to the non-existent pages and fix those pages so they don't contain the broken link in their content. (You can find the linking pages by downloading the 404 error report.) You'll also want to consider adding a redirect from the non-existent pages to another page on the site that provides essentially the same info, if such a page exists. (This is in case other websites might have been linking to those pages at some point) Final note - sometimes, these links show up as 404s because the link itself is written slightly incorrectly - double check for that too, if the link seems to be pointing to a real page but is 404ing. Hope that helps? Paul

Late to the game, but Deep Crawl is great for large sites, where Screaming Frogs, even with increased memory allocation, tend to force close the application from such large crawls.

Canonicals can pass link juice (see Dr. Pete's comment here), but it's at Google's discretion. I've seen it go both ways. The best way is to only link the one version you've chosen as the canonical. I'm not familiar with Magento - is that something that you can change easily? I think it'd be worth the time you'd invest in making that change.

I agree with what is said above, in addition you could also add the ignore parameter in GSC. As it 's basically adjusting the page content based on that. It's a bit unclear how much information that is really sending to the crawlers but it probably can't hurt.

After a bit more digging (and a venture down a character encoding rabbit hole) I haven't come up with any smoking guns (mixed metaphor alert). I don't suppose there's any chance those pages could have had a noarchive meta tag on them (or nosnippet) at any point in the past is there? It's possible that would remove the link but not remove the cached copy itself. I'm honestly not sure there is going to be a ton of ROI to going further down the rabbit hole to be honest. I think it's most likely to either remain unsolved or be something you can't do anything about (and we don't even know if it's really causing actual issues). If you want to continue debugging, I would run through these steps: Take a page like the one you mentioned and duplicate it on a different URL outside of that folder structure and see if that gets a cache link If it does, try 301 redirecting the page without the cache link to the one with the cache link and see if it disappears Try the above but with the redirect the other way around This will help narrow down what's going on - but doesn't guarantee that it'll be fixable, nor that there is actually any value to getting the cache link back. If you have any more evidence on the other issues you referred to (featured snippets etc) let me know and I can look at that separately. Let me know if you dig anything out. Good luck.

Thanks - I'll go ahead and do that.

As Red mentions, you're actually hosted on WordPress.com, not .org (which is the self-hosted version of WP) To resolve the specific error you're asking about... It's telling you that to be able to use the custom code features that are available, the settings for your domain name at your registrar should be pointing to the nameservers at WordPress.com, not the nameservers you're currently using (likely the registrar's own nameservers). Hope that helps? Paul

Targeting the same keywords with an additional site could certainly affect impact your existing rankings. You'll essentially be competing against yourself. But it won't make any difference whether the second site is on an addon domain in your primary hosting or on a different host/IP address. Google has so many ways of knowing that two sites are related that goes far beyond what IP they use. There can be instances where a second site for the same topics can be necessary/effective, but you'll want to be really sure that's the best approach as opposed to adjusting your existing site to accommodate whatever it is you're trying to accomplish. You're literally doubling your workload and competing against yourself in the process. What's the purpose of the second site? To go after a completely different market segment? Paul

Here are a few things that many people do not understand. The date of posting does not indicate who owns the content. The date that Google finds the content does not indicate who posted it first or who owns it. Ownership is independent of date of posting and date of Google discovery. Google does not always grant best rankings to "who they discovered first".  The rankings often go to "who is the most powerful". If you file a DMCA against someone who has documented permision to post the content and they decide to sue you for having that content taken down, you are probably going to lose, and you might have to pay more than you expect in damages and more than you expect in attorney fees. The good news is that legal advice on copyright often costs a lot less than you expect and a Hell of a lot less than getting sued.   Know what you are doing and the potential consequences before filing DMCA. There are two ways to get the canonical applied.  A) the webmaster of the website that is publishing the content must insert a canonical tag into the of the html of the page.  It should read like this...    B) the webmaster of the website that is publishing the content can apply rel=canonical using .htaccess.

ITS Not about loss of Linkjuice. ITS Not cool to Link sitewide in Footer to other Domains and link Back. My best practice: is the Link clicked by Users .. helpfull 4 Them: nofollow. Is the Link Not clicked or Not helpfull, Just exists to have links: delete