Has anyone had experience with the Wix platform and it's SEO qualities?
-
Wix offers an inexpensive, user friendly platform for building websites. Most of the site is flash, but Wix claims to be SEO friendly. I'm all ears for your feedback and experience with Wix.
-
Hi Karl
WIX is a great tool for building websites easily. Unfortunately, WIX is not SEO friendly as it is a FLASH based.
Flash is a big no no for SEO as the SERPS cant read flash and images.
Regards
Stef
-
AFAIK Wix is SEO friedly,
I don't have any first hand experience with it but I think they have an HTML Filter to help with SEO
"Wix sites are built using Flash. Although search engine robots cannot index Flash content, Wix developed a solution. As a user builds his or her Wix site, xml files are generated translate the site’s text and content into pure HTML"
look at the following thread: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=6e1a376d2d64f5c3&hl=en
Asaf.
-
Hi Karl, Stefano & Asif,
we're currently testing wix cms. Wix is great creativity tool, but it has some serious seo problems. It's correct that their websites are flash based, but we can confirm that their content are crawlable by google. There are other serious things - users cannot add any custom meta tags in the code level (head, body), also you will not be able to change anything in website hosting level. You can add any meta title and description, but this will be applied to the whole website (not page level). So you won't have different meta titles and descriptions (please note that google may change your titles and/or descriptions in their SERPS, so sometimes it doesn't matter). It must be said that currently wix have improved in handling these issues - they included 'rel canonical' and different meta titles - now they are constructed as follow - Website title + Page name, so it may be something like "My Website | My page". Meta descriptions are still the issue. Currently we are testing this cms, so we cannot recommend to use it or not, as you may know, flash, ajax is not recommended by most seo.
Some tips: - always use so called "masterpages" - these only are real web pages
- don't read their help on seo - it's very old and there are some major mistakes (like making no difference between image "alt" and "title", recommendations to use keywords tag and so on).
-
Hi Karl (and the rest),
My name is Nir and I manage the SEO development effort in Wix.com.
I want to clear some thing regarding Wix.com and SEO.
Wix is a flash based website builder but as some mentioned for every Flash website that you build Wix is automatically generates a search engine friendly HTML edition of the site so that the site will be visible to search engine.
Wix.com site is build using Wix technology and we're doing fine in SE positions and traffic.
We're constantly working on improving our platform SEO and many of the latest changes that we did came from our users requests and comments.
We're working on enabling different description along side other advance SEO properties. (soon we plan implemented Schema.org for our eCommerce solution).
Please feel free to ask anything and I'll try to answer any SEO related question you might have.
Nir Sagiv
UPDATE: our eCommerce solution is currently implemented using micro-formats and we're working on schema.org implementation in the future.
-
I've got a client with a Wix site and I need to edit their rel canonical tags--does anyone on here happen to know whether that's possible?
-
As far as I know, there is no way to edit rel canonical in Wix sites. The only option I see is to try to contact their support and ask to solve your problem. But personally I haven't tried to ask anything regarding the code change.
-
Thanks. Figured out a workaround.
-
if you dont mind,
what was your need for doing this
and
what was your workaround
im interested to know here
BUMP! 2013
-
Hi Guys, My name is Eitan and I am the SEO manager for WIX.com. I would like to try and clarify some issues raised here, so you will get a full picture regarding the SEO level for sites generated by Wix. Previously, sites were generated with Wix were based on Flash in the client side and seo was an issue for Wix to deal with and find a solution. In order to overcome the seo challenges, Wix came up with the solution of auto-generating HTML versions for each Flash site and serving the Html version to the search engines bots on the server side. So, the end results in terms of seo for Wix's Flash sites were very good. We can proudly say, that the seo level for those sites were well above the average seo level of most internet sites around the web. After explaining about Wix Flash sites seo, I would like to present much bigger news.... Since March 2012, we launched our new HTML5 editor which enables users to build themselves a free Html5 website. I encourage you to visit our sites and check hundreds of new and amazing Html5 templates. Our Html5 sites, are seo friendly and present top level of seo by using AJAX crawling, schema and microdata, adjusting your page titles and description, optimizing you images and more. Our users should know that by using the seo widget inside the editors, they are able to optimize their sites even more. I would like to conclude by saying that Wix sites (both Flash & Html5) have a decent level of SEO, and to ensure our users that they enjoy a well above market level of seo. I will be happy to answers any questions you may have in the future as well. Regards, Eitan Helman Seo Team Manager - Wix.com
-
Hi Eitan,
I quote you here: "Wix came up with the solution of auto-generating HTML versions for each Flash site and serving the Html version to the search engines bots on the server side."
Isn't this cloacking (presenting different content or URLs to human users and search engines)? That's a violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines!
-
Hi Sorina,
Serving Google with as HTML version with the same content isn't cloacking. **Cloaking **refers to the practice of presenting different content or URLs to human users and search engines.
If you'll go and read about it more on Google Help Center you will find out that Google is recommending different ways to serve pages and content to his bots in case they can't see the original content (JavaScript, Flash, Videos, Dynamic Content and more). Basically, Google is asking webmasters to serve the content users see in a way his bots will understand.
So is totally OKto serve Google bots their own version as long as it is exactly the same as the content viewed by the users.
Again, I recommend you read more about it on Google Webmaster Help, but I can ensure you that WIX users are enjoying a great level of SEO whether their sites are build with our HTML5 editor or with our Flash editor.
I hoped I clarified your question.
Eitan
-
Hi Sorina,
Serving Google with as HTML version with the same content isn't cloacking. **Cloaking **refers to the practice of presenting different content or URLs to human users and search engines.
If you'll go and read about it more on Google Help Center you will find out that Google is recommending different ways to serve pages and content to his bots in case they can't see the original content (JavaScript, Flash, Videos, Dynamic Content and more). Basically, Google is asking webmasters to serve the content users see in a way his bots will understand.
So is totally OKto serve Google bots their own version as long as it is exactly the same as the content viewed by the users.
Again, I recommend you read more about it on Google Webmaster Help, but I can ensure you that WIX users are enjoying a great level of SEO whether their sites are build with our HTML5 editor or with our Flash editor.
I hoped I clarified your question.
Eitan
-
Hi Eitan and thank you for your answer.
These lines are taken exactly from the Google Webmasters Help:
--begin quote:
Some examples of cloaking include:
- Serving a page of HTML text to search engines, while showing a page of images or Flash to users
- Inserting text or keywords into a page only when the User-agent requesting the page is a search engine, not a human visitor
-- end quote - source here
When they refer to serve the bots their own version of the content they mean it on the same page, through image alts, noscript tags, etc. They don't talk about creating other pages just for search engines.
-
To wix SEO team
I just got off the phone with your wonderful phone support staff and still have somethings i need to address here.
first and foremost, I think seomoz is not wix html5 (not flash) friendly or vice versa, and that wix is rather google friendly. these are my experiences as described below - see questions too to see what i mean.
in google, i have managed to get wix flash sites high rankings (currently a few webpages -master pages- are ranking in top 3 for their keywords. so i cant realy approve of the notion that wix flash is not seo friendly, because i have seen it in action and it is rather seo friendly. he who says nay, does not know the site well enough and has had inadequate experience using it.
and its been OVER a year since we ran those pages and we've only seen everything go up with regards to seo. there are tricks and tips you need to know though to make sure you rank well (h1 and title tags, etc)
However, when it comes to SEO for wix html5 websites, i still have a few things I need to clarify with both seomoz and wix staff's help
1. I would like to know more about how and why seomoz system sees/shows only 1 page (and when there are multiple non-sub page, main webpages visible through wix editor) for wix html5 websites (this is not an issue with multiple master pages with flash, they are seen properly).this has been tested on multiple html5 based wix sites now, both hooked and connected to GA accounts as well and both show only 1 page, the root domain homepage with 1 rel canonical tag from the page to itself. both of these websites have more than a few separate webpages that ought to function independently at least when it comes to being indexed or crawled.
with regards to this problem, there rises another issue that remains vague to me: I know google indexes all text and image content on html5 sites as i have ran site:domain.com keyword test and it sees them. however in seomoz, i only see a bunch of dashes in front of all my keywords for html5 sites (these are not optimized at all and are rather new domains so rankings are very low naturally) and i cannot verify or tell whether they are being seen and are not in top 50 results or they cant be read or seen by seomoz bot and crawler. google sees all of them and shows the correct internal url page result when you do a site search test. just want to confirm that seomoz can also see them
2. on wix flash, why are rel canonical tags to the root domain from every single separate master page changing up and down from seomoz's point of crawl? I mean, i have not made any changes to the site in question in 3 months and my number of rel canonical tags have gone up AND down constantly without ANY edits being made to the site in the same time period of 2+ months,
3. why can't we get sitelinks the same nice way that we can get with wix flash sites in your html5, this is a big deal.
and finally i have an open question to seomoz and wix staff both:
why or why not is it a good/bad idea to have all of your webpages rel canonical tag the homepage and transfer all seo points gained and attributes to the main domain. i am lead to believe that this is what wix does automatically across both flash and html5 platforms, at least this is what seomoz seems to be reporting.
in the end i would like to thank all of you wonderful and helpful people at both companies in advance and would like to mention that we are looking forward to using both companies services in conjunction with one another to build nice and cheap websites for our clients and also be able to optimize them well and be able to show and report on all of those efforts properly (what is currently crippled due to issue #1 above). particularly using the html5 site builder. I am sure there are swaths similar minded people like me albeit in the dark and in silence who are wishing they could use the new html5 sites with seomoz the same way flash ones work. i hope there will be more compatibility among the two and good constructive answers to my questions and challenges above.
-
It depends on what you are using the rel canonical for. In our case we were changing domains entirely and I could not 301 the old URLs to the new (both domains located the same content), so I really needed the rel canonicals to work. In the long run I figured out 1. how to 301 the old URLs and 2. how to update the rel canonical on the homepage of the Wix site. All the pages on the Wix site I was working with were dynamic, so they didn't have unique, static URLs. Between the domain change, the 301s, the one rel canonical I was able to update, a little bit of extra keyword rich text on the home page, some directory submittals, and a handful of links, I was able to get a few #1 rankings, as well as some top 3 and top 10 rankings for keywords among those we were targeting. The client was on a budget so the targets weren't too ambitious, and we didn't have the resources to overhaul the site entirely. Also for some reason they were emotionally committed to hosting and managing their site via WIX. It turned out ok given their budget and goals.
Ceteris paribus, if you have a choice, and inbound traffic matters to you, you ought to stay away from Wix. The convenience Wix offers can be had without paying for it with the lack of flexibility and control tech-minded inbound marketers value.
-
Didn't see this post. Interesting.
-
Having the exact same troubles as mentioned above by RayMa.. Would be amazing if SeoMoz and Wix could get rid of these bugs.
In addition, SeoMoz continues to show zero links/activity, (after multiple crawls) (and being both verified and connected through google analytics) the only thing SeoMoz shows is 1rel canonical warning. This is frustrating because i want to see where i stand with links vs my competitors. Of course i can use google webmaster tools, but i would much rather use the services of SeoMoz.
When i do run google webmaster tools, I have a handful of 404 errors reading "escaped_fragment_=untitled/zoom/canh/image" ... This url appears as http://www.bizrevamp.com/#!untitled/zoom/mainPage/image114q
this is also confusing... any help would be brilliant!
Regards, seomoz aspirant, Buddy
-
wix has been incredibly cold-shouldery about this whole thing... very canned responses everywhere, no legitimate explanation of why this happens, and why they cannot find a better way to do it, not even a tat on "we're working on this to increase web admin's options for 301s or canonicals. i can assure you they are not hard to code into a platform like wix, all they need to give users is a little control panel much like they have introduced for pages on html5 where you can set separate metadata, etc. with buttons and modes for 301s and canonicals.
it is also my pure guess-based on my understanding of how google handles these canonical tags, and since wix does not want to clear the air- that there is a lazy reason at wix for this situation-to answer my own question this way:
Google has stated that they reserve the right to IGNORE canonical tags when they so feel like based on their understanding of the websites- ie if they see webdev is shooting themselves in the foot with canonicals, they can ignore it and treat that particular page stand-alone.
FOR THIS, I can see how wix could have gotten a little lazy with this and said to themselves, we just set all pages to canonical tag homepage instead, and whenever google sees a page worthy of standalone ranking and treatment, it does so on its own terms.
which would nonetheless be a terrible and uber lackluster approach to a delicate matter such as SEO & CRO, especially for small business clients who cannot afford a $20,000 custom coded e-commerce page.
a good 80% of all you need for SEO is there, missing are minute controls over individual page canonical tags, 301 redirects, and a proper blog- which can btw be remedied atm with a paid wordpress hookup supposedly.
WIX, we need CLEAR answers.
we also need you to clear this across the board
here is just one of the probably many threads on your forum relating to the specifically mentioned topics above. PLEASE RESPOND & ELABORATE
-
I am sorry for the delayed response and I will try to address all the above issues.
Wix SEO is based on Google Ajax Crawling solution for dynamic ajax pages. You can read the Google documentation here, https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/getting-started In short, Wix instructs search engines to read the content in a special version of the page which contains all the content in the source code of the page, unlike the original dynamic page. This is an acceptable solution in the industry and as you can see, Google indexes all pages content. Ajax crawling solution works nowadays for both Flash and Html sites.
SEOMOZ Issues. Although Ajax Crawling is fully supported by search engines, it is not fully supported by many third parties tools. We will check if we can work it out with SEOMOZ great tool.
Canonical urls - Since Search engines are extracting all data from the escaped fragment pages, the canonical tags in the escaped fragment are what's matters and not the ones in the viewer version (the version user's sees). Viewer version always shows root canonical (in fact it displays the same code for all pages). RayMa, please take a look at the escaped fragment versions of your pages and let me know if the canonical tags are set properly
Cloaking (Sorina) - As mentioned above, Wix is following all Ajax Crawling guidelines, whenever Google bot sees a page with Ajax Crawling meta tag, , or a url with hashbang, #!, then the bot goes directly to the seo version of the page.
404 links on Google Analytics (David) - Can you provide us some links so we can check it?
Please let me know if I have missed anything.
-
0392
-
05213
-
03261
-
05535
-
03404
-
022.8k
-
08628