Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I'd tread very carefully here as thing 1 and thing 2 seem to contradict each other at face value. You're right, Google can send traffic to a site in ways other than keywords, but it's not the norm. The next thing I'd look at is, hmm - how are we tracking keyword rankings? Is it an online, cloud based rank tracker that relies on you specifying all of (and all of the right) keywords to track? Most of those trackers track between 50 and 300 KWs (daily, weekly) but it's not uncommon for such sites to have 10,000+ keywords contributing. If they're not all in there, it's a bad sample you are looking at. Connect Google Search Console to Google Analytics. let it run for a few weeks, analyse the 'search query' data from within Google Analytics (which can be done once it's all hooked up). GSC only lets you export 1k keywords (usually, sometimes it can be more) but GA will take 5k and that's much better for your analysis. You might be surprised to find, those pages rank for more keywords than you thought. maybe hundreds of little ones, instead of a few big ones

Cool thanks, it's nice to see some real insights on this.

hi rozy, it seems like you dont have proper seo knowledge. i think i can help you.

I'm can't fully understand why you would use 302 redirections, these are meant to be for tempory redirects only. https://moz.com/learn/seo/redirection

Yes. Link equity or PageRank is passed from page to page via the crawlable links on your site.

We like to think of all pages written around a specific topic as a content silo. Many of these pages will include the same keywords for sure. The key is to choose which page is the "head" of the silo and should rank for the main phrases assigned to that silo. Then you can use all the other pages in the silo to internally link back to the main page with the proper anchor text, thereby helping the main page (and correct page) rank for the keyword. To sum up, you might end up with many pages that all include a specific keyword but you're going to internally link all of them to the main page using the keyword as the anchor text which is basically telling Google that all your pages are saying that the main page is the most relevant for that keyword.

Just so you know Meta no-index can be applied through the HTML but also through the HTTP header which might make it easier to implement on such a highly generated website

if you want any coupon code then visit my site coupon code 99 and get 500+ coupon codes.

In addition to  effectdigitals comments, it partially depends on the CMS. For example a Standatrd WordPress robots.txt is formatted: **User-agent: * Disallow: /wp-admin/ Allow: /wp-admin/admin-ajax.php** I prefer to add a link to the sitemap.xml: **User-agent: *** Disallow: /wp-admin/ Allow: /wp-admin/admin-ajax.php Sitemap: https://www.website.com/sitemap.xml To allow all web crawlers access to all content, just use: **User-agent: *** Disallow: Refer to https://moz.com/learn/seo/robotstxt for further advise.

My site also have this problem please help. Social Sathee

If you're talking about the Moz spam score of the domain, it's higher than many would like but it's not extremely high: https://d.pr/i/4WwfDq.png (screenshot) A score of 80 or higher is indicative of very, very spammy sites. Although lots of strong language is used within the tool, 50% isn't super awful really. By the way, Moz is not connected to your disavow file and cannot see it (something many have requested many times, which I continue to request at any given opportunity). As such, disavow work will not decrease your Moz spam score Moz's spam score is not something which Google use within their ranking algorithm(s). Google have private spam metrics which they do not share with webmasters. Moz's spam score is simply an attempt by our industry to make our 'best guess' at how spammy Google 'might' think a website is. Ultimately though, it's just an indicator and a 'shadow metric', it's meant to mimic the decisions that Google might make but Google (again) does not actually use any Moz metrics (at all) within their ranking algorithm(s) Your disavow file goes straight to Google, so even if Moz doesn't see it and their best 'guess' is that your spam score is still high, you know that 'actual Google' have seen your disavow work and thus Moz's spam metric is not likely to be accurate for your domain (which is why it's only an indicator, even when looking at other domains, as you don't know what link removal and disavow work they have carried out) If you want your actual Moz spam score to go down (though there is no reason for such vanity, as Google doesn't use Moz metrics) then you have to actually remove the links and that's that (sorry) Remember that the spam score is derived based on factors which Moz perceives as being common to penalised websites: Spam Score: "Represents the percentage of sites with similar features we've found to be penalized or banned by Google." ~ Moz This is not necessarily linked to backlink features in isolation, I would expect that some on-page features may be counted. The site just doesn't look and feel very legit: 1.) A review site, with only seven reviews, one of which appears to be for a gun or fire-arm (paintball or not, it's a gun) 2.) No seeming ability for any users to add their own reviews, so this is just one person's biased voice. Why does the internet need this website? 3.) Logo is blurry and low-res and doesn't look 'proper' 4.) Only three pages seem to exist. One of these pages is a 'disclaimer'. Webmasters put up disclaimers when, they should be taking more responsibility for the content of their own website but they refuse to do so. Disclaimers are a low-quality signal, and unless there are thousands of contradictory positive signals (which there are not, for this domain) then this is how this will be viewed 5.) The site has no value-add for end-users, or unique value-proposition. People can find more in-depth reviews from product critics they trust, or shallow yet more numerous reviews from review aggregators like Trust Pilot. Either way, they would be on a better site with a better value-proposition for the end user. Why would Google rank this site? 6.) Site claims to be a review site, yet does not make good usage of review schema and star-ratings for prettier SERPs. Seems more like a blog with aspirations to be a review site, which didn't quite make it. The site marks up the supposed 'reviews' with BlogPosting schema, not with review schema 7.) Content is dry with poor layout and feels boring. In most reviews no numerical evaluation is made, no star ratings are given. There's no point at which the author accepts: "I am a reviewer now, I must give an opinion, I must give something useful to the user which they could use at a glance". The unwillingness to take responsibility for giving an opinion, combined with the disclaimer which reinforces the author's 'shunning' of their own content (are they worried their own content is bad? Why are they so careful not to give or take responsibility for opinions? The images all look like stock images, are these fake reviews? Right now it feels like yes they are) 8.) It feels as if this site has bee made 'for the sake of' SEO. That's not the kind of site Google wants to rank ... so as you can see, even if you tackle your poor backlinks, this site doesn't really have much hope of ranking well on Google. Google is ultimately looking for trust and a value proposition. Over the materials which Google already has indexed on their first page of results for the reviewed products, the pages on this site don't really add anything. In addition the domain is giving off multiple off-page AND on-page mistrust signals, which will really stand against in the rankings In this case I think you'd better head all the way back to the drawing board Look at this video in which Miley from Google (think she's an ex-Googler now) outlines the #1 common SEO mistake as 'working without a value proposition': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AmRg3p79pM You only need to watch her outline issue #1, the rest of the video isn't that relevant to you Also watch Moz's video on how unique content isn't good enough to rank any more: https://moz.com/blog/why-good-unique-content-needs-to-die-whiteboard-friday ... and how you should craft 10x content to replace the prior 'plague' of 'good unique content': https://moz.com/blog/how-to-create-10x-content-whiteboard-friday After watching these videos, you should begin to understand why what you're doing isn't working and why it won't work

The only thing I can fathom is that some of your links aren't really being counted. There could be some legitimate reasons for that! For example, some links are no-followed and the links callutheran.edu seem to be from pages which have billions of links on (link-list URLs) which we know Google does not like to count Pinoy Flix It's possible you got links from some great sites, but all that benefit was nullified by the format under which your links 'actually went live' (e.g: being on spammy link list URLs or being no-followed, or both!)

Darn. If you'd be willing to share the domain I'd be willing to do a full crawl of it and return the data to you. If there are no glaring technical errors then at least we'd know it was probably a combo of content issues and off-site popularity metrics which could be corrected over time Up to you though. Seems complex though, like we should begin ruling stuff out

Make sure you look at your URL bar when claiming that two URLs are "the same exact landing page". Just because they look the same, that doesn't mean they are the same. A page is defined first and foremost by its location, its URL. If the URL is different, it's not the exact same page

Sir , Thank you for replying, i will explain step by step what i have done; Old site: https://www.selldealsmango.com/ New site: https://www.dealsmango.com/ first i have remove all pages from my old site, than only home page left, i then remove all the data from home and on that blank page i posted the new site URL. by clicking on that old site URL you will know what i am trying to explain. but i am using canonical tag  for old site also. than i have generated XML site maps of both sites and uploaded on google search console. after that i request for indexing and duplicate canonical error occurs. in 2nd step i have put 301 redirect from old site to new site and than again i have request for indexing but error remain the same.

Due to many redirects (even 301s) being subject to some kind of content similarity checks (last cache of old active URL before 301, cache of new page) I don't think there's much mileage in this any more. I am pretty sure that some kind of Boolean content string similarity check is performed and if the content is very dissimilar, the 301s don't really work that well. I have no official Google quotes on this but have observed it from a number of 301 redirect migration projects and I'm pretty confident that dissimilar URLs receive only a fraction of SEO authority from 301s now

thanks for the thorough response. I was leaning toward leaving it alone for the time being and this helps affirm my decision. I don't think we are going to see much benefit from tampering with it to make it more Googlebot-friendly

Thank you!