Welcome to the Q&A Forum

In addition to Robert's answer, I'd like to add that although OSE doesn't have a built in bias towards "name-brand" links, it does favor links with high Page and Domain Authority, and URL that have good inbound link profiles themselves, because these are the most useful to crawl and index.

Of course, OSE doesn't report all links, especially those buried beneath layers of navigation and those on pages with very few inbound links themselves.

Part of the issue may be temporary as well. Each index changes from the last. The most recent index was an improvement in that it reported far more domains, but significantly fewer URLs. This is a trend we may see reversed in future updates.

More about the last update here.

The only way that SEOmoz will crawl your old URLs is if that is what your web servers is delivering to the SEOmoz crawlers. In this case, you might want to make sure all your redirect are in place.

I did a quick check of the URL listed in your public profile using the tool URI valet, and found at least 4 redirects from the homepage, including a 302, which passes no link juice. This is definitely something you want to look into.

Generally the SEOmoz robots will crawl your site once a week, so 99% of the time you will see new infomation contained in your campaign within 7-10 day. If you suspect an error, be sure to contact the help team (help@seomoz.org)

Also, here's my favorite article on site migration. Although you didn't migrate a complete site, many of the principals still apply.

https://seogadget.co.uk/surviving-seo-site-migration/

Best of luck with your SEO!

Hi Denis,

If I understand correctly, you have a PRO campaign that is grading a URL/Keyword combination that you didn't intend.

The On-Page tool automatically generates reports for any of your tracked keywords that rank in the top 50, and it grades them against the URL that is ranking. So generally, it can only get these keyword phrases from your tracked keywords.

Sometimes these are not the keyword/URL combinations you want to grade. Fortunately there's an easy way grade any keyword you want. Here's some instructions from the Help Guide I wrote...

For example, your "Contact Us" page ranks #5 for the keyword phrase "Yellow Shoes" and the Web App grades it a B. What if you really want to target your homepage for this keyword phase? Here’s how:

1. Hit **Report Card **at the top of the On-page summary.

2. Choose your Keyword you want to grade. The keyword must already be included in your   campaign. Select Manage Keywords if you need to add keywords.

3. Enter the URL of the page you would like to grade.

4. Hit Grade My On-Page Optimization to generate your report.

Hope this helps!

Hi Diane,

A few possibilities here.

1. Small changes can have a big impact. Even changing a single paragraph can cause your grade to go from an A to an F, or vice versa.

Fortunately, the complete report will tell you exactly how it scored your page. If you drill down into the report, it will even tell you what areas you need to fix.

You can see the full drill down by clicking on the keyword in the report overview. Here's a screenshot.

2. Check to make sure it's the same URL that is ranking. The On page report generates a report for the URL that is ranking for the current week, which can change from time to time. If a different URL is ranking this week from last, then the On-page grader will grade the new URL, which might have a completely different grade.

3. Unfortunately, without knowing the URL or keyword it's hard to tell you exactly what's going on. Feel free to ask a private question, or ping the help team if you want further help and you are not comfortable sharing this information in public.

Good luck!

There are some strange outlier instances, but in this case a domain that links to itself counts as a linking domain. (since it's entirely possible to have a domain not link to itself, we have to count it when it does.)

So, a domain that links only to itself, with no other links, would have 1 linking root domain and 0 external links.

The truth is, you can trust them all, but every index will always report different numbers.

For example, it's estimated that Google's index was 2x the size of Yahoo's.

The web is full of links. Billions and billions of them. The problem is that 80% of them are junk. Most indexes maintained by companies like Google, Bing, Yahoo, and even SEOmoz and Majestic can't afford to waste the resources crawling, processing and storing all of those junk links. So the question doesn't become what you keep, what's more important is what you throw away.

Yahoo tended to report a lot of links. It was kind of fun because they reported many links right away, even if they weren't important and didn't help you to rank.

Linkscape (the name of SEOmoz's index) tries very hard to produce a quality listing of links - links that actually have an effect on crawling, indexing and ranking. The huge advantage of Linkscape over Yahoo is that OSE will actually tell you the value of a link through metrics like Domain Authority, Page Authority and MozTrust. You couldn't get these metrics from Yahoo.

Our friends at Majestic wrote a post that we featured on the SEOmoz blog highlighting this difficulty.

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/why-counting-links-is-not-so-easy

No index will report every link, but OSE will represent the majority of links that matter, and provide actionable metrics to go along with them.

SEOmoz provides an API of it's Linkscape data that other companies, even individuals can use for their own purposes. Oftentimes companies buy this data and use it in their own reports. Sometimes they use all of the data, sometimes just a portion of it.

Unfortunately, there's no good way for me to tell how Link Diagnosis uses the SEOmoz data. To save money and resources, some companies "cache" the data - which works fine as long as they update the cache regularly. I'm not saying this to disparage Link Diagnosis, I simply don't know enough about them.

That said, you can be assured that Open Site Explorer always has the latest, freshest and most accurate OSE data. Every time you use OSE, fresh data is served with no long-term caching, so it proves itself a very reliable tool for webmasters.

Hi Éber,

In my opinion, it's totally legitimate to nofollow those links to your login page, assuming they are showing the same 302 redirect and login page to Google. This will cut down on excessive crawling and possibly help you out with your Google Crawl "allowance."

If, on the other hand, you wanted to direct some link juice towards your login page, you could turn the 302 into a 301.

There might be other solutions, such as blocking the page with robots.txt, or using clever javascript. That said, nofollow is probably the easiest.

Hi Frederik,

Domain Authority is highly correlated with both mozRank and mozTrust, and includes factors from both of these metrics into the final Domain Authority score. Most of the time, a site with both superior Domain MozRank and superior MozTrust will also have a higher Domain Authority, but not all the time.

In this instance, I think we are seeing an edge case where Linkscape was reporting funny numbers. In the time since you posted your original question, not only Linkscape has been updated but the way Domain Authority metrics has also been updated for the first time in a couple years. The old Linkscape calculations were accidently including certain types of binary and junk files. If Duft og Natur had a large number of these types of files included in the Index, it could have certainly thrown the numbers off.

The end result is more accuracy today.

In fact, looks like Netspiren now scores a DA of 45, whereas Duft og Natur scores a 40. Nice!

Robots.txt files are sequential, which means they follow directives in the order they appear. So if two directives conflict, they will follow the last one.

So the simple way to do this is to disallow all files first, then allow the directory you want next. It would look something like this:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /

User-agent: *
Allow: /test

Caveat: This is NOT the way robots.txt is supposed to work. By design, robots.txt is designed for disallowing, and technically you shouldn't ever have to use it for allowing. That said, this should work pretty well.

You can check your work in Google Webmaster, which has a robots.txt checker. Site Configuration > Crawler Access. Just type in your proposed robots.txt, then a test URL and you should be good to go.

Hope this helps!

Hi Loren,

I took a peek at your website, and checked some things behind the scenes using my super-awesome administrative powers here at SEOmoz. It looks like one of two things happened.

1. Rogerbot encountered an error when crawling your site
2. Your site had trouble with rogerbot.

In either case, you probably want to contact the help team (help@seomoz.org), especially if the problem persist in the next crawl report.

On another note..

Those extra-long title tags might cause some crawlers a little confusion. I'm not saying they're bad for you, but I doubt they are helping you much from a search engine point of view. Undoubtedly, I'd say with near certainty that Google is not indexing the entirety of your title tags. Paginated lists like this are tough to get indexed properly. If folks are actually searching for these obscure part numbers, perhaps this is the only way to scale it. That said, I would encourage you to experiment.