Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Thomas,

If you could send a screenshot over to our help team, that'd be great. Thanks!

Keri

I took a quick look at the first site. I don't know about triggering any type of warning, but are you aware that there are multiple pages with lorem ipsum text still? http://artistalaska.com/about.htm You might want to clean that up for a better user experience. Also, some pages are indexed that you probably don't want viewable, such as http://www.artistalaska.com/$_alternate1.htm.

Just those eight sites got targeted, and not the others that you also did (via http://spyonweb.com). Look and see if you can find something in common with those that the others don't have? I noticed this page http://www.whitegyr.com/using_free_link_exchange_directo.htm and while the Google notice doesn't mention linking, I'd maybe clean that up as a preventative tool.

Right now I'm on limited bandwidth and time, but if this were me I'd go through and do a site: on each of the sites and see what google has indexed and see if anything jumps out (like the default text, see if there's evidence of anything being hacked, etc). I'd go into open site explorer and look and inlinks and look to see anything fishy is there. I'd look at the source code to see if something looks off there (like a bunch of hidden text). I'd look to see if I was using unique content on the site.

Is your campaign set up with or without the www subdomain? If your campaign is set up for non-www and the results you're seeing are on www, that would be the reason (and it's a common reason).

We have more details about our rankings report at http://moz.com/help/pro/rankings. If that doesn't answer your question, it's best to submit a ticket to the help desk and see if there's some type of error. Thanks!

People who do that are often ones who don't know about SEO or wanting to optimize anchor text and the ones who haven't been asked for specific information for a link. They're the ones who help contribute to a natural-looking link profile. If all of your links have anchor text that looks like someone coached them about what to write, it looks a bit suspicious to the engines and less like someone linked there on their own and more like they were prompted to do so.

This sounds like the start of a good YouMoz post.

I totally agree with the other two responses. Ask what they mean by running macros, and be sure you understand what they are doing for you, and ask for regular reports. If they're building any links, you need to get the list from them about the exact links they have built.

The short answer is that Google and Moz don't look at images. If you turn off your images, there's not too much different between those pages.

Hi Steven,

A notice is just that -- it's a notice that "hey, this is here, make sure you want it here" and it's not a warning. Feel free to ignore it if it's set up the way you want it to.

You might find it helpful to go over to http://www.free-online-html-editor.com/ and do your post, then copy the source code.

Also, click on the buttons in our editor. Many are actually drop-downs with options for headings, alignment, etc. even though they just look like buttons.

I haven't done this in a long time, but I used ISAPI Rewrite, and did what is talked about in this thread at http://www.webmasterworld.com/microsoft_asp_net/3951672.htm. An alternate method is discussed at http://www.stepforth.com/resources/web-marketing-knowledgebase/non-www-redirect/#microsoft. Hope this helps you get started!

We apologize for the delay. We encountered some unexpected difficulties, but we hope to be able to release this index in the next day. We will know more in the next 3-4 hours, and I will update this post as I have more information.

I am closing this thread, and will keep http://moz.com/community/q/why-still-the-moz-index-showing-next-update-on-august-26-2013 updated. We'll also keep you posted on Twitter. Thanks for your patience!

Hi! These domains that no longer have links to a site should drop off the report in a couple of crawl cycles. Our data isn't live, but can take a few weeks to crawl, process, and display. I suggest re-running your report, since we just pushed out a new index yesterday, and seeing if anything looks better. You can also look to see what Google and Bing report in their webmaster tools for your website.

If you can give us some context as to where you've seen it used, we can help better explain what it means in that case. It could actually mean a lot of different things.

Using the private / incognito browsing in a browser can also help, as it means it's not using search history from the browser or anything stored in cookies. You're still getting geography in your queries (people in different areas see different results for the query 'pizza' for example), but it is a start.

If you download the CSV, you'll get the referring URL in the spreadsheet.

And Google has additional ways to identify sites all related, such as everything in the same GWT account, sites having the same Google Analytics master account, etc. Doesn't mean they use it for ranking, but they have ways beyond just IP to see things are related.

Hello Lesley,

I read your post, and wanted to make sure you had seen our blog post about the Just Discovered Links at http://moz.com/blog/announcing-the-just-discovered-links-report. Tela makes a couple of important points in it:

"This index includes valuable links that may be high-quality and topically relevant to your site or specific URL but are new, and thus have a low Page Authority score. This means they may not be included in the Mozscape index until they have been established and earned their own links. With this new index, we expect to uncover high-quality links significantly faster than they would appear in Mozscape.

I want to clarify that we are not injecting URLs from the Just-Discovered Links report into our Mozscape index. We will be able to do this in the future, but we want to gather customer feedback and understand usage before connecting these two indexes. So for now, the indexes are completely separate."

I don't see comments enabled on your blog, so I am not able to make a note of this over there. Could you perhaps amend your post with this information?

I would hold off just a bit on updating the links. If you have hundreds of links, and you can update them, and update them all at once to some keyword-rich anchor text, that's going to look awfully fishy to any search engine.

I've asked another associate to also come in and give there opinion on this, but do wait before doing anything drastic.

Here are the most common reasons why only one page is crawled. If this doesn't answer it, send us a note at help@moz.com. Thanks!

https://seomoz.zendesk.com/entries/409821-Why-Isn-t-My-Site-Being-Crawled-You-re-Not-Crawling-All-My-Pages-

Diane, the excessive ads for the hypnotherapy/weight loss help reduce credibility of the site. The travel news articles are outdated (the most recent one about holiday deals talks about it still being winter and about the upcoming Olympic games) and the Ryanair incident was from April 2012.Nothing has a date byline on it, so it makes it difficult for me to trust the article.

To a regular user, it looks like you don't have enough content and are trying to stretch it, as I'm seeing the same celeb picture multiple times in multiple locations on the home page.

The site seems to lack focus, or rather be focused on ads. Do people really care about that many bingo news features on a site that's supposed to (I think) be about celeb gossip?

The About section at the bottom looks spammy because it's small and in italics, making it hard to read. It looks keyword stuffed and like people aren't meant to read it, but that it's just there for search engines.

You may want to reconsider if you want to focus so much on the keyword "lifestyle magazine". What is the search volume like for that phrase? Are people really looking for that?

I'm surprised that I don't see a cookie notice like I do on most European sites these days. Is the UK excluded from that?