Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Yes, that is what I was referring to regarding Search Console.

It's _possible _that Moz isn't recognizing the H1 because it's below the H2 tag and  there are two H1 tags. Those two issues should be resolved whether or not it's the cause of Moz not registering your H1.

Hi Tiffany,

Have you rendered the page in Google Search Console to see how Google will render the site? In most cases, this will answer any question you have about Google's perception of a page element.

As Johnny said, you definitely want to qualify your keyword more. Let's say for the sake of discussion that this link was the magic bullet that got you to rank #1 for "towing" - presumably it's a local service so if you rank that well for such a generic term, you would get a lot of traffic sure, but 99.99% of it's going to be very unqualified.

The effort required to do this is relatively high and you'll see zero impact - actually, maybe a decline since you'd be redirecting all your current URLs. Google doesn't care about trailing slashes or file extensions on URLs. The most important thing is that URL variants all resolve to a single address. For example https://australiatimenow.com.au/category/health/ should always resolve instead of https://australiatimenow.com.au/category/health

Canonicals will help with the trailing slash issue, but that's not the sole reason for your traffic loss. Read up on Angular and address those issues first. It's definitely going to be a boatload of work, but the impact you'll see from that will far outweigh any smaller optimizations you're able to make.

Google has stated more than once that accordioned content will be crawled, indexed, and weighted the same as any other content on the page. This wasn't always the case, but as mobile usage grew and accordions became commonplace for good mobile UX, they pivoted their stance on this type of content. In your example, I would especially not be worried about it since the primary content of the page is in the Overview section.

It was wise to kill one of those pages. If I were in this position, I would use as much data as possible to inform the decision. I would look at:

Google Search Console for impressions, average position, CTR

Google Analytics: entrances, page value, bounces

You see that because the site is built to be a progressive web app, as seen in their Lighthouse Report.

When did the redesign occur? I looked at the wayback machine and it looks like it was well over a year ago. It's concerning that you're still seeing rank/traffic issues.

I noticed that MozBar isn't able to grab a status code from the site, which is concerning.  From the looks of things, you're using a version of Angular that isn't Google-friendly. When I click links on the site, none of the data in MozBar changes, which means Google likely isn't seeing anything different when they follow links either, effectively making your site a single page.  Read more here: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/angular-seo-guide/303849/#close

You should read Google's Search Quality Evaluator Guidelines. This document includes details of what they call E-A-T (Expertise, Authority, Trustworthiness). It's a long read and relatively dry, but there is some really good material in there that will help you better understand how Google evaluates a page. DA and PA are much simpler metrics than what Google actually uses in their algorithm, they're meant to help you make decisions and gauge competition, but these numbers are not provided by or used by Google.

And for what it's worth, I've seen countless instances of sites with great content and no links outrank mediocre content with a decent link profile. As Google gets more advanced in their ability to understand the content (using NLP), searcher intent, and engagement signals, links become less and less important.

I feel like I’ve read this comment somewhere before....

Seriously, Moz. It’s time to shut this thread down.

Moz team, looks like this has turned into feeble attempts at creating links instead if discussing them. Might be time to turn comments off.

Has anyone ever seen a log file analysis return only images and no actual page URLs?

David,

This type of link building has been dead for a long time. I'd definitely recommend spending your time elsewhere. Your time will be better spent creating great content.

Taylor,

If you've already shown your boss data from a Google employee and that didn't work, nothing provided here will be convincing either.

I've been in similar situations where my boss has a different stance and the way we've always settled it is by running a test. This gives you your own data to prove your case.

Take a subset of pages on your site, split it in half and try your way and his way. Be careful in what you choose so it's not skewed one way or another; look at search volume for target keywords, current traffic volume, etc.

Hi Sharon,

Your site should be entirely one or the other - and since it sounds like you've already got an SSL, I'd go with HTTPS. If you have traffic bouncing back and forth between HTTP and HTTPS, you're resetting the session in Google Analytics when someone clicks from an HTTPS page to a HTTP page. This creates a ton of dirty data and lost attribution.

Hi Jon,

If your objective is to prevent Moz from reporting crawl issues from these file types, you don't want to nonidex/nofollow them, you simply want to prevent Moz's User Agent (rogerbot) from crawling these file types.

Add these 3 lines to the top of your robots.txt file:

User-agent: rogerbot

Disallow: /*.dxf$

Disallow: /*.dwg$

I took a look at the paginated versions of these pages and it looks like canonicals and rel next/prev are all setup correctly. Have you gone into Search Console and specified the purpose of the 'start' parameter? That might help Google better interpret what's going on. Typically pagination is handled by a more accurately named parameter which could be causing confusion, despite having canonical/prev/next tags configured properly. Under the Crawl menu in Search Console, go to URL Parameters and configure 'start' for pagination.

In the situation outline by the OP, these pages are noindexed. There’s no value to clutterig up crawl reports  on these pages. Block rogerbot from non-critical parts of your site, unless you want to be alerted of issues, then don’t.

Did your name change? Or did I pull Patrice out of nowhere?!? haha

Anyway, if it's product detail pages you're referring to, you don't have too much to worry about. According to John Mueller of Google (https://www.seroundtable.com/google-rewriting-product-descriptions-22254.html) duplicates at the product level aren't a big deal. However, if you have any way to differentiate your pages, I would recommend doing that. Can you add a product review section? Q&A? Anything like that to create content unique to _your _versions of the products would be beneficial.