Tag Info

New answers tagged

0

It would be better to do it yourself. You don't want to rely on an API (if it goes down or it gets discontinued). More often than not, relying on external APIs will slow down the load times of your site. As you probably already know, page speed is a ranking factor.


1

I think that you need to host images by yourself. It will be better, and you will be safe (your images always will be yours, but any DB can install hotlink protection).


1

As closetnoc has stated: you are keyword stuffing. Removing keywords from your page is likely to help you look less spammy and will help you rank better. You are stuffing so many keywords into your pages that Google is likely to be filtering them as spam. Your keyword filled links seem to be a big part of the reason that Google isn't ranking the page ...


1

Just because you think a page is optimized for a keyword, does not mean the search engines do. There are a lot of factors that go into ranking a web page and you do not control many of them. And if your optimization efforts seem to be unnatural it may hurt your page's chances of ranking. There is no definite way to diagnose this as we do not have access ...


0

A single page application can rank well in search engines for its brand terms. If you have content embedded in this application, you'll want to implement crawlable AJAX. Doing so allows you assign #! URLs to the deep content and allow them to rank in search engines. Your existing mobile site can be redirected to the hash bang URLs of the single page ...


0

It retrieves it from the most popular (linked and trusted) website on that topic which in many cases is wikipedia


2

This one is rather easy. You do not have a description meta-tag. Search engine result page (SERP) snippets generally come from the description meta-tag though another closer matching content snippet can be used instead to satisfy the searchers intent. While the site does look good, you have made some fundamental SEO mistakes. Your title tag is too ...


1

The base directory in your URLs will make no difference to Google. Google indexes pages linked from one directory to another. Google often chooses not to index URLs for other reasons: The page doesn't have enough link juice. If you have only one page that links to the page, it may not make the cut. The site and page is too new. Google often takes ...


1

Yes. The first item is perfect! Updated application to return a 410 in case index1.php is requested But the second item needs to be removed. Added a disallow: /index1.php line to our robots.txt This will not allow Google and Bing to know of your 410. As for item three, Began requesting url removals from google. ...forget it. Too much work ...


2

I would give it more time. For a new site that is not crawled often it may take a while to get indexed. Here are a few ways you can speed it up a bit: 1) Having good quality link point to your site will help with crawling. 2) Having positive social media indicators such as likes, shares and etc. will help with crawling 3) You can submit your site to a few ...


0

Googlebot is finding your redirect links but it probably can't crawl them because you have disallowed them in robots.txt. It then thinks that your site has additional content and it "indexes" it with the link text. You could get around this by making your links point exteranally, but use JavaScript to write in the tracking. That way Googlebot can see ...


1

I am starting to think I did something incredibly wrong! Did I? Probably not. Can this be fixed and how? This may not be the answer you want to hear, but it should fix itself over time. Whenever you change the URL structure or content of your site in a significant way (and changing what Google perceives as your landing page counts as ...


-2

An easy fix is to put the actual home page on the home page and stop redirecting.


0

Google has the "same content" policy in place to prevent cloaking: Does this scheme open the door to cloaking? Cloaking is serving different content to crawlers than to users in response to a given URL. This is generally done with the intent of boosting one's ranking in search results. Cloaking has always been (and will always be) an important issue ...


2

The Fetch as Google was created as a temporary option originally designed to help you see your site the way Google sees it. It does allow you to update the index almost immediately. But this is based upon trust. Google will revisit your page with the regular Googlebot soon after. Because this is based upon trust, it is best not to rely on this option to ...


2

It could also be duplicate content filters. Do a site search then go to last page of search results. This may be page 30 or more. At the bottom of the last page you should see something similar to this: In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 348 already displayed. If you like, you can repeat ...


3

You do not have an indexing problem. Google Webmasters Tools is the authoritative source of information about your website with Google. Whatever it says there is true. Operators like site: and link: are known to not show all relevant results. This is on purpose as it prevents others from knowing exactly Google is handling your website inhibits any attempts ...


1

First, you don't have to go through the trouble of removing the old URLs with the hash. If your content is getting crawled and indexed appropriately under the new hash-bang URL, it'll soon get replaced. It's not entirely clear what the problem is without troubleshooting against the live site, but hopefully these steps will help you discover a solution. ...



Top 50 recent answers are included