New answers tagged

1

Nothing in the world will make a real link undiscoverable by Google. Even if you close your http://example.com/page?download from crawling with robots.txt, de-index the download page with noindex, and markup the link with nofollow - it is enough to get one single incoming backlink to your http://example.com/page?download, and the page is crawled. Thats why ...


0

It shouldn't cause a problem at all. I think you're applying human thinking to a computer problem. If the pages are different then analytics will treat them as separate chains of links. No issue whatsoever. Of course the actual issue is with someone looking at the different reports / goals in 6 months remember the differences, and report correctly back to ...


1

You seem to mix two completely different things. You mention that you don't see the pages indexing in the Search console - but the code you give is the Analytics tracking code - which is completely unrelated to the Search Console. The fact that you messed up your Analytics tracking code will not have an effect on the indexing. That said - your analytics ...


1

It's looking more and more like this is just a false alarm on Google's part. There was an article published about this today: http://searchengineland.com/hacked-content-rise-take-seo-precautions-protect-site-240855


0

That warning can be triggered from linked images, PDF, a linked JavaScript and sometimes a linked CSS. That can be also be triggered from ads on your website from shady sources. Also check your webpages for hidden iframes, Google does not like that pretty much and if Google warns you about it, the source of the iframe was reported before for malpractice


1

Like many have already said, this is not an attack but an attempt to probe or scan your site app and/or your server capabilities. The best way to filter out all of these useless traffic and potentially dangerous scans is to implement a WAF (Web Application Firewall). This will catch all the different attempts and flag them and only then send real legitimate ...


1

If you click on the domain (eg. "google.com") in the "Links to Your Site" report it will show you the pages on your site that are linked to from this domain. You can then drill down to find out from where (on "google.com") these pages are being linked from. That's the only way to really find out whether these particular links are beneficial to you. In my ...


0

Is this normal? Yes it is. Is this good? Yes it is. Is it a dofollow link? Yes it is. Does it mean those pages google linked to are likely to rank? 95% sure that yes.


3

The 404 errors are not from user input. Rather they are from links that Google has found while crawling the web. If you click on the 404 errors in the report you can see where Googlebot found the URL. You may find that many of them are bad links to your site. Some of them are probably Googlebot being dumb. You have several options: Do Nothing It is ...


1

i download WMT exports on following way: i manipulate the URL to WMT to adjust the datum (one day) and filter out some brand keywords (i don't want them in my reports) then i create manipulated URLs for each day of last 90 days, save them as list and run an iMacro to download all the data. On this way i get 90.000 datapoints (1.000 á day). To exclude ...


1

When a page is reported in WMT, it means that their bot actually tried to scan this page normally. When clicking on the error, you can see where the page is linked from. There may be invalid links to your website all around the web and you should research it and possibly notify the owners of these websites if relevant. Seems the selected answer refers to ...


1

As Google never will return more than 1000 results, my key was from standalone Perl script to query ( with the help of Lynx --accept-cookies ) several segments for site:myweb.xxx in the way https://www.google.es/search?q=site:www.955170000.com+%2B+"AA"&num=50&filter=0 The script calculates the string for search, now is "AA" , next will seek "AB" ...


2

as @w3dk mention in the comments, I had to add a R=301 in my .htaccess file. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{SERVER_PORT} 80 RewriteRule ^(.*)$ https://%{SERVER_NAME}/$1 [R=301,L] </IfModule> I didn't try Goyllo's answer but I think it's a good one if you don't have access to the server.


0

if your site is rendered by javascript, specially with any one, which runs after load, so the fetch as Google in the search console will probably show nothing, and you can ignore it. Because fetch as Google delivers a page's snapshot at a certain moment of page's rendering, at which your javascript doesn't load any content. All your content loaded by ...


0

Should I ignore Google’s rendering issues? I'd take them seriously as much as I can. What your question tells me is that some bots are capable of rendering javascript and some are not. ... However, the site is getting indexed as unique content to our site is easily searchable. Then the bot that indexes pages must have the ability to understand ...


1

Google Webmaster Tools has no option to set HTTPS as the preferred version. Google takes this automatically from your canonical link tag. <link rel="canonical" href="https://example.com/"> So whenever the Google spider sees this line in your head section, Google automatically indexes the HTTPS version of your site. Nowadays, Google indexes HTTPS ...


3

It is fully normal, that traffic drops after such basic change of URL structure. Google needs time to get the new structure, to re-index pages, to understand, whether the content changed and so on. I would say, the drop time is from 1 up to 5-6 weeks long. But you can speed up the re-indexing with new sitemap and new content, which is backlinked externally. ...


1

I add my sites with www and non-www versions to Google Webmaster Tools. The version you don't use won't have much in it, but is good to be able to see that. Adding both versions may show you problems that would otherwise be hard to catch. You may find that there is historical data on one or the other as well. You should only submit a site map for the ...


2

In the case where you have both www and non-www verions of the site readily available (i.e, you are not using 301 redirects from www to non-www or vice versa), yes, both profiles should be created in Google Webmasters Tools (GWT). However, you should also then specify your preferred domain to GWT, so that Google doesn't treat the www and non-www versions as ...


1

I just encountered the same issue and it has to do with riskified.com. They have a javascript file that calls http://beacon.riskified.com/?shop=whatever.com&ts=12345 and that references volluto.com. Based on this, I don't think it should be a great concern.


1

With a little bit of care, you should be fine to keep the same property if it's a new website on the same domain. Some of the major areas to consider are: Implementation Issues: If your new website is heavily dependent on AJAX, you may need to establish Single Page Application Tracking. Event Tracking: You'll need to reconfigure any event tracking you ...


0

Is creating two different properties necessary? In this situation as you stated there are two separate entities, and you need to create two different properties. I've submitted sitemaps for both properties. Will Google give relevance to only one of them? If so which one? Google will give same relevance to both.


1

In all likelihood, the keywords that you are getting from Google are (not set) and cannot be shown to you due to privacy reasons or are too low in search volume to be included in search tools. Admittedly, your ratio is incredibly low (12%) where it should be in 40-60% when normalised for volume, so try increasing your date range to 90 days to see if you get ...


1

By default Google Analytics doesn't know when a user leaves the page unless they go to another page. If your visitors view only a single page they get 0:00 as their time on site (and average time per page.) It sounds like you have implemented a single page application, so this is going to be an issue for you. You can fix this by implementing events. As ...


0

It isn't hard to see if your DNS TXT records are set up correctly and have propagated yet (it may take a few days). You can use the command line tool dig to see your DNS text records and see if they include the Google verification: $ dig +short -t TXT jelqtools.com "google-site-verification=9lhJSkzu2UDWGrzgTSfk2q8m-sLN8cp5fk0atqV6XOI" There are also ...


0

I have a far simpler solution that allows you to maintain user friendliness of your URLs. Here's the .htaccess code: RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} ^(.*).php/?$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)/?$ /? [R=301,L] The idea is, any guest trying to access anything on the domain that ends in .php (regardless of the case of the extension) with or without the ...


2

When you change an existing URL structure you need to redirect the old URLs (that have probably been indexed and linked to) to the new URLs. (For the benefit of SEO and user experience.) In your case the old URLs (with a .php extension) - that have been indexed - are still accessible and return the same content as the URL without the .php extension. So, you ...


1

There are several reasons to keep content out of search engines: Sensitive content -- Some content needs to be public but may have information in it that you don't want in the search engines. An example could be your resume. You want it available for potential employers to look at, but don't want your address easily locatable in the search engines. ...


1

This Google help document describes how to have your site opt-out of Google Web Light: If you do not want your pages to be transcoded, set the HTTP header Cache-Control: no-transform in your page response. If Googlebot sees this header, your page will not be transcoded. Please note that pages that opt-out of being transcoded will be labeled in ...



Top 50 recent answers are included