Www, non www, 301 redirects, Google webmaster tools & SeomozPro
-
arg! Any help on this topic would be greatly appreciated! This is in regards to sheffieldfurniture .com In October of 2011 I had our host set up a redirect for our site so all non www requests would be redirected to the www version and it works great (so it seems at least)
Recently I signed up for SEOMOZPRO and when I started trying to track my organic results for various keywords I realized that Google has my site indexed in the non www format.
Is this a problem? I’ve read you can tell google what your preferred domain is in Google Webmaster Tools, is that what I should be doing? Are there any negatives to doing that? I’m just confused as to why Google hasn’t noticed or acknowledged the redirect in 4 months. It makes me wonder if something isn’t working properly?
I have since added a second SEOMOZPRO campaign with the non www version but I’m worried about having historical tracking issues if I then tell google to use the www version…
-
Hi Nicholas,
Have you been able to straighten this out, or would you like some more assistance regarding Google Webmaster Tools?
-
GWT = Google Webmaster Tools. There is an option to view what pages from your site is indexed. Check there to see if you've got duplicates indexed.
Backlinks don't pass 100% of their SEO juice through a 301, just most of it (like 90%). That 10% loss can be a lot if you've got tremendous amounts of backlinks pointing to the non-preferred domain.
-
hmm Thats really odd, I also found out from someone that my redirect was not setup correctly...it's a 302 not a 301.
sorry whats GWT indexed pages?
And what do the backlinks matter? If I have a redirect setup shouldn't that take care of everything?
-
Hmm. I'm seeing the homepage indexed as non-www, however every internal page I just checked out is indexed as the www version.
I'd check your GWT indexed pages, and see if both the non-www and www home pages are indexed there, tell google to prefer the www, and go from there.
Also check your backlinks. If they're going to non-www, well...then it becomes difficult.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Mac Alternatives for Netpeak & SEO Tools For Excel?
Does anybody know of any mac alternatives for Netpeak & SEO tools for excel? I haven't been able to find any. I just need something to pull PA & DA quickly for a list of domains and URLs. Will I just have to create something custom with the Moz API?
Moz Pro | | kking41200 -
301 Redirect & Canonical Tags
If I have URL A and need to 301 Redirect to URL B but want to have a canonical tag on URL B pointing to URL A Would this be considered cloaking? My server which runs .net 3.5 does not allow me to do URL re-writes.
Moz Pro | | IMM0 -
Non-branded keywords sending search visits???
Hi, You announce a number of keywords sending search visits much larger than what you show in the interface. How do I get the list of the keywords you found?
Moz Pro | | ResourceLab0 -
Reliable Social Metrics Tool
Hi, Does anyone know of a reliable social metrics tool? So far I've tried Open Site Explorer, Tom Anthony's tools and SEO Quake With each one of them I get very, very different numbers. Cheers, Carlos
Moz Pro | | Carlos-R1 -
301 redirect
Guys Another post by me in regard to a 301 redirect which follows on from this post here http://www.seomoz.org/q/seomoz-crawl-test To quickly summarise all i have done is change URL name and done a simple 301 to change name where respective urls form old go to the relevant new pages Ok Now 14 weeks since we implemented our 301, Originally done In PHP everything looked text book but still 80% down on rankings PR has returned to inner pages Home page has not updated After some advice from some of the members here i changed the 301 on the old domain name from PHP to Htaccess This is the code i used on the old server is below RewriteEngine on RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.newsite.co.uk/$1 [R=301,L] On the new site the canonical is fixed by PHP , i want to change this to Htaccess, capturing the canonical element along with removing the trailing slash (This is only what has been done in the past so just keeping consistant) This is the situation Old site sits on a different server from the new so each have their own individual I.P addresses I am convinced somewhere in the PHP application we are chaining so want Htaccess on old server to do the 301 and want htaccess on new server to deal with canonical elements and remove trailing slash (if that best practice) What would be the best way to do this where we wont be chaining 301's at present all looks perfect and doing what it should, but i know there is an issue and i believe it to be with the php script Thanks for taking the time to look Paul Ps where i had the issue on the old site where Crawl test said page don't exist i now have on the new site if i try and crawl the non www. version of the new site , tested on a site that has the htaccess 301 in place and get the option of crawling the old or the new page so something don't stack up so its not the tool its the PHP Fetch as Googlebot and every other tool reports the correct header responses
Moz Pro | | kellymandingo0 -
Competitive Link Analysis Tool?
Hi, I ran a competitive link analysis report today and back came quite a few domains that 2 or more of my 5 main competitors link from. Is it worth me submitting links to these sites? And would i be best served submitting my homepage URL or submitting a brand page such as Creative Recreation Trainers? I want to target that brand but don't want to do it if my main URL is better? Any ideas? See below my report. | Subdomain | Subdomain mR | Subdomain mT | # Competitors | # Linking Pages | Link Acquired |
Moz Pro | | YNWA
| t.co/ | 8.05 | 8.04 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| ww2.cox.com/ | 5.99 | 6.50 | 2 | <a>3</a> | |
| www.littlewebdirectory.com/ | 5.90 | 5.59 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| www.amazines.com/ | 5.69 | 5.66 | 2 | <a>3</a> | |
| svpply.com/ | 5.66 | 5.53 | 3 | <a>20</a> | |
| www.jayde.com/ | 5.64 | 5.68 | 3 | <a>4</a> | |
| www.pearltrees.com/ | 5.58 | 5.81 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| www.businessseek.biz/ | 5.52 | 5.51 | 2 | <a>3</a> | |
| www.a1articles.com/ | 5.50 | 5.22 | 3 | <a>9</a> | |
| www.linksilo.de/ | 5.48 | 5.23 | 2 | <a>15</a> ||
| www.alistsites.com/ | 5.46 | 5.24 | 2 | <a>38</a> | |
| www.the-free-directory.co.uk/ | 5.37 | 5.07 | 2 | <a>20</a> | |
| www.walhello.com/ | 5.30 | 4.97 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| www.quarkbase.com/ | 5.14 | 5.12 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| snipsly.com/ | 5.13 | 5.20 | 2 | <a>21</a> | |
| www.counterdeal.com/ | 5.12 | 5.07 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| www.01webdirectory.com/ | 5.03 | 5.03 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| www.2addlink.info/ | 4.92 | 4.58 | 3 | <a>4</a> | |
| www.fuk.co.uk/ | 4.64 | 5.00 | 3 | <a>20</a> | |
| www.final-fantasy.us/ | 4.63 | 4.77 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| oyax.com/ | 4.42 | 4.61 | 2 | <a>4</a> | |
| www.touchretail.co.uk/ | 4.33 | 4.21 | 2 | <a>4</a> | |
| tptbtv.cold10.com/ | 4.27 | 4.86 | 3 | <a>1</a> | |
| www.mastbusiness.com/ | 4.23 | 4.34 | 2 | <a>2</a> | |
| www.competitionhunter.com/ | 4.16 | 4.21 | 2 | <a>6</a> | |0 -
Crawl test tool from SEOmoz - which URLs does it actually crawl?
I am using for the first time the crawl test tool from SEOmoz and I do not really understand which URLs the tool is going to crawl. First, it says "enter any subdomain" --> why can´t I do the crawl for the root domain? Second it says "we'll crawl up to 3,000 linked-to pages" --> does that mean that the tool crawls all internal links that it can find on the given domain? Thanks for your help!
Moz Pro | | Elke.GetApp0 -
Fishy Rank 1\. Google Algorithm Bug?
We have noticed some strange rankings for a while that do not make any type of logical sense from an SEO standpoint. After an SEO review, it is found that these sites rank for top terms in very competitive markets for no clear reason. To demonstrate, here is research for one of the categories where this is taking place. Google for "Phoenix Computer Repair" Rank #1: www.datafast.net/phoenix-computer-repair.html Rank #2: www.mobiletechsupport.com Rank #4: www.mypctechs.com Linkscape Visualization and Comparison Report The first thing we run is a linkscape visualization and comparison report. Compare site #1 to #4 or site #2 to #4. In all instances, site #1 and site #2 are completely dominated by site #4. Visualizer stats, with higher ranking site #1 on the left. Lower ranking site #4 on right: | Overall Score | 29% | 53% |
Moz Pro | | mypctechs
| Page mozRank | 3.72 37% | 5.66 57% |
| Page mozTrust | 5.41 54% | 6.09 61% |
| External mozRank | 3.38 34% | 5.62 56% |
| Subdomain mozRank | 3.91 39% | 5.70 57% |
| Domains Linking | 11 12% | 74 29% |
| External Links | 10 0% | 17461 60% | ********Linkscape Report Next, running a linkscape report to evaluate inbound links for site #1 shows a collection of cheap profile spam links. There actually appear to be no high quality inbound links: ****http://fastw3b.net/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=3432;sa=summary TARGET: www.datafast.net/phoenix-computer-repair.html TITLE: View the profile of Phoenix12****Anchor Text: Computer Repair Phoenix URL Metrics mozRank: 0.00 mozTrust: 0.00 Passing: 1.59 domain Metrics (fastw3b.net) mozRank: 5.19 mozTrust: 5.05 http://djdriblemouth.com/Simple Machines Forum 1.1.11 blog/index.php?action=profile;u=1897;sa=summary TARGET: www.datafast.net/phoenix-computer-repair.html TITLE: View the profile of Phoenix59****Anchor Text: Computer Repair Phoenix URL Metrics mozRank: 0.00 mozTrust: 0.00 Passing: 1.56 domain Metrics (djdriblemouth.com) mozRank: 2.38 mozTrust: 2.59 http://www.bettingfc.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=1990;sa=summary TARGET: www.datafast.net/phoenix-computer-repair.html TITLE: View the profile of Phoenix59 ********Checking Page Text and Content Full evaluation of the top site #1 shows there's not much relevant content on the pages to warrant rank 1. Just a few bare pages with very little text. Site #2 does have a lot of on-page information, but still not enough useful information to justify rank #2 in this market. ********So, what's going on? How is site #1 without any good inbound link and very little page content and site #2 with little inbound links and low trust ranking above sites with tens of thousands more inbound links, sites with more content, and sites that dominate in every way with MOZRank. Is this some kind of black-hat SEO that is exploiting an unpublished weakness in Google? If so, what method is being used? Spammy profile links? The current site ranked #1 has been reported to Google as SPAM 3 times in the past. Every time it disappears from the top ranking for a few weeks, but is back again a short time later.0