® is displaying as o in the SERP pages
-
Hello All,
A client's site was recently redesigned and since the redesign the
is not displaying as such in the search engines when created using Option+R on a Mac. If it is created using
it works fine.
I suspect it has something to do with the programming or the CMS. Other sites on this CMS seem to not have this problem from what I have seen so far.
As more time goes on, title tags and descriptions that are months or years old are also digressing to the 0.
I have cued up a few tests and once crawled will have narrowed down whether it is a CMS issue or not. Won't have completely done so, but much closer. The CMS says they have made no changes that would have caused this.
The programming gang on my end says they did nothing different on this site then on others so it can't be on us.
The classic 'no way it can by us, it has to be them' from all angles.
I am stuck in the middle trying to find the solution.
Has anyone else ever come across this problem?
Thoughts?
-
Never had this problem but was recommended by Will Critchlow to use HTML encoding for special characters He said that they "tend to advise going for ASCII only" and "HTML entities should generally be fine"
So perhaps all instances should be changed to
.
-
I haven't had this problem, but I have had weird things in the CMS I use. It was something about how the CMS generated the code that made it get funky.
Can you add it outside of the CMS perhas directly to a skin or source code?
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
-
Too many links per page? Double navigation on every page...
I have a client with navigation across the top of each page plus the same nav links in a sidebar on every page. Can that duplication (or the sheer number of links) on each page have a negative ranking factor?
On-Page Optimization | | brm20170 -
Updated page not ranking.
Hi Guys. Bit flummoxed by this. I've recently updated our Mid year diaries page to be this years mid year products. i.e) Diaries that go from 2015-16 not 2014-15. Last year we rank really well for the search term 'mid year diaries 14-15'. All i've done is update the page to be focused on 2015-16 diaries, but when i type in 'mid year diaries 15-16' it's no where to be seen in the SERP. Even our home page is ranking higher! I'm really puzzled about this, nothings changed apart from the year! The only reason I can think of is that Google is reading the file name of the images which are related to lasts years products? For example the file name might say mid year diary 2014-15. Do you think this is what's effecting us? Very puzzling 😕 I've submitted it through Webmaster tool btw 🙂 Isaac.
On-Page Optimization | | isaac6630 -
New google serps page design
hi i know title length displayed is now based on pixels rather than character but still thought safe to have titles up to 70 characters long before they are truncated i see that on the new G serps designed pages titles that were showing in full on old design (without truncation) are now being truncated. As in same title shows fine (displays in full) on old design serps but truncated on new designed page Anyone else notice this ? Cheers Dan
On-Page Optimization | | Dan-Lawrence1 -
Page architecture
We have some good content on our site, particularly relating to UK employment law. One section on unfair dismissal is split into 9 pages - there is a fair amount of legal detail. The question is whether we should combine it all into one "mother of all unfair dismissal" page just to satisfy the Google monster or keep in as it is. Some of the individual pages rank on page 1 already. If we change the architecture are 301 redirects the best way to handle the changing urls? The other more important issue is whether it is easier to read it all on one page or split it. Keeping G happy may not actually keep our users happy. As the content is quite dense we want to ensure we don't overload people. Any thoughts appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | dexm100 -
Is reported duplication on the pages or their canonical pages?
There are several sections getting flagged for duplication on one of our sites: http://mysite.com/section-1/?something=X&confirmed=true
On-Page Optimization | | Safelincs
http://mysite.com/section-2/?something=X&confirmed=true
http://mysite.com/section-3/?something=X&confirmed=true Each of the above are showing as having duplicates of the other sections. Indeed, these pages are exactly the same (it's just an SMS confirmation page you enter your code in), however, they all have canonical links back to the section (without the query string), i.e. section-1, section-2 and section-3 respectively. These three sections have unique content and aren't flagged up for duplications themselves, so my questions are: Are the pages with the query strings the duplicates, and if so why are the canonical links being ignored? or Are the canonical pages without the query strings the duplicates, and if so why don't they appear as URLs in their own right in the duplicate content report? I am guessing it's the former, but I can't figure out why it would ignore the canonical links. Any ideas? Thanks0 -
On Page Optimisation Reports
Firstly sorry if this has already been answered - I did look I promise.
On-Page Optimization | | Jock
Secondly sorry if the answer to this is blatently obvious! In the process of trying to optimise my landing pages, I am using On Page Optimisation reports. I have several (ok lots) with F grades which is not surprising as the landing page is not the landing page optimised for a certain keyword. If I change the landing page to the one that I have for a certain keyword then hey presto A or B grade (clever me)! Now here's the thing - presumably the landing page that is listed by default is the one that Google "sees" for a particular keyword. How do I change this if I can or do I have to be patient or am I just being plain daft?! Many thanks0 -
Too many on-page links
Hi, My website - www.thepartyhouse.com.au is showing as having too many on-page links for over 4,000 pages. Take for example the homepage which is showing as 188 links, but I don't understand this because I've used SEO tools to display the links and I am showing around 90 links on this page. How can I see what all the links are? Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | Spyre0 -
Page title structure?
From an SEO and user perspective what structure do you recommend for page titles. For example (given that they shouldn't ideally be more than 70 characters) :- Keywords (maybe two or three) | Company Name | more keywords I understood the best place for the company name was about second place. Is this now the considered view taking into consideration 'branding' which has been flagged up as the way forward. Keywords are separated by the vertical bar | - any thoughts? For 'house keeping' pages such as Privacy Policy - should this be optmised or simply stated as 'privacy policy' Thanks
On-Page Optimization | | PH2920