My pages are not listed in search results
-
My URL is: puremobile.comI have two websites: puremobile.ca and puremobile.com : both same products, but different discription , but same title of productwhen i exact search a product for example :** "HTC 70H0029701M Smartphone Case Large"** , puremobile.ca shows up , but not puremobile.com I have no issues with indexing, webmaster tools is indexing normallywhen i search for: puremobile.com "HTC 70H0029701M Smartphone Case Large" , i get the puremobile.com product page.but when i search ANY product (no matter how unique its title or description is : google doesnt display puremobile.commy PR ( as i far as i can see was PR 5 last year, and today when i checked it was PR 0) .. I havent been doing any fishy Link building, some basic blogger outreach ( non paid), and social bookmarking. and my blog is very active and I have original content on my pages.what is causing this? and how can i resolve this issue.any help is greatly appreciated
-
Hi PureMobile, you've received some great responses. Has your question been answered?
-
Surely what I'm going to say need to be confirmed doing a proper audit, but your PageRank 5 may be dried by the giant mega menu you have, which is causing your site to have 421 internal followed links...
If you don't change that, all your pages are going to be too weak to compete in the SERPs, because they are literally bleeding all their PageRank out.
Related to your visibility problem, as already cited by the others, I suggest you to implement the rel="alternate" hreflang this way:
<rel="alternate" hreflang="en-ca" href="http://www.puremobile.ca/"></rel="alternate">
<rel="alternate" hreflang="en" href="http://www.puremobile.com/"></rel="alternate">
<rel="alternate" hreflang="x-default" href="http://wwww.puremobile.com"></rel="alternate">
The first line is telling Google to show only the URLs from the .ca site to users performing a Search in English from Canada.
The second line is telling Google to show only the URLs from the .com site to users performing a Search in English from all over the world (apart Canada, because of the first line)
The third line is telling Google to show always the URLs from the .com site to users performing a Search in a language other that English from all over the world.
You can find more information about the hreflang here:
-
First thing we need to be sure of is how you're doing your searching, puremobile. When you say "when I exact search a product for example" do you mean you are doing that search in your own browser?
Due to all the personalisation of search results that Google does, if you're doing that search from your own browser, it's pretty much guaranteed to give you the .ca results as you are searching from Canada. In fact, if you are doing a default search, you are probably searching from Google.ca which is even more likely to give you that .ca result. (Even using incognito browser mode, you'll still likely see this)
To get around this, you can set up Google.ca and Google.com as two different search engines to track rankings from in each of your SEOMoz campaign. Ideally, you'll want to set up a separate campaign for each version of your site (.com and .ca)
Still not 100% accurate as these rankings still don't take all the other personalisation elements into account, but will give you a better idea of the rankings for each site.
As Matt points out, you'll still want to do what you can to give the engines as much help understanding which site to serve which visitor as possible. That work will also be easier to track if you set up both sites and separate campaigns and track your efforts individually.
Hope that helps?
Paul
-
There are actually a number of ways to approach what you're doing, including implementing hreflang tags for en-ca or en-us but I'm seeing the .com here in Melbourne.
I would sort out your canonicals, hreflang, and get your pages setup to show the right one per search engine (.ca on google.ca, .com on the rest maybe.)
-
Well I'd say you've definitely been penalized. Reason being would most likely be that you have duplicate content on a massive scale. Every one of your pages are duplicated between the .com and the .ca versions without a rel=canonical tag listed anywhere to be seen.
It seems like a manual penalty seeing as how your PR is gone, so I'd keep my eye on GWMT but in any case you need to solve that duplicate content problem before you do anything.
Basically what you should do is redirect one to the other 301-style. Like.. right now would be a good time to do it!
Good luck!
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Old pages not mobile friendly - new pages in process but don't want to upset current traffic.
Working with a new client. They have what I would describe as two virtual websites. Same domain but different coding, navigation and structure. Old virtual website pages fail mobile friendly, they were not designed to be responsive ( there really is no way to fix them) but they are ranking and getting traffic. New virtual website pages pass mobile friendly but are not SEO optimized yet and are not ranking and not getting organic traffic. My understanding is NOT mobile friendly is a "site" designation and although the offending pages are listed it is not a "page" designation. Is this correct? If my understanding is true what would be the best way to hold onto the rankings and traffic generated by old virtual website pages and resolve the "NOT mobile friendly" problem until the new virtual website pages have surpassed the old pages in ranking and traffic? A proposal was made to redirect any mobile traffic on the old virtual website pages to mobile friendly pages. What will happen to SEO if this is done? The pages would pass mobile friendly because they would go to mobile friendly pages, I assume, but what about link equity? Would they see a drop in traffic ? Any thoughts? Thanks, Toni
Technical SEO | | Toni70 -
Bing search results - Site links
My site links in Bing search results are pulling through the footer text instead of the meta description (see image). Is there any way of controlling this? 2L2VusT
Technical SEO | | RWesley0 -
How do I prevent duplicate page title errors from being generated by my multiple shop pages?
Our e-commerce shop has numerous pages within the main shop page. Users navigate through the shop via typical pagination. So while there may be 6 pages of products it's all still under the main shop page. Moz keeps flagging my shop pages as having duplicate titles (ie shop page 2). But they're all the same page. Users aren't loading unique pages each time they go to the next page of products and they aren't pages I can edit. I'm not sure how to prevent this issue from popping up on my reports.
Technical SEO | | NiteSkirm0 -
Will redirecting a logged in user from a public page to an equivalent private page (not visible to google) impact SEO?
Hi, We have public pages that can obviously be visited by our registered members. When they visit these public pages + they are logged in to our site, we want to redirect them to the equivalent (richer) page on the private site e.g. a logged in user visiting /public/contentA will be redirected to /private/contentA Note: Our /public pages are indexed by Google whereas /private pages are excluded. a) will this affect our SEO? b) if not, is 302 the best http status code to use? Cheers
Technical SEO | | bernienabo0 -
What to do with old conversion pages
Hey folks! I have a ton of old conversion pages from past trade shows, old webinars, etc that are either getting no traffic or very little. Wondering if I should just 404 them out? Here's an example: http://marketing.avidxchange.com/rent-manager-user-conference-demo-request-2015 For the pages getting traffic (from PPC, referral links, organic) my presumption is to keep those. The only problem is we have multiple instances of the same asset (prior marketers would just clone them for different campaigns), so in those cases should I 301 them to one version? Looking for advice on best practices here for future instances. Such as future trade shows, after we use the conversion pages at an event, should I just delete/404 them? Cleaning up old pages should I just delete/404? They don't have any value really and they're annoying to have hanging around. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Bill_King0 -
Are image pages considered 'thin' content pages?
I am currently doing a site audit. The total number of pages on the website are around 400... 187 of them are image pages and coming up as 'zero' word count in Screaming Frog report. I needed to know if they will be considered 'thin' content by search engines? Should I include them as an issue? An answer would be most appreciated.
Technical SEO | | MTalhaImtiaz0 -
Is it better to delete web pages that I don't want anymore or should I 301 redirect all of the pages I delete to the homepage or another live page?
Is it better for SEO to delete web pages that I don't want anymore or should I 301 redirect all of the pages I delete to the homepage or another live page?
Technical SEO | | CustomOnlineMarketing0 -
Warnings on Pages excluded from Search Engines
I am new to this, so my question may seem a little rookie type... When looking at my crawl diagnostic errors there are 1604 warnings for "302 redirects". Of those 1604 warnings 1500 of them are for the same page with different product ID's on them such as: www.soccerstop.com/EMailproduct.aspx?productid=999
Technical SEO | | SoccerStop
www.soccerstop.com/EMailproduct.aspx?productid=998 In our robots.txt file we have Disallow: /emailproduct.aspx Wouldn't that take care of this problem? If so, why is it still giving me these warning errors? It does take into account our robots.txt file when generating this report does it not? Thanks for any help you can provide.
James0