Google doesn't index image slideshow
-
Hi,
My articles are indexed and images (full size) via a meta in the body also. But, the images in the slideshow are not indexed, have you any idea? A problem with the JS
Example : http://www.parismatch.com/People/Television/Sport-a-la-tele-les-femmes-a-l-abordage-962989
Thank you in advance
Julien
-
You can do a "site:" search directly in Google like this and I currently see this --> http://screencast.com/t/ZVqq5iumQ - you can probably do a site: search on the whole domain, a subfolder or a specific page etc.
-
Ok, what is the best method that you recommend for verify images indexation directly in Google ?
I would post a message explaining the change after change sitemaps.
Thanks for all
-
Thanks! OK, yes I'd make your Sitemap and HTML image URLs the same.
Also, that's a LOT of images, so I'm not surprised Google is taking time to index them.
Also, there can sometimes be a delay in Search Console data. You can always be checking Google itself to see what files are indexed.
-
Not really, it seem be ok
-
Thanks! Hmmm did it clear Search Console without any errors? I see an error in my browser --> http://screencast.com/t/VLWhg8EyR3Dd
-
The images are here :
http://www.parismatch.com/var/exports/sitemaps/sitemap_images_parismatch-10.xml
-
Is this your current sitemap?
http://www.parismatch.com/var/exports/sitemaps/sitemap_parismatch-index.xml
What is the direct address of the image sitemap(s)?
Thanks!
-
Thanks Dan. Unfortunately, we have changed the images of host, on a different CDN...
Before the redesign, we used exactly this configuration, visible on this page (it's just an article, we don't have a slideshow example):
http://www.parismatch.com/Chroniques/Art-de-vivre/Lodge-Story-925785We have perhaps a problem with the image sitemaps because we have in Google Sitemaps:
<image: loc="">http://cdn-parismatch.ladmedia.fr/var/news/storage/images/paris-match/culture/cinema/le-fils-de-saul-la-critique-763334/8067828-1-fre-FR/Le-Fils-de-Saul-la-critique.jpg</image:>
and in the HTML source:
the perhaps should be put in the same sitempas URLs as used in HTML?
Many thanks for your help !
-
I see, thanks. Hmmm... did anything else change besides the re-design? Did the images URLs change, or did where they were being hosted change?
The current implementation doesn't show any issues, but I wonder if things were properly done in moving to the new design. Did you always have a slideshow format? Did the code change or just the design?
-
Thanks Dan !
I'm agree with you. It's problematic because since website redesign, we record a fall of images traffic by Google
-
Hi There
There does not appear to be any accessibility issues. I can crawl and access the images just fine with my crawler.
My guess is that since the images are duplicate, and they also exist on other websites, Google may be avoiding indexing them since they already are indexed and they are technically not being linked to with a normal tag.
Is this causing a particular issue for the site? Or is it just a pesky technical bug?
-
The display image is resized and indexed :
and the full size image is in META but not indexed :
-
How are your images being fed into the site? Are you using a CDN?
-Andy
-
The robots.txt file doesn't block the images, I check it. The website is under Easy Publish.
-
Hi Julien,
I always start with robots.txt in these cases, but that looks OK.
Is anything being blocked by JS? Something else to look at is if you are using something like Wordpress, there are plugins that can block access to these without you realising.
Looking at the URL of the image, this appears to be hosted on a 3rd party site?
-Andy
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
-
Can a duplicate page referencing the original page on another domain in another country using the 'canonical link' still get indexed locally?
Hi I wonder if anyone could help me on a canonical link query/indexing issue. I have given an overview, intended solution and question below. Any advice on this query will be much appreciated. Overview: I have a client who has a .com domain that includes blog content intended for the US market using the correct lang tags. The client also has a .co.uk site without a blog but looking at creating one. As the target keywords and content are relevant across both UK and US markets and not to duplicate work the client has asked would it be worthwhile centralising the blog or provide any other efficient blog site structure recommendations. Suggested solution: As the domain authority (DA) on the .com/.co.uk sites are in the 60+ it would risky moving domains/subdomain at this stage and would be a waste not to utilise the DAs that have built up on both sites. I have suggested they keep both sites and share the same content between them using a content curated WP plugin and using the 'canonical link' to reference the original source (US or UK) - so not to get duplicate content issues. My question: Let's say I'm a potential customer in the UK and i'm searching using a keyword phrase that the content that answers my query is on both the UK and US site although the US content is the original source.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JonRayner
Will the US or UK version blog appear in UK SERPs? My gut is the UK blog will as Google will try and serve me the most appropriate version of the content and as I'm in the UK it will be this version, even though I have identified the US source using the canonical link?2 -
HTML5: Changing 'section' content to be 'main' for better SEO relevance?
We received an HTML5 recommendation that we should change onpage text copy contained in 'section" to be listed in 'main' instead, because this is supposedly better for SEO. We're questioning the need to ask developers spend time on this purely for a perceived SEO benefit. Sure, maybe content in 'footer' may be seen as less relevant, but calling out 'section' as having less relevance than 'main'? Yes, it's true that engines evaluate where onpage content is located, but this level of granular focus seems unnecessary. That being said, more than happy to be corrected if there is actually a benefit. On a side note, 'main' isn't supported by older versions of IE and could cause browser incompatibilities (http://caniuse.com/#feat=html5semantic). Would love to hear others' feedback about this - thanks! 🙂
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mirabile0 -
Google Not Seeing My 301's
Good Morning! So I have recently been putting in a LOT of 301's into the .htaccess, no 301 plugins here, and GWMT is still seeing a lot of the pages as soft 404's. I mark them as fixed, but they come back. I will also note, the previous webmaster has ample code in our htaccess which is rewriting our URL structure. I don't know if that is actually having any effect on the issue but I thought I would add that. All fo the 301's are working, Google isn't seeing them. Thanks Guys!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | HashtagHustler0 -
How to get a site out of Google's Sandbox
Hi I am working on a website that is ranking well in bing for the domain name / exact url search but appears no where in Google or Yahoo. I have done the site search in Google and it is indexed so I am presuming it is in the sandbox. The website was originally developed in India and I do not know whether it had some history of bad backlinks. The website itself is well optimised and I have checked all pages in Moz - getting a grade A. Webmaster Tools is not showing any manual actions - I was wondering what I could do next?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AllieMc0 -
Google fluctuates its result on Chrome's private browsing
I have seen an interesting Google behaviour this morning. As usual, I would open Chrome's private browsing to see how a keyword is ranking. This was what I see... Typed in "sell my car", I see Auto Trader page on 3rd. (Ref:Sell My Car 1st result img) Googled something else, then re-Googled "sell my car" and saw that our page went to 2nd! I repeated the same process and saw that we went from 3rd to 2nd again. Has Google results gone mental? PaGXJ.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tmg.seo0 -
How are pages ranked when using Google's "site:" operator?
Hi, If you perform a Google search like site:seomoz.org, how are the pages displayed sorted/ranked? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | anthematic0 -
Removing URLs in bulk when directory exclusion isn't an option?
I had a bunch of URLs on my site that followed the form: http://www.example.com/abcdefg?q=&site_id=0000000048zfkf&l= There were several million pages, each associated with a different site_id. They weren't very useful, so we've removed them entirely and now return a 404.The problem is, they're still stuck in Google's index. I'd like to remove them manually, but how? There's no proper directory (i.e. /abcdefg/) to remove, since there's no trailing /, and removing them one by one isn't an option. Is there any other way to approach the problem or specify URLs in bulk? Any insights are much appreciated. Kurus
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kurus1