Why isn't Google indexing this site?
-
Hello, Moz Community
My client's site hasn't been indexed by Google, although it was launched a couple of months ago.
I've ran down the check points in this article https://mza.seotoolninja.com/ugc/8-reasons-why-your-site-might-not-get-indexed without finding a reason why.
Any sharp SEO-eyes out there who can spot this quickly?
The url is: http://www.oldermann.no/
Thank you
INEVO, digital agency -
Yeap it's really rare. Even more rare that WMT doesn't scream any error.
To check my mistake, i've run a screaming frog too. Sorry.
-
It shouldn't do as its just an iframe, if that were the case then every site that that used addthis would have a problem (which I know for a fact isn't true as two large sites I work with use it and have no issues).
As far as I'm aware, iframes do not pass on any of their attributes through to a website showing an iframe. The main reason I was curious about your reply was that screaming frog hadn't had any issues, I can understand myself having a small slip up, but a bit of software rarely does.
Back to the original question though, it is curious why there's no indexing by Google, Bing seems to have picked it up, and three days ago atleast. i can't see reason (in my brief look earlier) as to why it shouldn't be. So I came to the conclusion it hadn't been crawled or it had incredibly poor content (which I can't verify as I don't know Norwegian)
-
Damn it. You're right.
I'll retract my self.
Dispite my mistake, is there a chance that the add this iframe may be harming that site?
-
A friend just confirmed it, as you're using developer tools, what you're seeing is actually the fully loaded page, including iframes. So the noindex you have found is addthis. https://gyazo.com/abbdecc7e3d6a2d1f4d3acf65a48e65b
To actually check the source code, right click then click view source. That's the code for the specific site instead of loading all of the extra code you've been seeing. I would strongly advise you do like that from now onwards as the way you are doing is incorrect.
-
You know what, I don't think I am wrong.
Have a look at this source code from Bing's cache, can you see it there? http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.oldermann.no%2F&d=4558460857156532&mkt=en-GB&setlang=en-GB&w=Zicz6YAWVXgY8u0BPAR9qKRHF8OEn7o5 (Disclaimer I got my friend to check as I'm on a mobile)
This gyazo was just taken for example: https://gyazo.com/93c71c3767c57b74cb9f8b482c23c38
Just ran it through this too, showing the same thing: http://www.seoreviewtools.com/bulk-meta-robots-checker/
oh oh and so you know I think I know why you've found the noindex, you're looking at the for addthis.
-
I disagree Thomas. You're wrong.
I retract myself. Thomas has it right.
I've chequed 2 pages and both have the meta robots to nofollow and noindex.
http://www.oldermann.no/
http://www.oldermann.no/kompetanseCheck the image attached
To check that, go to the page source (F12 in chrome) and make a search (clicking in the source code then crtl+F) of 'robots' there you'll find your problem. Just erase that line of code and you'll be just fine.
Best Luck.
GR. -
I've had a quick look, I've been able to crawl it without any issues, the meta robots and robots.txt doesn't seem to be conflicting with anything at all.
It just doesn't look like it's even been found by Google.
Bing doesn't look to be having any issues indexing it: http://www.bing.com/search?q=site%3Aoldermann.no&go=Submit&qs=n&form=QBLH&pq=site%3Aoldermann.no&sc=0-17&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=B677970FF39F4A62A9B040806CF19EE0
What's the quality of the content on the site like? Have you "fetched as google" in the search console?
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
-
301ing one site's links to another
Hi, I have one site with a well-established link profile, but no actual reason to exist (site A). I have another site that could use a better link profile (site B). In your experience, would 301 forwarding all of site A's pages to site B do anything positive for the link profile/organic search of the site B? Site A is about boating at a specific lake. Site B is about travel destinations across the U.S. Thanks! Best... Michael
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Google Ignoring Canonical Tag for Hundreds of Sites
Bazaar Voice provides a pretty easy-to-use product review solution for websites (especially sites on Magento): https://www.magentocommerce.com/magento-connect/bazaarvoice-conversations-1.html If your product has over a certain number of reviews/questions, the plugin cuts off the number of reviews/questions that appear on the page. To see the reviews/questions that are cut off, you have to click the plugin's next or back function. The next/back buttons' URLs have a parameter of "bvstate....." I have noticed Google is indexing this "bvstate..." URL for hundreds of sites, even with the proper rel canonical tag in place. Here is an example with Microsoft: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zcxT7MRHHREJ:www.microsoftstore.com/store/msusa/en_US/pdp/Surface-Book/productID.325716000%3Fbvstate%3Dpg:8/ct:r+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us My website is seeing hundreds of these "bvstate" urls being indexed even though we have a proper rel canonical tag in place. It seems that Google is ignoring the canonical tag. In Webmaster Console, the main source of my duplicate titles/metas in the HTML improvements section is the "bvstate" URLs. I don't necessarily want to block "bvstate" in the robots.txt as it will prohibit Google from seeing the reviews that were cutoff. Same response for prohibiting Google from crawling "bvstate" in Paramters section of Webmaster Console. Should I just keep my fingers crossed that Google honors the rel canonical tag? Home Depot is another site that has this same issue: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:k0MBLFcu2PoJ:www.homedepot.com/p/DUROCK-Next-Gen-1-2-in-x-3-ft-x-5-ft-Cement-Board-172965/202263276%23!bvstate%3Dct:r/pg:2/st:p/id:202263276+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | redgatst1 -
Weird rankings on my website, can't figure it out
Hey guys, One of my post popular pages for "Rust Hacks" use to be - http://www.ilikecheats.com/01/rust-cheats-hacks-aimbot/ Now when searching Google for site:ilikecheats.com rust hacks This page shows as the highest ranking - http://forum.ilikecheats.com/forums/221-Rust-Hacks-Rust-Cheats-Public-Forum What's weird is it seems the entire front end (Wordpress site) isn't ranking well anymore on page #1 of Google and the forums are ranking better currently. I did have a huge penalty from backlinks last year but cleared it. I got Yoast to do a site review and I'm cleaning up everything now. I also cleared most of the bad links via the disavow tool. Another example is when I search for "warz hacks" the forums show up in 4th place but the main website isn't showing at all back to page 10. If I search site:ilikecheats.com warz hacks the links directly to the main site doesn't show until page #2. So is this still a penalty that is carried over or is something else going on? Can't seem to figure it out, thanks in advance for looking. 😃 Any ideas what's going on and why the main pages no longer rank - http://www.ilikecheats.com
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Draden670 -
Google's form for "Small sites that should rank better" | Any experiences or results?
Back in August of 2013 Google created a form that allowed people to submit small websites that "should be ranking better in Google". There is more info about it in this article http://www.seroundtable.com/google-small-site-survey-17295.html Has anybody used it? Any experiences or results you can share? *private message if you do not want to share publicly...
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GregB1230 -
How does the crawl find duplicate pages that don't exist on the site?
It looks like I have a lot of duplicate pages which are essentially the same url with some extra ? parameters added eg: http://www.merlin.org.uk/10-facts-about-malnutrition http://www.merlin.org.uk/10-facts-about-malnutrition?page=1 http://www.merlin.org.uk/10-facts-about-malnutrition?page=2 These extra 2 pages (and there's loads of pages this happens to) are a mystery to me. Not sure why they exist as there's only 1 page. Is this a massive issue? It's built on Drupal so I wonder if it auto generates these pages for some reason? Any help MUCH appreciated. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Deniz0 -
Site has no SEO done on it. It wasn't considered during design. What to do first ?
They opted for videos to explain to people what the website is about, but it ain't working for them. What steps would you take in order to get this site to rank higher without completely changing the design(changing design is out of the question they are low on funds). They also built a blog on wordpress.com and added a .me domain to it. For obvious reasons I'm not mentioning the website.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ternit0 -
Google giving me only partial site links?
Hi Guys, My site is #1 ranked for the term "waiting till marriage," but Google only gives me partial site links. See "Forums - Articles - Questions - Videos" links in attached screenshot. How do I get the full, page-dominating, mini-description-having site links? Any suggestions? Note: I've got a ton of content and decent traffic, but I haven't put much time into developing back links yet. I'm a php developer, but I'm new to professional-level SEO. Any help would be hugely appreciated. Also, sorry about the inflammatory nature of the site. It's not a preachy site; it's just a support group. Hope it doesn't offend. partial-sitelinks.png
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MikeAM270 -
SERP Experience After You Resubmit Your Site to Google
Hello Everyone, We suddenly noticed that our keywords fell off the map and discovered that porn had been placed (via.htaccess redirects and masking) on our site. The porn links caused Google to drop us.We scrubbed our .htaccess file and asked Google to reindex our site 3 weeks ago.Does anyone have experience with reindexing?If so, how long were you down and did your keyword positions return eventually?Thanks,Bob
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | impressem0