Any harm and why the differences - multiple versions of same site in WMT
-
In Google Webmaster Tools we have set up:
ourdomain.co.nz
ourdomain.co.uk
ourdomain.com
ourdomain.com.au
www.ourdomain.co.nz
www.ourdomain.co.uk
www.ourdomain.com
www.ourdomain.com.au
https://www.ourdomain.co.nz
https://www.ourdomain.co.uk
https://www.ourdomain.com
https://www.ourdomain.com.auAs you can imagine, this gets confusing and hard to manage. We are wondering whether having all these domains set up in WMT could be doing any damage? Here http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=44231 it says:
"If you see a message that your site is not indexed, it may be because it is indexed under a different domain. For example, if you receive a message that http://example.com is not indexed, make sure that you've also added http://www.example.com to your account (or vice versa), and check the data for that site."
The above quote suggests that there is no harm in having several versions of a site set up in WMT, however the article then goes on to say:
"Once you tell us your preferred domain name, we use that information for all future crawls of your site and indexing refreshes. For instance, if you specify your preferred domain as http://www.example.com and we find a link to your site that is formatted as http://example.com, we follow that link as http://www.example.com instead."
This suggests that having multiple versions of the site loaded in WMT may cause Google to continue crawling multiple versions instead of only crawling the desired versions (https://www.ourdomain.com + .co.nz, .co.uk, .com.au).
However, even if Google does crawl any URLs on the non https versions of the site (ie ourdomain.com or www.ourdomain.com), these 301 to https://www.ourdomain.com anyway... so shouldn't that mean that google effectively can not crawl any non https://www versions (if it tries to they redirect)? If that was the case, you'd expect that the ourdomain.com and www.ourdomain.com versions would show no pages indexed in WMT, however the oposite is true. The ourdomain.com and www.ourdomain.com versions have plenty of pages indexed but the https versions have no data under Index Status section of WMT, but rather have this message instead:
Data for https://www.ourdomain.com/ is not available. Please try a site with http:// protocol: http://www.ourdomain.com/.
This is a problem as it means that we can't delete these profiles from our WMT account.
Any thoughts on the above would be welcome.
As an aside, it seems like WMT is picking up on the 301 redirects from all ourdomain.com or www.ourdomain.com domains at least with links - No ourdomain.com or www.ourdomain.com URLs are registering any links in WMT, suggesting that Google is seeing all links pointing to URLs on these domains as 301ing to https://www.ourdomain.com ... which is good, but again means we now can't delete https://www.ourdomain.com either, so we are stuck with 12 profiles in WMT... what a pain....
Thanks for taking the time to read the above, quite complicated, sorry!! Would love any thoughts...
-
I agree with Federico that you probably don't need to have every page be secure. Perhaps you should consider making the http://www. version your canonical default instead?
-
It is fine to have multiple versions of a site in different countries. Some of the biggest brands in the world do this. There are "right" and "wrong" ways to go about it, but if I had a ccTLD for the UK and lots of UK customers I wouldn't send them to my US site, regardless of whether I had a /uk/ folder or not.
-
Chirs,
Is the content exactly the same on all domains? Anything changes between .com, .co.uk, etc?
If so, you MUST use the canonical to only ONE version (.com would be my guess) and rel="alternate" for the other domains, however, that doesn't make any sense if the content is the same. Why not just redirect all domains to .com (or whatever definitive version you choose)?
-
Hi Frederico,
Thanks very much for your response. And yes, sorry, my initial question wasn't written so great, sorry!
ourdomain.com and www.ourdomain.com both 301 to https://www.ourdomain.com (which is also the canonical definitive version for the .com)
ourdomain.co.uk and www.ourdomain.co.uk both 301 to https://www.ourdomain.co.uk (which is also the canonical definitive version for the .co.uk)
and the same as above for .com.au domains, and .co.nz domains.
The content is the same across all domains.
The thing is that a lot of info appears in Webmaster tools under the non canonical versions of the sites, and is not showing under the canonical profile in WMT. Which makes us feel like maybe we shouldn't delete those profiles?
Regarding the HTTP vs HTTPS issues... sounds like what you are saying is that we should consider only using HTTPS on pages that really need it - at the moment it is site wide. That makes sense.
Thanks again and look forward to your thoughts as to whether there is any benefit or harm if we keep/remove the non canonical site profiles from WMT.
-
Hi Chris,
That was hard to follow. Let's start with the basics:
Do all those domains redirect to one single domain? or all those domains serve the same content but within the domain accessed?
If you redirect all domains to a single domain, using a 301 will do while having the profiles in WMT is useless. If you serve the same content within all domains, you should use canonicals pointing to a definitive version with no canonical tag. Then again, you can use WMT to track searches and links, but Google will serve one URL in their results, and that's the one all other versions are pointing in the canonical tag.
Now, are you trying to serve all your content under SSL or standard HTTP? As that causes a duplicate content issue if you are serving both, and again, you should use 301 to the verison you prefer or canonicals. There's no benefit or harm using HTTPS for all your pages, and sometimes, HTTPS could be slower as the browser has to negotiate certificates in each request (I would go with regular HTTP if you are not requesting input from your visitors or showing private information).
Am I on the right track so far?
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
-
Does subdomain (or sub sub domain) affect analytics data of root site?
We self-host our public website, but over time have also added subdomains onto it that are not public and are for internal or even client portals. I am seeking advice as to whether those subdomains affect the analytics data (self referrals, visits, bounces) of the public site that I am tasked with analyzing. I feel that it does skew the data but need to build a solid case to move the public website to a new domain, so as to leave the existing one in tact with all of its subs.
Reporting & Analytics | | MarketingGroup0 -
Weird visitors to my site
Hi, I am in the process of disentangling myself from a dodgy SEO company. At some point they set up another GA account on my site without consulting me. I replaced the tracking code with my original account on my wordpress site, placing the tracking code on the dashboard. There is a box in the dashboard for you to do this. For some reason the account he created is still giving me analytics but from mostly one url :forum.topic55622342.darodar.com. It has marked it as a referral? When you click it it redirects to this site : http://activities.aliexpress.com/computers_channel.php?aff_platform=aaf&sk=vV3B2RJYB%3A&cpt=1421321021096&null There have been 218 visits from this "referral" in the last month and also 2 direct visits to a clients online gallery (i'm a photographer). I am guessing the code for this new account is still on the site somewhere? Funnily enough in the first month I was getting targeted by spam using my contact form and I was a bit perplexed as to why. We had to put captchas on the contact forms which I was loathe to do as its another step for a client to have to go through causing resistance. Has this link got something to do with it? I have recently disavowed a lot of toxic links he created, so maybe they had something to do with it? Best wishes. David.
Reporting & Analytics | | WallerD0 -
How can we stop Google analytics pulling in data from another site?
We have a few accounts under one Google login. They all have separate Google analytics codes but one of the sites is somehow pulling in some data from another site but the other site has not got the same analytics code on it. Not sure how this is happening and what we can do about this, is it a bug in the Google Analytics system? Any help would be appreciated.
Reporting & Analytics | | dentaldesign0 -
I have few similar job forms that were created for different positions. SEOMoz says, its "duplicate pages". So how do I resolve it? I want my jobs to be searchable in Search Engines.
Hi There, I have few similar job forms that were created for different positions. SEOMoz says, its "duplicate pages". So how do I resolve it? I want my jobs to be searchable in Search Engines. Thanks !
Reporting & Analytics | | pointstar0 -
Can you link several sites together in Google Webmaster Tools?
I have a client saying that there is a way to link 3 separate websites (A website for each department of a company) in Google Webmaster tools to tell Google it's basically one site but really its 3. Or to tell Google it's the same company and all the sites are one. I have never heard of this & I don't see the point in making 3 separate small sites & "linking" them as one in Webmaster tools. Is there in fact a way? Am I out to lunch on what they might be referring to? I am recommending they create one larger authority site with a page on each department & earn links for each department page & provide informative unique content for each page. Thoughts? Thanks for the help!
Reporting & Analytics | | DCochrane0 -
Google Analytics internal Site Search - Destination pages dispaly Search results
Hi, Im having a bit of an issue with Google Analytics internal site search, I am able to currently track the search terms through my website internal search but when I click onto destination pages I just get the search result page. When clicking destination pages I would expect to get the pages on which the user ended up after the results page, instead I just get the results page which is pretty much useless ?submitsearchXXXXXX hope you can help, look forward to your response. Thanks,
Reporting & Analytics | | Tug-Agency1 -
Setting up Analytics on a Site that Uses Frames For Some Content
I work with a real estate agent and he uses strings from another tool to populate the listings on his site. In an attempt to be able to track traffic to both the framed pages and the non-framed pages he has two sets of analytics code on his site - one inside the frame and one for the regular part of the site. (there's also a third that the company who hosts his site and provides all these other tools put on his site - but I don't think that's really important to this conversation). Not only is it confusing looking at the analytics data, his bounce rate is down right unmanageable. As soon as anyone clicks on any of the listings they've bounced away. Here's a page - all of those listings below " Here are the most recent Toronto Beaches Real Estate Listings" are part of a frame. http://eastendtorontohomes.com/toronto-beach-real-estate-search/ I'm not really sure what to do about it or how to deal with it? Anyone out there got any good advice? And just in case you're wondering there aren't any other options - apart from spending thousands to build his own database thingie. We've thought about that (as other agents in the city have done that), but just aren't sure it's worth it. And, quite frankly he doesn't want to spend the money.
Reporting & Analytics | | annasus0 -
Will Google start trimming 'stale' sites rank?
With the recent focus on Google to reduce rank of farms and low value sites, I am interested to get SEO view on if you think Google will start devaluing stale sites. I do find it a bit frustrating that in the top 5 for my main key phrase, there is one site that has NO content just an error and another blog that has not updated content in 2 years. How can blogs that do not blog be considered high enough value by Google to rank in the top 5? How can sites that just return 404 or 500 for ALL their pages be even considered a site let alone rank 2nd. I am interested so see others experiences and thoughts on 'user experience' clean ups by Google and why these types of sites get missed?
Reporting & Analytics | | oznappies0