Do I need to verify my site on webmaster both with and without the "www." at the start?
-
As per title, is it necessary to verify a site on webmaster twice, with and without the "www"?
I only ask as I'm about to submit a disavow request, and have just read this:
NB: Make sure you verify both the http:website.com and http://www.website.com versions of your site and submit the links disavow file for each. Google has said that they view these as completely different sites so it’s important not to forget this step. (here)
Is there anything in this? It strikes me as more than a bit odd that you need to submit a site twice.
-
Yes, that's generally considered the correct way of doing it if you have links to both www and non-www.
-
Thanks, Chris. Do I need to tailor the disavow request for each version? i.e. only links that point to our domain with the www subdomain in one list and non www in a separate list?
-
In GWT, if you tell Google that you have a preferred domain (www or non www) it will require that you verify both versions. You're not able submit a disavow file for a domain that you have not been verified for, so if you have links pointing to non-www, you need to be verified for that domain before you can submit your disavow file for it--and vise versa.
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
-
GSC: Change of Domain Not Processed, Despite Saying "Approved"?
Hi folks, I've just completed a straightforward olddomain -> newdomain migration. All the redirects were done on 7th Feb. I submitted the change of domain request on 7th Feb. All seemed fine - as can be seen in the attached. It's now 19th March and our pals at GSC are still saying that the domain migration is ongoing. I've never had this take so long before; 2-3 days tops. Their results are tanking as I can't geo target and more features in GSC are out of action as it's 'locked' due to this migration (I just get a screen as per the attached). Thoughts? Shall I risk withdrawing the request and starting anew? The old "turn it off and on again"? Thanks! hJXKC
Technical SEO | | tonyatfat0 -
Using "Div's" to place content at top of HTML
Is it still a good practice to use "div's" to place content at the top of the HTML code, if your content is at the bottom of the web page?
Technical SEO | | tdawson090 -
Using http: shorthand inside canonical tag ("//" instead of "http:") can cause harm?
HI, I am planning to launch a new site, and shortly after to move to HTTPS. to save the need to change over 5,000 canonical tags in pages the webmaster suggested we implement inside the rel canonical "//" instead of the absolute path, would that do any damage or be a problem? oranges-south-dakota" />
Technical SEO | | Kung_fu_Panda0 -
Is it problematic for Google when the site of a subdomain is on a different host than the site of the primary domain?
The Website on the subdomain runs on a different server (host) than the site on the main domain.
Technical SEO | | Christian_Campusjaeger0 -
Instance IDs on "Events" in wordpress causing duplicate content
Hi all I use Yoast SEO on wordpress which does a pretty good job of insertint rel=canonical in to the header of the pages where approproate, including on my event pages. However my crawl diagnostics have highlighted these event pages as duplicate content and titles because of the instance id parameter being added to the URL. When I look at the pages head I see that rel=canonical is as it should be. Please see here for an example: http://solvencyiiwire.com/ai1ec_event/unintended-consequences-basel-ii-and-solvency-ii?instance_id= My question is how come SEOMoz is highlighting these pages as duplicate content and what can I do to remedy this. Is it because ?instance_id= is part of the string on the canonical link? How do I remove this? My client uses the following plugins "All-in-One Event Calendar by Timely" and
Technical SEO | | wellsgp
Google Calendar Events Many thanks!0 -
Unknown "/" added causing 404 error
I have four 404 url redirect errors that I cannot sort out. It tells me the referring url: | www.homedestination.com/calculator-mortgage-resources.html has a "/" on the end. cannot find: | www.homedestination.com/calculator-mortgage-resources.html | I cannot figure out where this referring url is; as it is in the root file without a "/" on the end. Could it be on a page somewhere? All my Dreamweaver page link tests come back ok. I must be missing something simple and would value help for others who may spot it? Thanks! |
Technical SEO | | jessential0 -
"/" at the end of a URL
I just noticed that I have the exact same page showing up separately in my Google Analytics reports. One has a "/" at the end and the other does not. Otherwise, these are the exact same URL's. Is this something I need to be aware of from a duplicate content perspective? If so, how do I go about fixing this? I thought the SE's would automatically see that a URL with a "/" at the end is the same as one without, but if that is the case, why is it showing up in my reports as two separate pages?
Technical SEO | | Blockinc0 -
Confused about rel="canonical"
I'm receiving a duplicate content error in my reports for www.example.com and www.example.com/index.htm. Should I put the rel="canonical" on the index page and point it to www.example.com? And if I have other important pages where rel="canonical" is being suggested do I place the rel="canonical" on that page? For example if www.example/product is an important page would I place on that page?
Technical SEO | | BrandonC-2698870