How could you make a URL/Breadcrumb structure appear different in Google than when you click into site?
-
I'm seeing a competitor be able to make their URL/Breadcrumb stucture appear different in Google than on the site. Google shows a 3-4 category silo for the page but once clicked the page is off root. How could you do this?
-
Looks like Rich Snippets / structured data are whats doing it on this particular URL. If you right click on the site and click inspect elements you will see bits of code like this
The itemscope & item type tags all have to do with rich snippets / structured data, im no expert as i've not implemented them yet myself, but you can find out more at the following links
https://mza.bundledseo.com/learn/seo/schema-structured-data
https://mza.bundledseo.com/blog/a-visual-guide-to-rich-snippets
https://developers.google.com/structured-data/breadcrumbs In short, they tell the search engines what the data is so it can be displayed in a more appealing way in the search engine. -
Yes, that is exactly what is happening. But it has been this way for awhile now. I don't think reindexing is the issue. What do you think about this? See images below.
-
So your saying in google their URL appears
site.com/cat1/subcat/subsubcat/pagebut once clicked the url is
site.com/pageIf this is the case, I would guess that they previously had the page at the "site.com/cat1/subcat/subsubcat/page" url and google index'd it there and have since re-directed the URL the site.com/page and google simply hasn't reindexed and updated its listing yet.
Without a URL / example to look at I cant tell if anything more is going on.
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
-
Ecommerce Preferred URL Structure for Printing Website
Hello Mozers! We are adding an ecommerce functionality to our existing website.
Technical SEO | | CheapyPP
Our company offers a wide range of commercial printing and mail services. We have done a pretty good job over the years in building content both in terms of our print offerings and blog section highlighting those offerings. We have finally bit the bullet and have decided to add end-to end ecommerce functionality. Users will be able to price, pay, upload and order thru our website. My question to the community becomes which sub folder do we use?
The ecommerce functionality is a third part software and needs to sit in a sub folder and we can't seem to find a good fit. Most of our content pages for print items are something like this www.website/printing/ - pillar page examples of url structure for sub pages www.website/printing/flyer-printing/
www.website/printing/booklet-printing/
www.website/printing/door-hangers/
www.website/printing/business-cards/ Options would be order-printing/ or prints/ So we we thinking /orders/ would be the best but not certain and wanted some feedback from the community. If we did go this route the url structure would be: order/business-cards this would be the default econ page order/business-cards/full-uv-coaing-both-sides individual product page What are your thoughts? CH0 -
Cross domain canonical for different branded sites
Hi everyone, We are working on 5 websites that offer the same products but are of different brands and locations. They are owned by the same company, but each run independently. On the sites, they have content such as privacy policies, terms and conditions and guides that are the same across all brands. Will publishing these be flagged as duplicate content by Google? If yes, is it recommended to add rel=canonical to all duplicate pages across all sites pointing to one of the five? We are just concerned that the 4 sites with duplicate content would be valued less than the canonical as a result of passed link equity. We are doing SEO optimisations for all and are trying to rank them well in SERPs. If a canonical is not the best solution here, what would be the best to do apart from completely rewriting content? Is it noindex tag or turning the texts into images and adding to PDFs? Thank you.
Technical SEO | | nhhernandez1 -
Google Search Console - URL Parameters Tab ISSUE
Hi, Recently i removed some disallowed parameters from my robots.txt and added the setting No Url in my search console URL parameters tab (as can be seen in the image http://prntscr.com/e997o5) Today i saw the orderby parameter indexed even if the setting is to not crawl those urls. Anyone any idea why is this happening? Thank god that all those urls with parameters are canonicalised to their original url's.
Technical SEO | | dos06590 -
Hey all -- ever seen a client with URLs that keep repeating the domain? Something like: client.com/client.com/client.com/subfolder-name. Any idea what glitch could cause that?
Hey all -- ever seen a client with URLs that keep repeating the domain? Something like: client.com/client.com/client.com/subfolder-name. Any idea what glitch could cause that?
Technical SEO | | TDC_SEO0 -
Value in Consolidating Similar Sites / Duplicate Content for Different URLs
We have 5 ecommerce sites: one company site with all products, and then four product-specific sites with relevant URL titles and products divided up between them (www.companysite.com, www.product1.com, www.product2.com, etc). We're thinking of consolidating the smaller sites into our most successful site (www.product1.com) in order to save management time and money, even though I hate to lose the product-specific URLs in search results. Is this a wise move? If we proceed, all of the products will be available on both our company site and our most successful site (www.company.com & www.product1.com). This would unfortunately give us two sites of duplicate content, since the products will have the same pictures, descriptions, etc. The only difference would be the URL. Would we face penalties from Google, even though it would make sense to continue to carry our products on our company site?
Technical SEO | | versare0 -
Site command / Footprint Question
Hi All, I am looking for websites with keywords in the domain and I am using: inurl:keyword/s The results that come back include sub-pages and not only domains with the keywords in the root domain. example of what i mean: www.website.com/keyword/ What I want displayed only: www.keyword/s.com Does anyone know of a site command i can use to display URL's with keywords in the root domain only? Thanks in Advance Greg
Technical SEO | | AndreVanKets0 -
Google and QnA sites
My website has a QnA site - a bit like this one except it's not private to premium members. It is a page with a left colomn for category links and it has a list of recently asked questions, each question is a link to view the full question and answers etc. Does google know this is a QnA ? Or will it say - hey, there are far too many links on this page, tut tut. Is there anything I can do to help it understand what the page is.
Technical SEO | | borderbound0 -
Redirect Flash Site for Google Only - Is this against TOS?
A photographer client has a flash website, purchased as from a (well respected) template company. The main site is at the root domain, and the HTML version is at www.example.com/?load=html If I visit the site on a browser without Flash installed, I am re-directed automatically to the HTML version. I'm concerned as the site has some great links and the HTML version is well optimised, but doesn't appear anywhere in Google for chosen keywords (ranks perfectly for brand related searches). Google is indexing the Flash version of the site, but I would rather it didn't (there's no real content (just Javascript to load the SWF) and all of the pages load under one URL). How can I block the Flash version from Google but still make the incoming links count towards the HTMl version of the site? If I re-direct Google to the HTML version, is this cloaking, and is it frowned upon? Thanks for any advice you can offer.
Technical SEO | | cmaddison0