Is google seeing "all" my homepage?
-
Hello All
Since launching my new website design - www.advanced-driving.co.uk I am not convinced Google is seeing all the content on the page. I took a long extract of text and did a search on Google and nothing was found. Also although in the search results for "advanced driving course" I can see the new title tag, the snippet isn't showing..
Is there anyway I can check this? As a scroll down I can see the URL changes ie:
www.advanced-driving.co.uk
then:
http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/#da-page_in_widget-3
then:
http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/#da-page_in_widget-4
then:
http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/#da-page_in_widget-5Is this right?
Thanks in advance..
-
Hi Rob Morgan,
You've talked about 2 issues here, please find my views on them:
-
"Since launching my new website design - www.advanced-driving.co.uk I am not convinced Google is seeing all the content on the page. I took a long extract of text and did a search on Google and nothing was found. Also although in the search results for "advanced driving course" I can see the new title tag, the snippet isn't showing"
=> Here, you can check the cached version of any given page by googling "cache:<url-you-want-to-check>" and then clicking on "Text Version".</url-you-want-to-check>
-
As a scroll down I can see the URL changes i.e:
www.advanced-driving.co.uk
then: http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/#da-page_in_widget-3
then: http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/#da-page_in_widget-4
then: http://www.advanced-driving.co.uk/#da-page_in_widget-5=> This is absolutely fine as far as canonical URL is there, and its there in your case. So, good to go
Hope this helps!
-
-
Hi Rob
Wanted to reply you on your previous question but than I noticed the new one. I have the impressions that your new site has compatibility issues with the different plugins you use.
I tried to check your site with different external tools (web-sniffer.net - first time 302 status but no details / webpagetest.org - check: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/151013_3E_13EQ/ - failed & http://www.webpagetest.org/result/151013_1P_14V3/1/details/ - check the 302 in the first line ) - and results are not consistent. Apart from that - as mentioned previously - when checking your site in Firefox I can see the Analytics snippet in the source - when I try the same thing in Chrome the snippet is not present.
The cached version of your site (homepage) isn't complete - check http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_cThj8msp3EJ:www.advanced-driving.co.uk/+&cd=1&hl=nl&ct=clnk&gl=be#da-page_in_widget-4 - are you blocking some js/css files in your robots.txt
Try fetching pages like Google in WMT (and with the other tools) and check the results - you could try to enable/disable each module to see if results change.
Dirk
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 adding "noindex" help with quality penalizations?
Hello Moz fellows, I have another question about content quality and Panda related penalization. I was wondering this: If I have an entire section of my site that has been penalized due to thin content, can adding "noindex,follow" to all pages belonging to that section help de-penalizing the rest of the site in the short term, while we work to improve those penalized pages, which is going to take a long time? Can that be considered a "short term solution" to improve the overall site scoring on Google index while we work to improve those penalized pages, and, once ready, we remove the "noindex" tag? I am eager to know your thoughts on this possible strategy. Thank you in advance to everyone!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | fablau0 -
Google Indexing our site
We have 700 city pages on our site. We submitted to google via a https://www.samhillbands.com/sitemaps/locations.xml but they only indexed 15 so far. Yes the content is similar on all of the pages...thought on getting them to index the remaining pages?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brianvest0 -
Why do Local "5 pack" results vary between showing Google+, Google+ and website address
I had a client ask me a good question. When they pull up a search result they show up at the top but only with a link to their G+ page. Other competitors show their web address and G+ page. Why are these results different in the same search group? Is there a way to ensure the web address shows up?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Ron_McCabe0 -
Should you bother with an "impact links" manual action
I have a couple sites that have these, and I have done a lot of work to get them removed, but there seems to be very little if any benefit from doing this. In fact, sites were we have done nothing after these penalties seem to be doing better than ones where we have done link removal and the reconsideration request. Google says "I_f you don’t control the links pointing to your site, no action is required on your part. From Google’s perspective, the links already won’t count in ranking. However, if possible, you may wish to remove any artificial links to your site and, if you’re able to get the artificial links removed, submit a reconsideration request__. If we determine that the links to your site are no longer in violation of our guidelines, we’ll revoke the manual action._" I would guess a lot of people with this penalty don't even know they have it, and it sounds like leaving it alone really doesn't hurt your site. If seems to me that just simply ignoring this and building better links and higher quality content should help improve your site rankings vs. worrying about trying to get all these links removed/disavowed. What are your thoughts? Is it worth trying to get this manual action removed?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | netviper0 -
Why is Google rewriting titles with the brandname @ the front followed with a conon " : " i.e. > Brandname: the rest of the title
Example: https://www.google.nl/search?q=providercheck.nl&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&ei=9xUCUuH6DYPePYHSgKgJ&fp=96e0b845c2047734&q=www.providercheck.nl&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=X&spell=1&ved=0CC4QBSgA Look @ the first result: www.providercheck.nl
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zanox0 -
Google Local oddity
So I spotted something a little weird... one of my client's Google Local placements in blended results has the domain name - complete with the .com extension appearing where the business name typically appears: Businessxyz.com www. businessxyz .com of Google reviews Has anyone seen this? I setup their Google Places account quite some time ago and used the business name - not the url. I also setup their Google+ and Local page - using the name. None of the page titles on the website contain the url. I simply can not pinpoint where G is pulling this from or why for that matter. All competitors are appearing with business name - only my client has the domain name visible for the particular local search query. Any ideas?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | SCW0 -
Pagination: rel="next" rel="prev" in ?
With Google releasing that instructional on proper pagination I finally hunkered down and put in a site change request. I wanted the rel="next" and rel="prev" implemented… and it took two weeks for the guy to get it done. Brutal and painful. When I looked at the source it turned out he put it in the body above the pagination links… which is not what I wanted. I wanted them in the . Before I respond to get it properly implemented I want a few opinions - is it okay to have the rel="next" in the body? Or is it pretty much mandatory to put it in the head? (Normally, if I had full control over this site, I would just do it myself in 2 minutes… unfortunately I don't have that luxury with this site)
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeTheBoss1 -
Link to Google Places, or Google Maps?
On our contact page, we offer a link to view Google Maps for directions. I'm wondering should we be linking to our Google Places page instead, or just stick with the Google Map link? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | GravitateMCC0