New Site Worries
-
To cut a long story short, our old web developers who built us a bespoke site decided that they could no longer offer us support so we decided to move our back end to the latest Magento 2 software and move over to https with a new company.
The new setup has been live for 3 weeks, I have checked in webmaster tools and it says we have 4 pages indexed, if I type in site:https://www.mydomain.com/ we have 6560 pages indexed, our robots.txt file looks like this:Sitemap: https://www.mydomain.com/sitemap.xml Sitemap: https://www.mydomain.com/sitemaps/sitemap_default.xml
I use Website Auditor and Screaming Frog, Website Auditor returns a 302 for my domain and Screaming Frog returns a 403 which means I cannot scan any of these. If I check my domain using an https checking tool some sites return an error but some return a 200.
I have spoken to my new developer and he says everything is fine, in Webmaster tools I can see some redirects from his domain to mine when the site was in testing mode. I am concerned that something is not right as I always check my pages on a regular basis. Can anyone shed any light on this, is it right or am I right to be concerned.Thank you in advance
-
As far as Google Search Console is concerned - make certain you've verified a new Property in GSC for specifically the HTTPS version of your domain. Google (and other search engines) consider the HTTPS version a completely separate site, and so accurate data will only exist in the new HTTPS property.
If multiple monitoring and crawling tools are at least occasionally reporting improper redirects or are blocked, that's a huge potential issue and must be thoroughly researched. First place to start is to make certain that the SSL certificate encompasses both the www and non-www versions of the domain. If you provide the URL, we may be able to provide more info.
Hope that helps?
Paul
P.S. If the developer's version of the site has carelessly been allowed to get indexed, that's going to have to be dealt with too.
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
-
Free Media Site / High Traffic / Low Engagement / Strategies and Questions
Hi, Imagine a site "mediapalooza dot com" where the only thing you do there is view free media. Yet Google Analytics is showing the average view of a media page is about a minute; where the average length of media is 20 - 90 minutes. And imagine that most of this media is "classic" and that it is generally not available elsewhere. Note also that the site ranks terribly in Google, despite having decent Domain Authority (in the high 30's), Page Authority in the mid 40's and a great site and otherwise quite active international user base with page views in the tens of thousands per month. Is it possible that GA is not tracking engagement (time on site) correctly? Even accounting for the imperfect method of GA that measures "next key pressed" as a way to terminate the page as a way to measure time on page, our stats are truly abysmal, in the tenths of a percentage point of time measured when compared with actual time we think the pages are being used. If so, will getting engagement tracking to more accurately measure time on specif pages and site signal Google that this site is actually more important than current ranking indicates? There's lots of discussion about "dwell time" as this relates to ranking, and I'm postulating that if we can show Google that we have extremely good engagement instead of the super low stats that we are reporting now, then we might get a boost in ranking. Am I crazy? Has anyone got any data that proves or disproves this theory? as I write this out, I detect many issues - let's have a discussion on what else might be happening here. We already know that low engagement = low ranking. Will fixing GA to show true engagement have any noticeable impact on ranking? Can't wait to see what the MOZZERS think of this!
Reporting & Analytics | | seo_plus0 -
SEO dealing with a CDN on a site.
This one is stumping me and I need some help. I have a client who's site is www.site.com and we have set them up a CDN through Max CDN at cdn.site.com which is basically a cname to the www.site.com site. The images in the GWT for www.site.com are de-indexing rapidly and the images on cdn.site.com are not indexing. In the Max CDN account I have the images from cdn.site.com sending a canonical header from www.site.com but that does not seem to help, they are all still de-indexing.
Reporting & Analytics | | LesleyPaone0 -
Site relaunch and impact on SEO
I have some tough decisions to make about a web site I run. The site has seen around for 20 years (September 1995, to be precise, is the date listed against the domain). Over the years, the effort I've expanded on the site has come and gone, but I am about to throw a lot of time and effort back into it. The majority of the content on the site is pretty dated, isn't tremendously useful to the audience (since it's pretty old) and the site design and URL architecture isn't particularly SEO-friendly. In addition, I have a database of thousands vendors (for the specific industry this site serves). I don't know if it's a factor any more but 100% of the links there have been populated by the vendors themselves specifically requesting inclusion (through a form we expose on the site). When the request is approved, the vendor link shows up on the appropriate pages for location (state) and segment of the industry. Though the links are all "opt-in" from vendors (we've never one added or imported any ourselves), I am sure this all looks like a terrible link farm to Google! And some vendors have asked us to remove their link for that reason 🙂 One final (very important) point. We have a relationship with a nationwide brand and have four very specific pages related to that brand on our site. Those pages are essential - they are by far the most visited pages and drive virtually all our revenue. The pages were put together with SEO in mind and the look and feel is very different to the rest of the site. The result is, effectively, a site-within-a-site. I need to carefully protect the performance of these pages. To put some rough numbers on this, the site had 475,000 page views over the last year, with about 320,000 of those being to these four pages (by the way, for the rest of the content "something happened" around May 20th of last year - traffic almost doubled overnight - even though there were no changes to our site). We have a Facebook presence and have put a little effort into that recently (increasing fans from about 10,000 last August to nearly 24,000 today, with a net gain of about 2,500 per month currently). I don't have any sense of whether that is a meaningful resource in the big picture. So, that's the background. I want to totally revamp the broader site - much improved design, intentional SEO decisions, far better, current and active content, active social media presence and so on. I am also moving from one CMS to another (the target CMS / Blog platform being WordPress). Part of me wants to do the following: Come up with a better plan for SEO and basically just throw out the old stuff and start again, with the exception of the four vendor pages I mentioned Implement redirection of the old URLs to new content (301s) Just stop exposing the vendor pages (on the basis that many of the links are old/broken and I'm really not getting any benefit from them) Leave the four important pages exactly as they are (URL and content-wise) I am happy to rebuild the content afresh because I have a new plan around that for which I have some confidence. But I have some important questions. If I go with the approach above, is there any value from the old content / URLs that is worth retaining? How sure can I be there is no indirect negative effect on the four important pages? I really need to protect those pages Is throwing away the vendor links simply all good - or could there be some hidden negative I need to know about (given many of the links are broken and go to crappy/small web sites, I'm hoping this is just a simple decision to make) And one more uber-question. I want to take a performance baseline so that I can see where I started as I start making changes and measure performance over time. Beyond the obvious metrics like number of visitors, time per page, page views per visit, etc what metrics would be important to collect from the outset? I am just at the start of this project and it is very important to me. Given the longevity of the site, I don't know if there is much worth retaining for that reason, even if the content changes radically. At a high level I'm trying to decide what questions I need to answer before I set off on this path. Any suggestions would be very much appreciated. Thanks.
Reporting & Analytics | | MarkWill0 -
How can you tell if Google has already assessed a penalty against your site for spammy links?
Is there any way to tell for sure if there is a penalty? My client has a ton of low quality back links, and I think they are in danger of a Penguin penalty. Any way to know? The links are there for a business reason.... their clients mention them in the footer, with a backlink. It is not a link scheme. but folks are generally not clicking on a footer link, and so there is a pro/con of leaving it as it. Any way, to diagnose whether a Penguin penalty has already hit?
Reporting & Analytics | | DianeDP2 -
Is there a problem with using same gmail account for multiple site analytics and GWMT?
Hi, Is there a problem or a general recommendation about using the same gmail account for two different sites (both in Google Analytics and Webmaster tools)? Thanks
Reporting & Analytics | | BeytzNet0 -
Does a Manual Penalty Affect Other Sites in Same GA Account
Hello Mozzers, I was a bit foolish a couple of years back when first getting into the game, and employed a dodgy agency to do some SEO for me on some sites. Fast forward to this year, and the two sites in my Google Analytics account have been hit with a manual penalty. I decided to ditch the websites and move on, so removed them from my GA account, webmaster tools etc and will simply let them die a death. My question is, do you think this would affect how easy it would be to rank other websites within my GA account? Does anybody have any views on this? Thanks!
Reporting & Analytics | | Marc-FIMA0 -
SEOing a Site Before it is ready?
Hi Guys I have a site currently being built that is 45 days away. I am wondering whether it is possible to have a dummy website (with same domain name) in play and starting the SEO effort so that these 45 days are not wasted from an SEO point of view. Is this something you have seen done effectively, or is it a no no. Kind Regards, Justin
Reporting & Analytics | | jchapman50 -
Linking Multiple Niche Site In Same Google Analytics Account
Hi, I am providing SEO for Local business. Is it advisable to separate out the Google Analytics into different Google account or is it ok to remain it this way? Some of the client might be in the same niche, and might be competing with the same keywords as well. What I was worried is, Google might see these sites as same owner and only rank for 1 of the site. I was thinking to get the owners to register for their own Google Analytics and share the access to me.
Reporting & Analytics | | JonathanSoh0