Round 3 & still no indexing for varicose veins :-(
-
Greetings from 11 degrees C partly suuny Wetherby
Every so oftem you hit an SEO mission that just consistently hits a brick wall. For the third time i'm investigating why this page:
http://www.collegeofphlebology.com/varicose-veins/what-are-they/ fails to even reach the bottom of page 3.Ive gone back to basic and ran an SEO audit of sorts in an attempt to see if I'd missed anything. Here is the audit:
http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc53/zymurgy_bucket/audit-for-moz.jpg
So my question is please:
From a technical SEO perspective is there anything wrong with this page http://www.collegeofphlebology.com/varicose-veins/what-are-they/ to explain why it does not rank for target term "Varicose Veins"
Thanks in advance,
David -
Morning Nick,
A big thank you for taking time out to look at this. You've confirmed a vague hunch that the site architecture is inherently jinxed and morre importantly given me hope i can get the dismal ranking sitution out of the mire
Have a great weekend & thank you again
-
Hi there David
From looking at the site, some past experience and Matt's responses, my view would be there are a few challenges facing you:
On a prior project, I came to understand that 'phlebology' is one of those highly spammed and abused areas of search that has all sorts of people trying to gain high ranking positions with poor quality sites, so there's probably a higher-than-normal barrier to entry for anyone new or new-ish into the market. Given the potential volumes of traffic out there, neither the spamming nor barrier to entry are that much of a surprise, so you have your work cut out for you!
I don't think the scrolling widget at the footer of your site will be doing you any favours as it links out to separate domains that are immediately redirected, which might look very suspect to search engines, and it's obviously there to create a number of links out. I'd strip them off.
I think you'd be far better to adjust the overall navigation of the site so that users and search engines can clearly flow from the top-level navigation down to the VV page (and others). At the moment the architecture seems somewhat awkwardly arranged and I would recommend re-organising it so there's a flow from the top down that follows the advancing detail of the content e.g.
Home
- Veins
-- Varicose Veins
--- Varicose Veins Sub-Topic
(repeat for all other topics!)
At the least better links in the main content on the Home Page, the For Patients Page and the Veins page down to the VV page would help a great deal. The VV page is presumably one of the most important on the site so the internal link structure should reflect that.
There is nothing on the 'For Patients' or For Specialists pages (http://www.collegeofphlebology.com/for-patients/ & http://www.collegeofphlebology.com/for-specialists-outer/) which will act as a red flag to Google. Those pages should act as high-level content resources, providing links down to lower pages.
Content-wise you're competing against some very high quality pages and I think you'd be best to review those and have a serious conversation with your client to show that (being blunt about it) a relatively short page summarising VV isn't going to have a great chance of really competing with a very high quality page from Patient.co.uk that goes into great detail on the condition, provides simple diagrams and is written by someone with a pretty high profile. I would encourage you to read into what Google is saying - if they are returning long, detailed high-quality pages at the top of the search results, that's what you need to provide to compete.
Link-wise there's a lot to do as you're competing with some of the most authoritative sites on the web - Wikipedia, NHS…without the great quality content you're going to struggle to gain links…chicken and egg as so much of SEO is, but that's where the fun is.
You could do a lot more on the Authorship and 'News' side and I'd recommend: pulling all the news into a 'News' or 'Blog' section that sits right at the top-level of the site architecture; the articles could have better pseudo-meta data e.g. a better by-line, a better date of publication and some categorisation.
On the authorship side, creating a Google+ profile for Mr Mark Whitely and linking the content he has published up to the profile will do you no harm at all. The same would go for anyone else publishing on the site.
Technically (and this might be a temporary blip with our connection) the site seems a bit slow to load, perhaps worth looking into.
In short, there are some navigational issues, there are some content issues, but you have what is the ultimate source of content - surgeons, so with effort there's no reason the site can't do well.
Hope that helps.
-
Ah I see - I personally think having it as a footer link will not help in the way it would as part of your main navigation which for a start would put it above the fold so search engines would give it more weight and also the fact that it will carry across your sites navigation..
Did you see the addition I made to the response above re your homepage?
-
Hi Matt, yes we put a scrolling link nav in the footer of the homepage routing thru to the varicose page.
-
Looking at opensiteexplorer.org your page only has a page authority of 13 and inbound links to your page look few and far between - have you thought about trying to build on this to help with your page ranking?
Have you thought about giving a direct link to varicose veins using this anchor text from your homepage http://www.collegeofphlebology.com because from what I can see getting to the page you are trying to rank for a competitive term it would appear that is several levels down the navigation structure of your site - unless I have missed it at a quick glance?
I would also say that your homepage appears to have a title that is targeting varicose veins and treatments but you don't appear to mention varicose veins in your body text and it isn't a specific link in your navigation which would help...
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
-
Regarding Mobile first Indexing
My Site name GiftaLove.com Desktop version - https://www.giftalove.com/
Technical SEO | | Packersmove
Mobile version - https://m.giftalove.com/ How to enable mobile first Indexing in Desktop and Mobile version sites. Not found any message from both sites desktop and mobile version. Please resolve my Issue.0 -
Google not Indexing images on CDN.
My URL is: https://bit.ly/2hWAApQ We have set up a CDN on our own domain: https://bit.ly/2KspW3C We have a main xml sitemap: https://bit.ly/2rd2jEb and https://bit.ly/2JMu7GB is one the sub sitemaps with images listed within. The image sitemap uses the CDN URLs. We verified the CDN subdomain in GWT. The robots.txt does not restrict any of the photos: https://bit.ly/2FAWJjk. Yet, GWT still reports none of our images on the CDN are indexed. I ve followed all the steps and still none of the images are being indexed. My problem seems similar to this ticket https://bit.ly/2FzUnBl but however different because we don't have a separate image sitemap but instead have listed image urls within the sitemaps itself. Can anyone help please? I will promptly respond to any queries. Thanks
Technical SEO | | TNZ
Deepinder0 -
Mobile website indexing
Hi we have a mobile version of our website at mobile.gardening-services-edinburgh.com its been live for 5, maybe 6 months, it has its own mobile-sitemap.xml have tried submitting this sitemap to google and for some reason it does not index these pages any ideas, most welcome
Technical SEO | | McSEO0 -
URL not indexed but shows in results?
We are working on a site that has a whole section that is not indexed (well a few pages are). There is also a problem where there are 2 directories that are the same content and it is the incorrect directory with the indexed URLs. The problem is if I do a search in Google to find a URL - typically location + term then I get the URL (from the wrong directory) up there in the top 5. However, do a site: for that URL and it is not indexed! What could be going on here? There is nothing in robots or the source, and GWT fetch works fine.
Technical SEO | | MickEdwards0 -
Should I remove these pages from the Google index?
Hi there, Please have a look at the following URL http://www.elefant-tours.com/index.php?callback=imagerotator&gid=65&483. It's a "sitemap" generated by a Wordpress plug-in called NextGen gallery and it maps all the images that have been added to the site through this plugin, which is quite a lot in this case. I can see that these "sitemap" pages have been indexed by Google and I'm wondering whether I should remove these or not? In my opinion these are pages that a search engine would never would want to serve as a search result and pages that a visitor never would want to see. Attracting any traffic through Google images is irrelevant in this case. What is your advice? Block it or leave it indexed or something else?
Technical SEO | | Robbern0 -
How to Find all the Pages Index by Google?
I'm planning on moving my online store, http://www.filtrationmontreal.com/ to a new platform, http://www.corecommerce.com/ To reduce the SEO impact, I want to redirect 301 all the pages index by Google to the new page I will create in the new platform. I will keep the same domaine name, but all the URL will be customize on the new platform for better SEO. Also, is there a way or tool to create CSV file from those page index. Can Webmaster tool help? You can read my question about this subject here, http://www.seomoz.org/q/impacts-on-moving-online-store-to-new-platform Thank you, BigBlaze
Technical SEO | | BigBlaze2050 -
Getting querystring indexed?
Hi everybody! I work with tags a lot on my photo blog but I haven't gotten Google to index one tag so far. Any tips on how to do this? Thanks / Niklas
Technical SEO | | KAN-Malmo0 -
Non-Canonical Pages still Indexed. Is this normal?
I have a website that contains some products and the old structure of the URL's was definitely not optimal for SEO purposes. So I created new SEO friendly URL's on my site and decided that I would use the canonical tags to transfer all the weight of the old URL's to the New URL's and ensure that the old ones would not show up in the SERP's. Problem is this has not quite worked. I implemented the canonical tags about a month ago but I am still seeing the old URL's indexed in Google and I am noticing that the cache date of these pages was only about a week ago. This leads me to believe that the spiders have been to the pages and seen the new canonical tags but are not following them. Is this normal behavior and if so, can somebody explain to me why? I know I could have just 301 redirected these old URL's to the new ones but the process I would need to go through to have that done is much more of a battle than to just add the canonical tags and I felt that the canonical tags would have done the job. Needless to say the client is not too happy right now and insists that I should have just used the 301's. In this case the client appears to be correct but I do not quite understand why my canonical tags did not work. Examples Below- Old Pages: www.awebsite.com/something/something/productid.3254235 New Pages: www.awebsite.com/something/something/keyword-rich-product-name Canonical tag on both pages: rel="canonical" href="http://www.awebsite.com/something/something/keyword-rich-product-name"/> Thanks guys for the help on this.
Technical SEO | | DRSearchEngOpt0