Hiring someone to assist us in fixing SEOMOZ Errors
-
Greetings. We have been using SEOMOZ for about 9 months and we are needing to hire someone to assist us in fixing ERRORS promulgated by our SEOMOZ weekly crawl.
Does anyone know of any person or firm that can assist us with this?
-
Good answer. I like that.
-
It may be worth sharing the web address in question and the type of errors SEOMoz is finding.
The Moz community is a thriving place of SEO experts who are very willing to offer advice to help fix your problems, it might be worth a shot as it could save you some dollar and also expand your own knowledge
-
SEOmoz has some great recommended firms.
Depending on the size, scope and budget I'd be interested in helping you. I've been helping some companies do this for over a year. Private message me up via my SEOmoz profile and I'd love to see if I could be of some help for you.
I don't wont to self promote but If my profile fits what you are looking for then I'd be interested.
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
-
Broken canonical link errors
Hello, Several tools I'm using are returning errors due to "broken canonical links". However, I'm not too sure why is that. Eg.
Technical SEO | | GhillC
Page URL: domain.com/page.html?xxxx
Canonical link URL: domain.com/page.html
Returns an error. Any idea why? Am I doing it wrong? Thanks,
G1 -
Best way to fix duplicate content issues
Another question for the Moz Community. One of my clients has 4.5k duplicate content issues. For example: http://www.example.co.uk/blog and http://www.example.co.uk/index.php?route=blog/blog/listblog&year=2017. Most of the issues are coming from product pages. My initial thoughts are to set up 301 redirects in the first instance and if the issue persists, add canonical tags. Is this the best way of tackling this issue?
Technical SEO | | Laura-EMC0 -
Are W3C Validators too strict? Do errors create SEO problems?
I ran a HTML markup validation tool (http://validator.w3.org) on a website. There were 140+ errors and 40+ warnings. IT says "W3C Validators are overly strict and would deny many modern constructs that browsers and search engines understand." What a browser can understand and display to visitors is one thing, but what search engines can read has everything to do with the code. I ask this: If the search engine crawler is reading thru the code and comes upon an error like this: …ext/javascript" src="javaScript/mainNavMenuTime-ios.js"> </script>');}
Technical SEO | | INCart
The element named above was found in a context where it is not allowed. This could mean that you have incorrectly nested elements -- such as a "style" element
in the "body" section instead of inside "head" -- or two elements that overlap (which is not allowed).
One common cause for this error is the use of XHTML syntax in HTML documents. Due to HTML's rules of implicitly closed elements, this error can create
cascading effects. For instance, using XHTML's "self-closing" tags for "meta" and "link" in the "head" section of a HTML document may cause the parser to infer
the end of the "head" section and the beginning of the "body" section (where "link" and "meta" are not allowed; hence the reported error). and this... <code class="input">…t("?");document.write('>');}</code> ✉ The element named above was found in a context where it is not allowed. This could mean that you have incorrectly nested elements -- such as a "style" element in the "body" section instead of inside "head" -- or two elements that overlap (which is not allowed). One common cause for this error is the use of XHTML syntax in HTML documents. Due to HTML's rules of implicitly closed elements, this error can create cascading effects. For instance, using XHTML's "self-closing" tags for "meta" and "link" in the "head" section of a HTML document may cause the parser to infer the end of the "head" section and the beginning of the "body" section (where "link" and "meta" are not allowed; hence the reported error). Does this mean that the crawlers don't know where the code ends and the body text begins; what it should be focusing on and not?0 -
Massive Increase in 404 Errors in GWT
Last June, we transitioned our site to the Magento platform. When we did so, we naturally got an increase in 404 errors for URLs that were not redirected (for a variety of reasons: we hadn't carried the product for years, Google no longer got the same string when it did a "search" on the site, etc.). We knew these would be there and were completely fine with them. We also got many 404s due to the way Magento had implemented their site map (putting in products that were not visible to customers, including all the different file paths to get to a product even though we use a flat structure, etc.). These were frustrating but we did custom work on the site map and let Google resolve those many, many 440s on its own. Sure enough, a few months went by and GWT started to clear out the 404s. All the poor, nonexistent links from the site map and missing links from the old site - they started disappearing from the crawl notices and we slowly went from some 20k 404s to 4k 404s. Still a lot, but we were getting there. Then, in the last 2 weeks, all of those links started showing up again in GWT and reporting as 404s. Now we have 38k 404s (way more than ever reported). I confirmed that these bad links are not showing up in our site map or anything and I'm really not sure how Google found these again. I know, in general, these 404s don't hurt our site. But it just seems so odd. Is there any chance Google bots just randomly crawled a big ol' list of outdated links it hadn't tried for awhile? And does anyone have any advice for clearing them out?
Technical SEO | | Marketing.SCG0 -
Easy Fix for 404 Errors foe Newbie
Hey there, I have two errors at these links that to my knowledge do not exist on my domain according to the MOZ. http://educateathletes.com/post/23804085842/educateathletes-ushl-gm-head-coach-jim http://educateathletes.com/products I'm really not sure what to do. The first is an old Tumblr blog post. The second is a page that was created on my site but the URL title was changed to http://educateathletes.com/enroll Any advice is appreciated to eliminate this. Sean
Technical SEO | | EDUCATEAthletes0 -
Having a massive amount of duplicate crawl errors
Im having over 400 crawl errors over duplicate content looking like this: http://www.mydomain.com/index.php?task=login&prevpage=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mydomain.com%2Ftag%2Fmahjon http://www.mydomain.com/index.php?task=login&prevpage=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mydomain.com%2Findex.php%3F etc.. etc... So there seems to be something with my login script that is not working, Anyone knows how to fix this? Thanks
Technical SEO | | stanken0 -
Javascript or HTML / DIVS to fix pagination issues?
Which is better to fix a pagination problem, javascript or HTML/DIVs? I know in one Google Webmaster Forum, a Google engineer recommends Javascript, but I've also seen people use DIVs.
Technical SEO | | nicole.healthline0 -
Has google panelized us ? If so, why ? How do I know if our website is panelized ?
We were ranked on first page among top 5 position a year ago for most of our pages. On one fine day, google decided to drop us from the results although google keeps indexing our pages. Google index our pages regularly but doesn't show them in its results. All google traffic we receive is for our own site name and its variations. I wanted to know - how do we know if google has panelized us. Why has google panelized us ? If they have panelized us, what can we do to get out of it ? Also I wanted to know if any tool will help me identify such thing. We have not done any link building. Our site page rank is 4 (it was 5 few months ago). All we did was on page optimization. Thanks for your help!
Technical SEO | | seoidea0