Google's 'related:' operator
-
I have a quick question about Google's 'related:' operator when viewing search results. Is there reason why a website doesn't produce related/similar sites?
For example, if I use the related: operator for my site, no results appear.
https://www.google.com/#q=related:www.handiramp.comThe site has been around since 1998. The site also has two good relevant DMOZ inbound links. Any suggestions on why this is and any way to fix it?
Thank you.
-
Anything ever come of this, folks? Just noticed this about our website (https://www.google.com/#&q=related:epicwebstudios.com), but also noticed MOZ now has related sites appearing. So does Thom's Handiramp site. Still probably not a huge deal but I going nuts trying to understand where the "related" is being generated and how we can help improve the graph by improving our website. FWIW, all of the aforementioned tips have been applied to our site, epicwebstudios.com.
-- David -
With "related:" - you could say all the same things with Moz.com, and we also don't have the related results, but I doubt it's hurting our search rankings at all.
Regarding Dmoz - there's no particular way to get Google to recognize Dmoz listings and include them. They seem to do so sometimes and not others. You can actively prevent them using that listing with the noodp tag, but there's no way to do the reverse and get them to pay attention. One thing you might try is making sure they've actually crawled & indexed the page on Dmoz with your listing recently. If they haven't (you can look at the cache date in Google's results), you might try linking to it, using "Fetch as Googlebot," etc.
-
Hi Rand/Matt, I understand your answer but I really think there is something more there. We have developed tremendous content, our site has been up since 1998. We have good PA and DA and no sense of any type of penguin type penalty. We have in the past dominated the SERPs often at the top slots. Then as Google added "brand" consideration to the mix we've been placed more middle of the first page (some have mentioned that this might be related to a panda hit but I don't think so when I look at the quality of our site versus the quality of the sites beating us). All of our competitors have "related" classifications and those related tags are page, not site related. Interestingly, our URLs will show up from time to time on the competitors related listings. I'm not sure how long this has been going on but I'm thinking that there is some sort of manual tag (I don't think this is a penalty of any sort) that Google has attached to our domain. I truly believe that the lack of a related tag some how is reducing our SERP ranking. I'd love to find an answer to this mystery.
On a related but separate note I've noticed that some of our competitors have another type of notation that shows up right next to the related/cache arrow that references DMOZ of Wikipedia listings. While we don't have a Wikipedia listing we do have a DMOZ listing, but that is not shown by Google either. Do you have any idea how to get Google to recognize our DMOZ posting? (I realize that DMOZ in it self is really pretty useless but if Google is recognizing it as important enough to list with the URL listings for some of our competitors there must be some value there.)
Any help or insight that you can provide would be much appreciated.
-
Hi Thom - unfortunately, I don't have much to give you, but I can say that this isn't necessarily a problem. Tons of sites that do really well in search results, have popular brands, and are legitimate don't have "Related:" results. Moz itself is one, but we've seen others. There may be elements about Google having issues understanding your content or not seeing many powerful links from sources to your site that also link to other places, but we don't know for sure.
Long story short - if you're not seeing other issues with your site in Google, I wouldn't worry about it.
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
-
ECommerce Replatforming URL's
We are in the process of re-platforming our eCommerce site to Magento 2. For the most part, the majority of site content will remain the same. Unfortunately on our current platform, we have been inconsistent with the use of .html as a URL suffix. As a result, our category and product pages are half and half - /stainless-steel-hardware.html
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BoatOutfitters
&
/stainless-steel-hardware We are considering taking the opportunity to clean up and standardize our URLs. (Drop the .html from all URLs on the new site and 301 redirect these to the same URL without the .html) Our concern is that many of the .html pages are good categories with strong page rank and I've read many articles about page rank loss from 301 redirects. We are debating internally if it really makes sense to take an SEO hit for something is seemingly small as dropping the .html from the URL. It would be a no-brainer if we were taking the opportunity to change to more SEO friendly natural language URLs. However currently our URL's appear acceptable with the exception of the inconsistent suffix. Thanks in advance for any insight on how you would approach this!2 -
Ranking 1st for a keyword - but when 's' is added to the end we are ranking on the second page
Hi everyone - hope you are well. I can't get my head around why we are ranking 1st for a specific keyword, but then when 's' is added to the end of the keyword - we are ranking on the second page. What could be the cause of this? I thought that Google would class both of the keywords the same, in this case, let's say the keyword was 'button'. We would be ranking 1st for 'button', but 'buttons' we are ranking on the second page. Any ideas? - I appreciate every comment.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Brett-S0 -
How to switch from URL based navigation to Ajax, 1000's of URLs gone
Hi everyone, We have thousands of urls generated by numerous products filters on our ecommerce site, eg./category1/category11/brand/color-red/size-xl+xxl/price-cheap/in-stock/. We are thinking of moving these filters to ajax in order to offer a better user experience and get rid of these useless urls. In your opinion, what is the best way to deal with this huge move ? leave the existing URLs respond as before : as they will disappear from our sitemap (they won't be linked anymore), I imagine robots will someday consider them as obsolete ? redirect permanent (301) to the closest existing url mark them as gone (4xx) I'd vote for option 2. Bots will suddenly see thousands of 301, but this is reflecting what is really happening, right ? Do you think this could result in some penalty ? Thank you very much for your help. Jeremy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JeremyICC0 -
Site Structure: How do I deal with a great user experience that's not the best for Google's spiders?
We have ~3,000 photos that have all been tagged. We have a wonderful AJAXy interface for users where they can toggle all of these tags to find the exact set of photos they're looking for very quickly. We've also optimized a site structure for Google's benefit that gives each category a page. Each category page links to applicable album pages. Each album page links to individual photo pages. All pages have a good chunk of unique text. Now, for Google, the domain.com/photos index page should be a directory of sorts that links to each category page. Alternatively, the user would probably prefer the AJAXy interface. What is the best way to execute this?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | tatermarketing0 -
Is there any negative SEO effect of having comma's in URL's?
Hello, I have a client who has a large ecommerce website. Some category names have been created with comma's in - which has meant that their software has automatically generated URL's with comma's in for every page that comes beneath the category in the site hierarchy. eg. 1 : http://shop.deliaonline.com/store/music,-dvd-and-games/dvds-and-blu_rays/ eg. 2 : http://shop.deliaonline.com/store/music,-dvd-and-games/dvds-and-blu_rays/action-and-adventure/ etc... I know that URL's with comma's in look a bit ugly! But is there 'any' SEO reason why URL's with comma's in are any less effective? Kind Regs, RB
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RichBestSEO0 -
How to Handel Fashion Jewelry Stores's Listings?
Hi ! I m working with few brands who hardly make same designs again... which is good things for my buyers.. Buy i m worrying how i can handle this keeping seo in mind? should i delete pages after product is sold out? or there is some other better way to handle this? Thanks, Vinku
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vinku0 -
Should I 301 Poorly Worded URL's which are indexed and driving traffic
Hi, I'm working on our sites structure and SEO at present and wondering when the benefit I may get from a well written URL, i.e ourDomain / keyword or keyphrase .html would be preferable to the downturn in traffic i may witness by 301 redirecting an existing, not as well structured, but indexed URL. We have a number of odd looking URL's i.e ourDomain / ourDomain_keyword_92.html alongside some others that will have a keyword followed by 20 underscores in a long line... My concern is although i would like to have a keyword or key phrase sitting on its own in a well targeted URL string I don't want to mess to much with pages that are driving say 2% or 3% of our traffic just because my OCD has kicked in.... Some further advice on strategies i could utilise would be great. My current thinking is that if a page is performing well then i should leave the URL alone. Then if I'm not 100% happy with the keyword or phrase it is targeting I could build another page to handle the new keyword / phrase with the aim of that moving up the rankings and eventually taking over from where the other page left off. Any advice is much appreciated, Guy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | guycampbell0 -
Most Painless way of getting Duff Pages out of SE's Index
Hi, I've had a few issues that have been caused by our developers on our website. Basically we have a pretty complex method of automatically generating URL's and web pages on our website, and they have stuffed up the URL's at some point and managed to get 10's of thousands of duff URL's and pages indexed by the search engines. I've now got to get these pages out of the SE's indexes as painlessly as possible as I think they are causing a Panda penalty. All these URL's have an addition directory level in them called "home" which should not be there, so I have: www.mysite.com/home/page123 instead of the correct URL www.mysite.com/page123 All these are totally duff URL's with no links going to them, so I'm gaining nothing by 301 redirects, so I was wondering if there was a more painless less risky way of getting them all out the indexes (IE after the stuff up by our developers in the first place I'm wary of letting them loose on 301 redirects incase they cause another issue!) Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | James770