Google news rejection
-
Google News is always rejecting my application. I feel as if my site strongly fits the requirements yet they reject it all the time.
My url is hiddentriforce.com
Any thoughts?
-
They have every one of my competitors included who cover the same content we do. So that should not be an issue. I do have a news sitemap as well
-
Noah, they're really looking for more news news sites instead of sites that just offer news on a certain topic. I had a site that also was rejected many many times and we finally got them in a couple of months ago. When we started making really clear that we had the best news in a certain industry they approved us. You could try this but I doubt that you'll be successfull. Have you also created a news sitemap?
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
-
Google ranking content for phrases that don't exist on-page
I am experiencing an issue with negative keywords, but the “negative” keyword in question isn’t truly negative and is required within the content – the problem is that Google is ranking pages for inaccurate phrases that don’t exist on the page. To explain, this product page (as one of many examples) - https://www.scamblermusic.com/albums/royalty-free-rock-music/ - is optimised for “Royalty free rock music” and it gets a Moz grade of 100. “Royalty free” is the most accurate description of the music (I optimised for “royalty free” instead of “royalty-free” (including a hyphen) because of improved search volume), and there is just one reference to the term “copyrighted” towards the foot of the page – this term is relevant because I need to make the point that the music is licensed, not sold, and the licensee pays for the right to use the music but does not own it (as it remains copyrighted). It turns out however that I appear to need to treat “copyrighted” almost as a negative term because Google isn’t accurately ranking the content. Despite excellent optimisation for “Royalty free rock music” and only one single reference of “copyrighted” within the copy, I am seeing this page (and other album genres) wrongly rank for the following search terms: “free rock music”
On-Page Optimization | | JCN-SBWD
“Copyright free rock music"
“Uncopyrighted rock music”
“Non copyrighted rock music” I understand that pages might rank for “free rock music” because it is part of the “Royalty free rock music” optimisation, what I can’t get my head around is why the page (and similar product pages) are ranking for “Copyright free”, “Uncopyrighted music” and “Non copyrighted music”. “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted” don’t exist anywhere within the copy or source code – why would Google consider it helpful to rank a page for a search term that doesn’t exist as a complete phrase within the content? By the same logic the page should also wrongly rank for “Skylark rock music” or “Pretzel rock music” as the words “Skylark” and “Pretzel” also feature just once within the content and therefore should generate completely inaccurate results too. To me this demonstrates just how poor Google is when it comes to understanding relevant content and optimization - it's taking part of an optimized term and combining it with just one other single-use word and then inappropriately ranking the page for that completely made up phrase. It’s one thing to misinterpret one reference of the term “copyrighted” and something else entirely to rank a page for completely made up terms such as “Uncopyrighted” and “Non copyrighted”. It almost makes me think that I’ve got a better chance of accurately ranking content if I buy a goat, shove a cigar up its backside, and sacrifice it in the name of the great god Google! Any advice (about wrongly attributed negative keywords, not goat sacrifice ) would be most welcome.0 -
How do you find out all the keywords Google is ranking you for?
Hello, Is there anyway of finding out all the keywords that Google is currently ranking our website for so that we can then build on those keyword positions? Many thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | mblsolutions0 -
My site's articles seem to never show up in Google.
This is in regards to a previous post that was answered for me:
On-Page Optimization | | Ctrl-Alt-Success
http://moz.com/community/q/my-site-s-name-not-ranking-in-google I was talking to a friend and he suggested I try to type in an article in google with the exact name followed by my site's domain name without the .com For example, I have an article entitled: "MULTITASKING IS BAD FOR YOU, MKAY?" Obviously it's a title most would not word in that way. I typed it in and followed it up with my site's domain minus .com. So "MULTITASKING IS BAD FOR YOU, MKAY? ctrl-alt-success" But I'm not even getting listed in the search. There's got to be something I'm missing. I understand backlinks are important for ranking, but when I'm trying to find an exact match along with my site's url minus the .com? I just have this strong hunch that something is awry. NOTE: It seems this is only with google. If I use Bing or Yahoo, it comes up just fine.0 -
I've just manually edited all the page titles and meta descriptions on a site, when will this show in Google results?
I've just manually edited all of the page titles, meta descriptions and optimised the copy on a client's site. I submitted this for a new crawl on Google via Webmaster Tools but when I do a Google search the old versions are still showing. Will it still take a few weeks for the new versions to show even though Google has crawled it via Webmaster?
On-Page Optimization | | aoifep0 -
What are the best practices for google indexing ajax response urls?
We just did a build to our site and our server erros went up to over 9,500. After looking into it, it seems like google is crawling the ajax urls and coming back with the errors. Here is one example http://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/productDetail.do?navType=type&vehicleId=1423&webTypeId=68&navTitle=Drive&webCatId=9&prodFamilyId=29660 If you know of any good articles on this please send them my way.
On-Page Optimization | | DoRM0 -
Possible Reasons for 40% Drop in Google since January?
Hello: I know this is long - but I kept it as succinct as I could to explain the situation - but everyone of the brilliant people on here insight is so greatly appreciated in advance. There has been more than a 30% decline in traffic mostly from Google on a site with an 11 year presence on the web, 5 page rank (historically 6), fairly good quality backlinks (but they are old). I cannot pinpoint a smoking gun (such as a specific penalty) - if it's just not attrition in demand for the product itself which there is plenty of evidence for. But I practice only white hat, so I don't know what it is. I do not engage right now in link building because my time to work on SEO is very limited. We have a few common keywords that cannot be avoided (because there are no good synonyms) so there is a high density for one word especially all over the site. From some websites (like tidbits) we have in Google Webmaster account tens of thousands of backlinks. How serious is this (FYI - they're not new though) Because of some unflattering reviews from sites with strong authority, the number of click throughs vs. impression in Google Search has dropped dramatically - I think a big part of it is that because the reviews drove down CT ratio. Interestingly, the number of CTs from Adwords has also dropped off significantly, and I was told by Adwords specialist that declining organic traffic does affect the Adwords traffic to - in fact, they're not even using our daily budget for Adwords as they used to. The site also doesn't pick up quality organic backlinks as it used to, and the anchor link text is almost always the same - a product name. Plus, the site was banned in 2008 by Google (from a black hat keyword stuffing that I discovered happened in another dept.) and only after really working hard was it reinstated by reconsideration request. Site traffic from Google has never fully reached it's potential since then. Also, text prices were removed from Buy Now buttons even though the prices were textually part of the buttons for years (could this be some penalty?) **Is it possible that Google is taking the ban history, the poor reviews, the decline in CTs to impressions on the site, the huge decline (75% over four years) in "search volume" or "search interest" (according to Google Trends) for the site's main product name and just using all of this to keep downgrading the site? If true, wouldn't the page rank be diving down to anywhere from 0 to 2 (or is that not relevant at all?) ** There are no messages of a penalty or anything else in the official Webmaster account for this site. Any insight anyone is able to provide is much appreciated.
On-Page Optimization | | holdtheonion1 -
How to make FB comments crawlable by Google? <noscript>?</noscript>
We get tons of FB comments, but it's all in iframe, so Google doesn't give us any credit for it. We found a solution - turn all the comments into HTML and hide it from readers with <noscript>. </p> <p> </p> <p>Will this help? I heard that Google considers <noscript> a scammy practice. Is that true?</p> <p>How do you guys make your FB comments SEO friendly?</p> <p> </p></noscript>
On-Page Optimization | | Alexey_mindvalley0 -
Major update to site architecture (outline)-Is Google going to drop?
I'm working with a lawyer client who has a table-based, outdated site. Her nav links consist of a jumble of topics and static pages in one long sidebar list on the home page. I'm moving her site to Wordpress and I've recommended that she organize the site based on categories that roughly match the topics/keywords she wants to rank highest for in Google. The site will be much better organized and coded and the URLs for the new launch will be much stronger for SEO by being targeted and coded properly. So the site should rank better after, right? Right??? I know that when Google crawls the new architecture, it's not going to find the expected long sidebar list of internal nav links. It'll find better, more keyword targeted internal nav links. But will that keep the site from getting dropped off page 1? I'm speaking w/ the client tomorrow and if she's going to drop or get bounced around, I feel like I should prepare her and let her know roughly what might happen. I'm thinking based on my current understanding that I should tell her to expect to be bounced around for a few weeks, but in the end she should rank higher than before. What would you do/say?
On-Page Optimization | | bvrob0