Strange cache - what could be the reason
-
The cache of one of our site is being displayed in a strange way in Google. The site in question is - http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/ The cache is shown like this -
Title is shown first
description
Followed by URL
What could be the reason for this.
Normally, cache is shown in a box like this ..... in a rectangular box
This is Google's cache of .... . It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on...
-
Thanks. Understood.
-
I was thinking that Google first caches a site, and then includes the site in it's index.
The mechanics of how Google actually works is not public information. We have to make decisions based upon the glimpses of information that is shared along with our experiences and testing results.
With the above understood, Google defines the noarchive tag as "noarchive: prevents Google from showing the Cached link for a page". So technically they could still make the cached page available by other means but not offer the link.
My experience is Google clearly has all the data from your site. If they crawl your site and index it, they capture all the information. They are choosing to not make any cached copies of the site available due to the noarchive tag. Your experience in this instance clearly indicates Google not only does not present the "cached" link in SERPs but blocks users from seeing the cache through other means as well.
In short, I agree with you. I believe your page is cached but Google is preventing the cache from being viewed.
-
Thanks Ryan for your time and patience.
Don't you think the issue here is that the page is indeed cached, but NOT showing the cached link due to the tag mentioned by me. How can a page be in Google's index, but not cached.
I was thinking that Google first caches a site, and then includes the site in it's index.
-
Yes to both questions.
I mean the page is in Google's index and not cached.
The noarchive meta tag is designed specifically to prevent search engines from caching a web page.
-
You mean that page is in Google's index, but NOT cached.
I just came across this tag
is the issue has something to do with this tag ?
I replied late because i am in a different time zone.
-
When I enter the search query you offered, cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/, I see a single normal search result. There is nothing wrong with the result except you are wanting to see the cached page, not the search result. The issue is, the cached page does not exist. Google SERPs shows no cache. The system cannot provide what it does not possess.
It appears Google is thinking, well we don't have the cache that is being requested, so we'll offer the next best thing, the search result to the live page which the user can click on. It makes perfect sense to me.
You are comparing the result for your page with other pages and asking about the differences. In the example you offered, www.bidvolt.com/drywall-contractors.php is a cached page. It has an SEO issue in that both the www and non-www URLs work.
When I look at the non-www cache it comes up with a standard "your search did not match any documents" message. This url, as entered, lacks any result matches in Google. If you enter the same URL adding in the www subdomain, you will see the cached page.
The result is different because in this example the page is not in Google's index, where your page is in the index. From what I am seeing the results are logical, sensible and normal.
-
So how exactly are you viewing the "cache"?
I am viewing the cache using Google toolbar. Please enter the below line in Google and you will understand what i am trying to say
cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/
and view the result. If it's not cached as you are saying, then why is it being shown like this. If a page is not cached, it does not show like this.
If a page is not cached, it should show like this -
-
Perhaps we can find some common ground upon which to agree.
http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/ is not currently cached in Google. The screenshot I shared shows the page is not cached.
The natural way to view cache is to click the "Cached" link in a search result page. You are not clicking that link. So how exactly are you viewing the "cache"?
I am taking a guess that you are attempting to access the cache directly through another means, and therefore you are not seeing the desired result.
The reply offered earlier where you said "I have added the image of the cache" does not have any image attached. Perhaps if you could share a complete image it would clarify things.
-
If you open the page http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/, and view it's cache, you will understand what i am trying to say. It shows
cache:http://www.ugwebmart.com/en/
Web Development India - UG Webmart6 Jul 2011 – UG Webmart specializes in custom web development, open source solutions and Organic SEO services.
www.ugwebmart.com/en/What i mean by normal cache ( cache which is normally shown ) is what is being shown when you view of http://www.ugwebmart.com/ ( home page )
The difference in the cache of two pages is what i would like to know
If there is no cache, it should have been shown blank
-
You are searching the cache for www.ugwebmart.com/en/. The problem is, there is no cache for the page, which is why your results are appearing that way.
Notice the second result does not have the word "cache" next to it.
-
I have added the image of the cache.
-
Atul, I took a look at the cache for the URL you offered and it appears normal to me. Can you offer a search term or the exact page that is showing the issue? As Steven suggested, a screenshot would be most helpful.
-
Do you have a screen capture of the cache result that you see it as appears as normal for me an its a little difficult to determine what you're describing
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
-
Are bad links the reason for not ranking?
Hello Moz community. I'm looking here for some input from the experts on what could be wrong with a site I'm working on. The site is in Spanish, but I'm sure you'll get the idea. We want to rank the site first page on Google Mexico (www.google.com.mx) for the keyword "refacciones Audi" and some other brands (refacciones = replacement parts would probably be a good translation, just FYI). Now, our page hasn't been completely optimized, so in my mind it's OK not to be on first page yet. However, our main competitor is ranking first page for all the keywords we want to rank for, but when you check their site, you'll find there is hardly any content, no keywords are being used in their content, all pages have the exact same title and meta description, their catalog is in a completely different domain. In short, no SEO whatsoever. Looking at Moz data, our site has a DA of 26, while our competitor's has a 10. They have no external backlinks at all, while we have a few hundred. This leaves me scratching my head: how can a completely non-optimized site outrank us? I decided to check our backlink profile, and a previous SEO agency seems to have built MANY fake blogs with lots of backlinks with rich anchor text. Quite a big percentage of our backlinks are of this kind, so this is the only thing I can think can be affecting our ranking. Will disavowing be our solution? If you'd like to check, our site is: www.refaccionariaalemana.com.mx Our competitors' is: www.saferefacciones.com ANY help will be extremely appreciated as I feel a bit lost. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | EduardoRuiz1 -
Https Cached Site
Hi there, I recently switch my site to a new ecommerce platform which hosts the SSL certificate on their end so my site no longer has the HTTPS status unless a user is going through the checkout. Google has cached the HTTPS version of the site so in search it comes up sometimes which leads to a nasty warning that the site may not be what they are looking for. Is there a way to tell google NOT to look at the https version of the site anymore? Thanks! Bianca
Technical SEO | | TheBatesMillStore0 -
Cache Not Working on Our Site
We redesigned our site (www.motivators.com) back in April. Ever since then, we can't view the cache. It loads as a blank, white page but the cache text is at the top saying: "This is Google's cache of http://www.motivators.com/. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Jul 22, 2013 15:50:40 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more. Tip: To quickly find your search term on this page, press Ctrl+F or ⌘-F (Mac) and use the find bar." Has anyone else ever seen this happen? Any ideas as to why it's happening? Could it be hurting us? Advice, tips, suggestions would be very much appreciated!
Technical SEO | | Motivators0 -
Page not cached
Hi there, we uploaded a page but unfortunately didn't realise it had noindex,nofollow in the meta tags. Google had cached it then decached it (i guess thats possible) it seems? now it will not cache even though the correct meta tags have been put in and we have sent links to it internally and externally. Anyone know why this page isn't being cached, the internal link to it is on the homepage and that gets cached almost every day. I even submitted it to webmaster tools to index.
Technical SEO | | pauledwards0 -
Web page is showing up on Google but doesn't show when it was cached, so is it indexed?
Hey everyone So I created a new page on a WordPress website, it was live for a few hours till I changed my mind & switched it back to a draft. Just out of curiosity I did the Site:www.example.com/Example search on Google to see if it had been indexed & apparently it had but when I click on cached to see what time it got indexed at exactly it's showing me an error. So does this mean it is indexed or not?
Technical SEO | | conversiontactics0 -
Google Cache Version and Text Only Version are different
Across various websites we found Google cache version in the browser loads the full site and all content is visible. However when we try to view TEXT only version of the same page we can't see any content. Example: we have a client with JS scroller menu on the home page. Each scroller serves a separate content section on the same URL. When we copy paste some of the page content in Google, we can see that copy indexed in Google search results as well as showing in Cache version . But as soon as we go into Text Only version we cant see the same copy. We would like to know which version we should trust, Google cache version or the TEXT only version.
Technical SEO | | JamesDixon700 -
Is there a reason to set a crawl-delay in the robots.txt?
I've recently encountered a site that has set a crawl-delay command set in their robots.txt file. I've never seen a need for this to be set since you can set that in Google Webmaster Tools for Googlebot. They have this command set for all crawlers, which seems odd to me. What are some reasons that someone would want to set it like that? I can't find any good information on it when researching.
Technical SEO | | MichaelWeisbaum0 -
Advice on strange URL problem
I'm considering doing some pro bono work for a local non-profit and upon initial review they have a number of serious issues but there is one in particular I'd like to check my thinking on. The developer who set up the site some years ago implemented a javascript redirect on their root domain so that it redirects to: http://domain.com/wordpress This is wrong for all kinds of reasons and I want to recommend eliminating this redirect and getting rid of the 'wordpress' part of the path altogether. However, the site is quite established with good PR and they would take a hit by changing the path. I'd do 301 redirects to the new URLs that would not have 'wordpress' in the path in addition to other remediation. My question - is my thinking here good? It's worth it, right? The other option is just get rid of the weird redirect and keep 'wordpress' in the path but this seems unacceptable to me. Any opinions?
Technical SEO | | friendlymachine0