SEOMoz says i have errors but goole webmaster doesnt show them - which one is right ?
-
I have about 350 websites all created in farcry 4.0 cms platform. When i do a site crawl using any seo tool ( seomoz, raven, screaming frog) it comes back telling me I have duplicate titles, description and content for a bunch of my pages. The pages are the same page its just that the crawl is showing the object Id and the friendly URL which is autocreated in the CMS as different pages.
EXAMPLE these are the samge page but are recognised as different in SEOMOZ crawl test and therefore flagged as having duplicate title tags and content ...
<colgroup span="1"><col style="width: 488pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 23771;" span="1" width="650"></colgroup>
|www.westendautos.com.au/go/latest-news-and-specials
<colgroup span="1"><col style="width: 488pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 23771;" span="1" width="650"></colgroup>
| www.westendautos.com.au/index.cfm?objectid=9CF82BBD-9B98-B545-33BC644C0FA74C8E ||
GOOGLE WEBMASTER however does not show me these errors ? It shows no errors at all.
Now i believe i can fix this by chucking in a rel=canonical at the top of each page ? (a big job over 350 sites) But even so - my problem is that the website developers are telling me that SEOMOZ and all the other tools are wrong - that google will see these the way it should, that the object ID's would not get indexed ( although i have seen at least one object id show up in the serps.)
Do i believe the developers and trust that google has it sorted or go through the process of hassling the developers to get a rel=canonical added to all the pages?
(the issue sees my homepage as about 4 different pages www.domain.com/ www.domain.com/home /index AND object id.
-
No i have the webmaster access and its not done there. 345 ??? wow is that coding stuff ?
-
I had a think about what your developers said about not erring in Google WMT, and I there is some truth in that as I assume they have exclude the parameters in WMT. But this is the poor mans way of fixing such things. You need to do this at the source for all search engines.
That was probably the most urgent problem the site had, but all up I found 345 violations all up.
If you want me to send you a detailed report email me mosley@thatsit.net.au if you want any help with IIS I can give you some help. -
I have 350 franchise type businesses. Independant but have the marketing etc done for them I inhertied them this way. I am adressing the www to non www canonical issue seperately to this 'friendly url + objectID" canoncal issue. Yes all 350 of them were pretty much duplicates and i am slowly working towards them all being fixed and individualised. I know I can fix it by putting in a rel=canonical but I am looking for some support so that when i go back to the developers they cant just fob me o with some excuse that i dont understand. I have a real hard time to get some of these pages to rank and i sincerely beleive that it is no in my content ( which is in my control ) but coding errors which are holding some of them back ( which is somewhat out of my control) i had to push just to be able to write a page title that wasnt automatically used as the paragraph heading on the page 0_o
Oh and i have addressed the domain canonical via webmaster, which obviously doesnt solve ii for bing - but thanks to the awesome tutorial on your site http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/tutorials/how-to-fix-canonical-domain-name-issue I know what i have to ask the developers for
now ! I do have access to the IIS but with onlylimited knowledge about the whole set up I am afraid of screwing something up - but that shows that with the right plugin it EASY to fix !! thank you so much !!
-
I did find out, his web sites are a chain of auto shops called Repco here in australia
-
I would also like to ask why you have 350 sites,
I was going to ask that too but didn't want to seem like a wise guy if the OP has 700 people workin' on 'em.
-
No CMS is perfect, but you can cetainly build a site free from any of these issues, i get a perfect score on every site i build using teh Bing SEO Toolkit, wich finds ever viollation that bing finds.
-
As one assuie to anouther, your deveopers are just not up to it.
I scaned your site, with software from bing that sees the exact same violations as bing.
and for a small site it has a lot of issues.
here is the same error SEOMoz foundThe page with URL "http://www.westendautos.com.au/index.cfm?objectid=9CF82BBD-9B98-B545-33BC644C0FA74C8E" can also be accessed by using URL "http://www.westendautos.com.au/go/latest-news-and-specials".
Search engines identify unique pages by using URLs. When a single page can be accessed by using any one of multiple URLs, a search engine assumes that there are multiple unique pages. Use a single URL to reference a page to prevent dilution of page relevance. You can prevent dilution by following a standard URL format.more on teh error http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/reports/violation/the-page-contains-multiple-canonical-formats
You problems go deeper still, you have domain name canonical issues, this is a big one and a obvious one your developers should of not let get by
if your site can be resched by www and non www without 301 redirecting the SE will see the sites as 2 seperate sites, and you rank will be split
I would also like to ask why you have 350 sites, are you saying they are duplicates of this one www.westendautos.com.au
-
No tool is 100% accurate in the SEO world.
If Google webmaster tool doesn't detect any error today that doesn't mean there is no error at all.
rel=canonical is a perfect solution and go for it.
-
I agree with you about Joomla, It is awful in my experience for creating duplicate content issues.
-
No big deal, these URLs can be generated if you are using a non SEO friendly CMS. This happens to me when I was using Joomla (Joomla is not bad but It didn’t worked out well for me!).
The simple solution to this is download the CSV from screaming frog and go to these pages and set rel=canonical to the page so that Google if crawling, knows what page contains the original data that crawlers should be looking for.
On the other hand it’s a good idea to look in to some good SEO friendly CMS.
-
...my problem is that the website developers are telling me that SEOMOZ and all the other tools are wrong...
Trust developers/designers for making things look good - if you like their style.... but when it comes to SEO you need to have your head examined if you are going to listen to your developer instead of trusting SEOmoz.
Here's something every professional SEO knows.... developers/designers generate a lot of business for SEOs (and lose a lot of money for webmasters) because they don't understand search engines, change all of your URLs, hide text because it stinks up their design, want to make your entire site in images, create navigation bars that spiders can't crawl, allow session id's to generate duplicate content and suck up all of your linkjuice.... I could go on and on here... You must be very careful and watch what they are doing - closely.
Do i believe the developers and trust that google has it sorted or go through the process of hassling the developers to get a rel=canonical added to all the pages?
lol.... I don't think that "hassling" is a very good word. I would either be kicking their asses or firing them and getting a different developer who understand who owns the website!!!
Sometimes you have to assert yourself when somebody is going to screw up one of your websites. If they were trashing one of my good sites I would exert my authority as owner of the site. If it is a choice between my site and their opinion... they lose swiftly.
Now i believe i can fix this by chucking in a rel=canonical at the top of each page ?
Great, you know what to do.
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
-
Inbound links not showing in reports
My clients site so far only has a few inbound links. If I do a report on MOZ/Open Site Explorer it only lists 10 domains linking in and, a number of important ones are not on that list. As an example, one of the leading UK national newspapers (Daily Telegraph) has a link on this page to the client www.vidavida.co.uk and yet this link/domain does not appear in the above reports. Is this an intentional nofollow type thing that the telegraph does and is there a way for me to check that on their site/page? http://fashion.telegraph.co.uk/news-features/TMG8655068/Holiday-travel-in-style.html Any comments most appreciated. Thanks,
Moz Pro | | MrFrisbee
C0 -
AM I the only one getting misleading titles in OSE?
I am trying to locate directories in my competitor's links using OSE. Here is the workflow I am using: Filter all results to external sites only, group by site, linking to any page on the domain. Export results to csv. My competitor is in the web design industry. So I try to filter the titles of the pages linking to the competitor to look for titles containing directory. But when I click on the link for "Windsor Internet Web Design Hosting Ontario Canada Directory" I get a page with the title "Kitchen & Bathroom Showroom | London Ontario | Bathroom Vanity Showroom" Are the results really this misleading?? or am I doing something wrong here? Any insight or help would be greatly appreciated.
Moz Pro | | tdlabs0 -
Are seomoz ranking in jeopardy?
A few weeks ago Raventools announced that they would no longer be able to provide tools based on the adwords API, then withdrew that. Rand commented on a thread here discussing that and made similar noises. Today Raventools made an announcement as SERP tracking with wording that sounded a lot like it had more than a little influence from Google. Would I be really paranoid to be wondering whether the Rankings tools in seomoz could be at risk?
Moz Pro | | matbennett1 -
Best way to improve your SEOMOZ avatar status ?
Whats the best way to improve your SEOMOZ avatar status and gain SEOMOZ brownie points? I notice some people have amazing status level such as Guru how is this possible? Surely That becomes a full time job in itself?
Moz Pro | | Bristolweb0 -
One page per campaign?
Not quite sure if I read correctly, but is it correct that one campaign tracks only one page of my site? So if I wanted to track something like a services page, this would require a second campaign?
Moz Pro | | GroundFloorSEO0 -
SEOMOZ Stats dont work out
Hi, When I check my mozstats for the homepage it says the PA is 50 but the DA is 30, how can that be? I would expect them to either be the same or at least the DA to be higher then the PA. Cheers
Moz Pro | | activitysuper0 -
Is SEOMoz better than Traffic Travis ?
I've been trying both programs for the free trial and I'm not sure which one is exactly better. they seem to me that both give a similar asepct of research, However SEOMOZ seems to be updating more frequntly. On the seconnd hand, traffic travis is way more cheaper only $97 one time fee as apposed to SEOMoz $100 per month Could someone convince me SEOMOZ is the better tool?
Moz Pro | | ilan_connnect1 -
SEOmoz Toolbar vs. Opensiteexplorer
Dumb question, why is the SEOmoz Toolbar reporting vastly different data than opensitexplorer? I had assumed they pulled from the same data set. False assumption? Am I misinterpreting the metrics? The discrepancies with which I am most confused are differences in number of root linking domains between OSE and Toolbar. Please enlighten me.
Moz Pro | | Gyi0