I just found something weird I can't explain, so maybe you guys can help me out.
-
I just found something weird I can't explain, so maybe you guys can help me out.
In Google http://www.google.nl/#hl=nl&q=internet. The number 3 result is a big telecom provider in the Netherland called Ziggo. The ranking URL is https://www.ziggo.nl/producten/internet/. However if you click on it you'll be directed to https://www.ziggo.nl/#producten/internet/
HttpFox in FF however is not showing any redirects. Just a 200 status code.
The URL https://www.ziggo.nl/#producten/internet/ contains a hash, so the canonical URL should be https://www.ziggo.nl/. I can understand that. But why is Google showing the title and description of https://www.ziggo.nl/producten/internet/, when the canonical URL clearly is https://www.ziggo.nl/?
Can anyone confirm my guess that Google is using the bulk SEO value (link juice/authority) of the homepage at https://www.ziggo.nl/ because of the hash, but it's using the relevant content of https://www.ziggo.nl/producten/internet/ resulting in a top position for the keyword "internet".
-
The site you've pointed to uses ajax to load its content. When the page loads there's a javascript snippet which takes over and adds the # to the page (hence why you're not seeing it as a httpd header). If you click on any other link you'll see that the base URL stays the same with some extra parameters on the end.
There are potential crawling issues with this and a number of fixes (some Google documentation here, although this isn't the fix that the site in question is using: http://code.google.com/intl/en-US/web/ajaxcrawling/).
So, in short, there's nothing fishy going on - it's just good old ajax content loading
- Matt
-
This is actually a fairly crude attempt of loading AJAX content. I say 'crude' because it's not quite using Google's documented AJAX protocol using the hashbang (#!). There was an SEOmoz post about Google's protocol a while back that had some good examples:
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/how-to-allow-google-to-crawl-ajax-content
For this specific website, there actually is a JavaScript redirect involved. The original URL will load, then some JS will do some work and eventually do a document.location.replace() to do the redirect to the URL with the hash. As far as GoogleBot is concerned it won't necessarily do the redirect and will index the original page.
One thing I want to caution is to again remember that this site is not exactly adhering to Google's recommendations on AJAX content. Coupled with the fact that there is a JS redirect going on I would say that there might be a risk of cloaking. On the front end, the content looks the same and I would kinda hope that Google would just treat this scenario similar to their hashbang solution because this site is not intending to do some tricky stuff here. But we can't trust that Google will always give a free pass.
-
This looks more like a dynamic site using AJAX, rather than anchors in the page like you're thinking.
See: http://code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/docs/getting-started.html
No funny stuff. The page you see is the page google intended to show you, with all the SEO value for the page itself being responsible for its spot in the SERPs.
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
-
Can anyone tell me - in layman's terms - any SEO implications of a Netscaler redirect?
We are in the midst of exploring the best options for developing a "microsite" experience for a client and how we manage the site - subdomain vs. subdirectory... Netscaler redirect vs DNS change. We understand that a subdirectory is best for SEO purposes; however, we anticipate technical limitations when integrating the different hosting platforms and capabilities into the existing site. The proposed solutions that were provided are a netscaler redirect and/or dns changes. Any experience with these solutions?
Technical SEO | | jgrammer0 -
Help! How to Remove Error Code 901: DNS Errors (But to a URL that doesn't exist!)
I have 2 urgent errors saying there are 2 x error code 909's detected. These don't link to any page - but I can tell there is a mistake somewhere - I just don't know what needs changing. http://www.justkeyrings.co.ukhttp/www.justkeyrings.co.uk/printed-promotional-keyrings http://www.justkeyrings.co.ukhttp/www.justkeyrings.co.uk/blank-unassembled-keyrings Could someone help please? screen-shot-2015-08-11-at-13.18.17.png?t=1439292942
Technical SEO | | FullSteamBusiness0 -
I need help compiling solid documentation and data (if possible) that having tons of orphaned pages is bad for SEO - Can you help?
I spent an hour this afternoon trying to convince my CEO that having thousands of orphaned pages is bad for SEO. His argument was "If they aren't indexed, then I don't see how it can be a problem." Despite my best efforts to convince him that thousands of them ARE indexed, he simply said "Unless you can prove it's bad and prove what benefit the site would get out of cleaning them up, I don't see it as a priority." So, I am turning to all you brilliant folks here in Q & A and asking for help...and some words of encouragement would be nice today too 🙂 Dana
Technical SEO | | danatanseo0 -
OSE says URL redirects to URL with trailing slash but it doesn't.
Site is www.example.com/folder/us and OSE says this URL redirects to www.example.com/folder/us/, but it does not. When I look at the OSE report for the latter version with the "/" it says "No Data Available For This URL". Why would that be? The original URL is www.example.com and it redirects to www.example.com/folder/us. Is this anything I need to worry about? I thought that the trailing / doesn't really mean much anymore but nonetheless, why does it think it redirects there?
Technical SEO | | rock220 -
'No Follow' and 'Do Follow' links when using WordPress plugins
Hi all I hope someone can help me out with the following question in regards to 'no follow' and 'do follow' links in combination with WordPress plugins. Some plugins that deal with links i.e. link masking or SEO plugins do give you the option to 'not follow' links. Can someone speak from experience that this does actually work?? It's really quite stupid, but only occurred to me that when using the FireFox add on 'NoDoFollow' as well as looking at the SEOmoz link profile of course, 95% of my links are actually marked as FOLLOW, while the opposite should be the case. For example I mark about 90% of outgoing links as no follow within a link masking plugin. Well, why would WordPress plugins give you the option to mark links as no follow in the first place when they do in fact appear as follow for search engines and SEOmoz? Is this a WordPress thing or whatnot? Maybe they are in fact no follow, and the information supplied by SEO tools comes from the basic HTML structure analysis. I don't know... This really got me worried. Hope someone can shed a light. All the best and many thanks for your answers!
Technical SEO | | Hermski0 -
Does Having Links on this blog Hurt or Help?
Hello, I created a wordpress blog a while back, http://plastic-bins.com/ If you go into one of the pages on the blog (for example: http://plastic-bins.com/plastic-shelf-bins/ ) you will notice a link after the text/content telling you where you can purchase the stuff that is talked about on that page. There is one link back to the e-commerce site on every category page on the blog. Does anyone know if these links will help me or hurt me in terms of ranking in the SERPS? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Prime850 -
What if my host doesn't have the 301 redirect feature?
Ok, So i need to do a 301 redirect but my host doesn't have the feature with htaccess. I currently use yahoo. What are my options?
Technical SEO | | bronxpad0 -
Ignore url parameters without the 'parameter=' ?
We are working on an ecommerce site that sorts out the products by color and size but doesn't use the sortby= but uses sortby/. Can we tell Google to ignore the sortby/ parameter in Webmaster Tools even though it is not followed by an = sign? For example: www.mysite.com/shirts/tshirts/shopby/size-m www.mysite.com/shirts/tshirts/shopby/color-black Can we tell WMT to ignore the 'shopby/' parameter so that only the tshirts page will be indexed? Or does the shopby have to be set up as 'shopby=' ? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | Hakkasan0