Meta description tag problems according to an seo tool
-
hi, my site is www.in2town.co.uk
I am using an seo tool to check on my site and how to improve the seo. The tool is here. http://www.juxseo.com/report/view/51ebf9deab900
for some reason it has brought up errors, it claims i have not got a meta description even though i have and have doubled checked in my source code
the errors it has brought up is as follows, and i would like to know if this is a fault of the seo tool or am i doing something wrong
Does the description tag exist?0/1
<a id="sub_toggle_12" class="sub_toggle contract_sub"></a>Hide Info
Description Tag:
Explanation: The meta description tag does not help your rankings but it is your opportunity to encourage prospects to click. The meta description should describe the content of your web page, include a strong call to action, and include your keyword.
Action: Make sure you are using the meta description tag. It is found in the section of your page.
Is there only one description tag?0/2<a id="sub_toggle_13" class="sub_toggle expand_sub"></a>More InfoIs your description less than 156 characters?0/1<a id="sub_toggle_14" class="sub_toggle expand_sub"></a>More InfoIs your keyword in the description tag?0/3
<a id="sub_toggle_15" class="sub_toggle expand_sub"></a>More Info
it also says about the canocial tag which it claims i have more than one
Is the canonical tag optmized?
Is there only one canonical tag?0/4
<a id="sub_toggle_10" class="sub_toggle contract_sub"></a>Hide Info
Explanation: You only need one of these to direct a search engine. Don't muddy the waters.
Action: Make sure you only have one canonical tag. This only applies if you use the canonical tag.
any help and advice would be greatregards
-
just to let you know that i have now sorted the issues on the home page and we have jumped from page nine in google to pay six in the past 12 hours. so many thanks for your help it has done wonders.
can you let me know about the below as i have looked at we see it with the www.
On you health page it has the canonical URL of http://in2town.co.uk/health-magazine (I don't remember wether it was with or without www) - and this is the proper way to do it.
-
thanks for this. i am having it re done on the home page as there were two of them
hi it should be with the www.
i can see it as
<link href="[http://www.in2town.co.uk/health-magazine](view-source:http://www.in2town.co.uk/health-magazine)" rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" />
-
Yes, if you prefer the www prefix, that is what should should do.
If you put this in a dynamic header (like one in a theme) it will appear on every page, yes.
however, on your site it looks like it has been properly implemented already (at least last time I checked)
On you health page it has the canonical URL of http://in2town.co.uk/health-magazine (I don't remember wether it was with or without www) - and this is the proper way to do it.
-
so basically i should get rid of this one
<link href="[http://in2town.co.uk/](view-source:http://in2town.co.uk/)" rel="<a class="attribute-value">canonical</a>" /> and put the one i had in but if i put this in the head, this will mean it will be shown on every page unless i am wrong
-
Hi again,
Sure.A canonical link is used to tell the search engines, browsers, etc what your prefered link is.
For instance, lets say you have a website with a page containing a parameter: http://www.yoursite.com/page.html?parameter=this - but you only want google to crawl the content for both http://www.yoursite.com/page.html?parameter=this, http://www.yoursite.com/page.html?parameter=that and http://www.yoursite.com/page.html. The solution is to set the canonical url to http://www.yoursite.com/page.html - that sets the prefered url to the specified canonical url.So if you prefer to use http://www.in2town.co.uk instead of just http://in2town.co.uk the element you specified is the correct use for your home page. This should be done one every page as you have already done.
--
Jørgen Juel -
can i ask you if that canonical looks ok on line 14 as the one i told them to put on was on 63, and that included the site name as we had trouble with our site being known as in2town.co.uk and www.in2town.co.uk
the below is the one i instructed them to show
-
Great, thanks
-
thanks for this jorgen juel, i had the canonical put on today and a redirect and since then the meta description has vanished, i need to speak to the person who done it as when i clear my cache it appears again but when i move to another page and go back again it vanishes.
I will sort out the two canonical links now and see what happens. thank you for letting me know where they are. i will keep you updated
-
Hi @tim ellis,
I've had a look at your site and it looks like you don't have any meta description or keywords tags.
The code for your description and keywords tags are as follows
The other question you had, regarding canonical links; you have two links to canonical - one on line 14 and 63.
I hope this helps
--
Jørgen Juel
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
-
Pages being flagged in Search Console as having a "no-index" tag, do not have a meta robots tag??
Hi, I am running a technical audit on a site which is causing me a few issues. The site is small and awkwardly built using lots of JS, animations and dynamic URL extensions (bit of a nightmare). I can see that it has only 5 pages being indexed in Google despite having over 25 pages submitted to Google via the sitemap in Search Console. The beta Search Console is telling me that there are 23 Urls marked with a 'noindex' tag, however when i go to view the page source and check the code of these pages, there are no meta robots tags at all - I have also checked the robots.txt file. Also, both Screaming Frog and Deep Crawl tools are failing to pick up these urls so i am a bit of a loss about how to find out whats going on. Inevitably i believe the creative agency who built the site had no idea about general website best practice, and that the dynamic url extensions may have something to do with the no-indexing. Any advice on this would be really appreciated. Are there any other ways of no-indexing pages which the dev / creative team might have implemented by accident? - What am i missing here? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | NickG-1230 -
Do H2 tags carry more weight than h4 tags?
Of course H tags are key signals for relevance in search. Does an h2 tag send a significantly "louder" signal than an h4 tag?
Technical SEO | | aj6130 -
Carwling and indexing problems
hi, i have noticed since my site was upgraded that google is taking a long time to publish my articles. before the upgrade google would publish the article straight away, but now it takes an average of around 4 days. the article i am talking about at the moment is here http://www.in2town.co.uk/celebrities-in-the-news/stuart-hall-has-his-prison-sentence-for-sex-crimes-doubled-to-30-months now i have a blog here on blogger and the article was picked up within six mins http://showbizgossipandnews.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/stuart-hall-has-his-prison-sentence-for.html so i am just wondering what the problem is and what i need to solve this my problem is, my site is mostly a news site so it is no good to me if google is publishing new stories every four days, any help would be great.
Technical SEO | | ClaireH-1848860 -
SEO for Interspire Relic
Hi All, Does anyone know of optimization best practices for the now largely defunct Interspire Web Publisher? Specifically, I'm looking for a canonical plugin or workaround to try and get rid of a few duplicate content issues (most importantly root vs. index.php). I'd like to just redo the site with a cms that has better support...unfortunately client budget constraints are a little tight at the moment. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | G2W0 -
Webmaster Tools 404s
We try to keep our 404s in google webmaster tools to a minimum but in recent months, the volume has simply exploded to over 500k errors. 99.95% of this is complete spam linking to pages that never existed. Have tried marking as resolved but they just end up back in the list eventually and don't like the idea of 301ing so many links when the pages never existed in the first place. We can just ignore them all but this makes it hard to identify legitimate 404s that need redirecting as there is only so much data we can export out of WT. Has anyone had experience with returning 410s? Does google eventually drop these from WT?
Technical SEO | | jandunlop0 -
SEO problem if homepage is 2 folders deep?
We are currently looking at a site for a client, where instead of featuring standard file structure, every folder is being buried two folders deep by the CMS. So the homepage is: www.domain.com.au/folder/folder And a subpage is: www.domain.com.au/folder/folder/subpage Is this necessarily and SEO problem? Will it be positive for rankings to pull out the two redundant folders? Any insights are appreciated! Cheers
Technical SEO | | MarketingResults0 -
Backtracking from verification meta tag to the correct Google account is difficult
A Google verification meta tag was created and implemented on a site that I am now responsible for (I took over an SEO project after a long lapse), but no one seems to know what Google account was used to create the meta tag in the first place. I'm finding it very difficult to backtrack from verification meta tag to the Google account, and all the online help is for those having trouble moving forward with the verification. Any suggestions or advice?
Technical SEO | | MaryDoherty0 -
Google Off/On Tags
I came across this article about telling google not to crawl a portion of a webpage, but I never hear anyone in the SEO community talk about them. http://perishablepress.com/press/2009/08/23/tell-google-to-not-index-certain-parts-of-your-page/ Does anyone use these and find them to be effective? If not, how do you suggest noindexing/canonicalizing a portion of a page to avoid duplicate content that shows up on multiple pages?
Technical SEO | | Hakkasan1