Anyone else see a redundant hostnames message in GA this morning?
-
Message reads as follows:
Property sqlsentry.com is receiving data from redundant hostnames. Consider setting up a 301 redirect on your website, or make a search and replace filter that strips "www." from hostnames. Examples of redundant hostnames: sqlsentry.com, www.sqlsentry.com.
We have had our preferred domain set to www for months and I've never seen this error before today. A quick search shows others getting this as well. I did notice our 301 is no longer working so I am going to set that back and see what happens.
-
Thanks. We made sure a 301 redirect is in place but the error is still there. It's been days now. I'm not sure what else to do.
-
Saw this recently on a site with a WordPress installation added in a subdirectory. The root domain was set up with the www but /blog was not...
-
I actually just work for this company and have shifted from a support role into an SEO role. I agree about less hands in the cookie jar but as you said, it doesn't always work that way
-
Eww that's scary!
Is this your site or a clients site that you are working on? If an outside developer or team of devs are working on a project that you own or one that is for a client of yours, I would request that you are consulted prior to any changes like that.
Less hands in the cookie jar the better as you know. However, I know that isn't always the scenario but if a cookie gets a bite taken from it, I'd like to know who did it and when they did it at the very least.
I hope fixing the 301 clears up the issue you are having in GA!
-
Unfortunately I have no way of knowing what the developers do so they could have modified it. I've asked that it be righted. Thanks!
-
Interesting... I'm not getting this message on any properties in our account. But thank you I will keep an eye out in case something pops up on us!
I wonder why your 301 would no longer be working though...
Is there anything you can remember that was done that could have caused that? Was your htaccess file modified without your knowledge?
Kind of troubling I'd say. Set that back and see if that message clears up for you!
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
-
Seeing some really bad sites that ranked in my niche years ago reaching 1st page
It started after the update about 4 websites form the 1st page dropped to the 2nd and 4 of the other sites just popped back to the 1st page and the bad part is that the Da and inbound links of these sites are really bad, so my question is must we just wait this out till Google realises how bad these site are and some of them haven't been updated in years links broken i can go on and on. what these sites have is just the age of the domains, but can this really be the main focus of these results?
Algorithm Updates | | johan80 -
Does anyone know what causes the long meta description snippet?
You know the ones I mean... Google have been infrequently displaying some meta descriptions as 3-4 lines long for some time now. But recently, I've been noticing them more. Not sure whether it's just a coincidence that I've been seeing more for my searches, or whether Google are displaying more in this format. Does anybody know what causes Google to prefer the longer meta description or extended meta description for some results?
Algorithm Updates | | Ria_0 -
Anyone Notice Google's Latest Change Seems to Favor Google Books?
I've noticed a change in the search results lately. As I search around I notice a lot of results from books.google.com Seems a little (ok a lot) self serving... JMHO
Algorithm Updates | | get4it0 -
SEO Audit after Penguin 2.1 what are you guys seeing? this is my thougts
We have looked at around 2000 sites since Penguin 2.1 launched a few weeks back. These include our customers and their own competitors site. We are going through all the data which is obviously going to take some time. Hopefully we will publish a report on our findings as we are happy to share. What I currently see in my early analysis is Roughly 70% of sites tested have 0% exact match Anchor Text for their money keywords. The other 30% have less than 5% exact match Anchor Text. The quality of the links is often still poor to the sites ranking on page 1. The content surrounding the links is only about 10-15% of the time related to the money keywords. The loading time of the sites ranking seems to not matter, we encountered a lot of slow sites. Design and usability of the site was not important. We are not seeing much impact via Social media, a lot of these sites are small business Less than 10% of sites on page 1 had a Google+ account More than 40% of page 1 sites had Facebook profiles. More than 80% of the sites ranking on page 1 had less than 100 links to the landing page that ranked What are your opinions of helping to recover if hit by the above??? Q) If you have too high an anchor text percentage and have been hit or may get hit in the future would you. a) create some more high quality links with more varied anchor text, ie Click here, brand name etc b) not create any more links just remove the links you have to dilute the anchor text c) change the anchor text on links you are able to These figures are a work in progress so data will change just wanting to share our early findings and try to get a good conversation going. What are you guys seeing?
Algorithm Updates | | tempowebdesign0 -
15% Drop in Traffic. Anyone have theories about the most recent update?
Analyzing our traffic, looks like we were hit site wide, with some article pages that don't have great engagement seeing more damage than others. We've been talking to other sites, and sites that have never seen any penalties and do everything right have also seen about 15-20% drop in traffic. The sites we know that weren't affected are brands (sites you would recognize by name). The only conclusion I can draw from everything (looking at mozcast metrics 'big 10' is that branded websites saw a boost. Does anyone else have any theories about what this most recent update was about?
Algorithm Updates | | nicole.healthline0 -
Best way of seeing how many links come from individual root domain domains.
Just wondering how best to see this - which tool to use. I'm dealing with a website with several thousand inbound links from around 100 root domains. Thanks in advance, Luke
Algorithm Updates | | McTaggart0 -
Has anyone starting using schema.org?
On the 3rd June 2011 Google announced that they are going to start using Schema. Do you think this will change the way search engines find content, from briefly looking at Schema I'm concerned that the proposed tags could just turn into another keyword meta tag and be abused. Have you started using this tags yet and have you noticed a difference?
Algorithm Updates | | Seaward-Group0 -
Anyone have stats on numbers of Google users searching while logged in?
In light of Google's recent "social search update", I am curious to know how many Google users perform searches while logged into their Google account thereby showing "social results".
Algorithm Updates | | Gyi0