Removal tool - no option to choose mobile vs desktop. Why?
-
Google's removal tool doesn't give a person the option to tell them which index - mobile friendly, or desktop/laptop - the url should be removed from. Why?
I may have a fundamental misunderstanding. The way I thought it works is that when you have a dynamically generated page based on the user agent, (ie, the SAME URL but different formatting for smartphones as for desktop/laptop) then the Google mobile bot will index the mobile friendly version and the desktop bot will index the desktop version -- so Google will have 2 different indexed results for the same url. That SEEMS to be validated by the existence of the words 'mobile-friendly' next to some of my mobile friendly page descriptions on mobile devices.
HOWEVER, if that's how it works--why would Google not allow a person to remove one of the urls and keep the other? Is it because Google thinks a mobile version of a website must have all of the identical pages as the desktop version? What if it doesnt? What if a website is designed so that some of the slower pages simply aren't given a mobile version? Is it possible that Google doesn't really save results for a mobile friendly page if there is a corresponding desktop page-- but only checks to see if it renders ok? That is, it keeps only one indexed copy of each url, and basically assumes the mobile title and actual content is the same and only the formatting is different? That assumption isn't always true -- mobile devices lend themselves to different interactions with the user - but it certainly could save Google billions of dollars in storage.
Thoughts?
-
Thanks for your reply, but the link you pointed me to isn't my situation. I'm not redirecting to separate urls. Mine is this: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/configurations/dynamic-serving
I HAVE to figure out what Google is doing in my situation because if I don't and I assume wrong, then lots of pages for either my desktop or mobile friendly won't be indexed.
Surely lots of website owners have had their developers create a minimal mobile friendly site with less content and pages than desktop users get and chosen the dynamic-serving approach, but I have yet to receive a reply from anyone who has faced that issue..It's a very serious issue for me because either I have to consider dumping the dynamic serving in favor of separate mobile urls (if that would work), or I have to do a ton of programming to add in content so that all the urls have both mobile and desktop content.
-
**There's a lengthy discussion on it here: **https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/configurations/separate-urls?hl=en
Notably this section:
For Googlebot, we do not have any preference and recommend that webmasters consider their users when deciding on their redirection policy. The most important thing is to serve correct and consistent redirects, i.e. redirect to the equivalent content on the desktop or mobile site. If your configuration is wrong, some users may not be able to see your content at all.
In my opinion, trying to figure out what Google does on the backend is a losing proposition. Maybe they index both; maybe they index one. Heck, there's no way to know if they even index full text now for every site. There's certainly a lot of optimization going on in the back-end that is above and beyond our purview as SEO practitioners.
Google says they don't care what kind of redirect you use for mobile. Likely, that means your mobile sites are being semantically linked to your desktop version of the pages -- they specifically recommend against pointing two separate page redirects to the same mobile page. They recommend that you add a link that lets mobile users click over to desktop for usability. That's good enough for me.
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
-
Mobile Google SRP not showing Mobile breadcrumb
Hi,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | vivekrathore
I have implemented schema code for Breadcrumb on mobile site which is same as on Desktop. Now Desktop breadcrumb structure is getting visible on Google SRP, but when i check Mobile breadcrumb structure in Android Phone Google SRP, it is not visible. I have verified both code in schema structure tool. Is there any different schema code for mobile breadcrumb. Need any additional information regarding this, please send me your queries.0 -
Question about robots file on mobile devices
Hi We have a robots.txt file, but do I need to create a separate file for the m.site or can I just add the line into my normal robots file. Ive just read the Google Guidelines (what a great read it was) and couldn't find my answer. Thanks in Advance Andy
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Andy-Halliday0 -
Spam Links? -115 Domains Sharing the Same IP Address, to Remove or Not Remove Links
Out of 250 domains that link to my site about 115 are from low quality directories that are published by the same company and hosted on the same ip address. Examples of these directories are: -www.keydirectory.net -www.linkwind.com -www.sitepassage.com -www.ubdaily.com -www.linkyard.org A recent site audit from a reputable SEO firm identified 125 toxic links. I assume these are those toxic links. They also identified about another 80 suspicious domains linking to my site. They audit concluded that my site is suffering a partial Penguin penalty due to low quality links. My question is whether it is safe to remove these 125 links from the low quality directories. I am concerned that removing this quantity of links all at once will cause a drop in ranking because the link profile will be thin with only about 125 domains remaining that point to the site. Granted those 125 domains should be of somewhat better quality. I am playing with fire by having these removed. I URGENTLY NEED ADVICE AS THE WEBMASTER HAS INITIATED STEPS TO REMOVE THE 125 LINKS. Thanks everyone!!! Alan
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Kingalan10 -
Google disavow tool
I have an algorithmic penalty on one of my websites. I never received a notification of a manual penalty in GWMT and even sent in a reconsideration request 6 months ago ad they told me their were no manual penalties on the website. I have cleaned up my link profile and what I could not clean up I sent in using the Google disavow tool a few days ago. I've heard to just wait if it's algorithmic or should I send in another reconsideration request for disavow links tool?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MarkHIggins0 -
Link Research Tools - Detox Links
Hi, I was doing a little research on my link profile and came across a tool called "LinkRessearchTools.com". I bought a subscription and tried them out. Doing the report they advised a low risk but identified 78 Very High Risk to Deadly (are they venomous?) links, around 5% of total and advised removing them. They also advised of many suspicious and low risk links but these seem to be because they have no knowledge of them so default to a negative it seems. So before I do anything rash and start removing my Deadly links, I was wondering if anyone had a). used them and recommend them b). recommend detoxing removing the deadly links c). would there be any cases in which so called Deadly links being removed cause more problems than solve. Such as maintaining a normal looking profile as everyone would be likely to have bad links etc... (although my thinking may be out on that one...). What do you think? Adam
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NaescentAdam0 -
Is removing inorganic links a bad idea?
Hey there, We have recently been in touch with a SEO agency that recomended we remove all inorganic links from our backlink profile. Most of the links are pretty good but there are some news sites that have sitewide links to our site. The link is in the nav menu, as a useful link. We didn't ask for this link it was totally organic. Also some link building in the past was focused on anchor text so some of the keywords may have been over emphasised. Is it a good idea to go about removing all of the potentially inorganic looking links? My concern is that we wipe out links that google are actually valuing. I still know sites are ranking #1 with much more dubious backlink profiles, and then there's this guy who removed his sitewide backlinks and dropped in his ranking: http://www.seomoz.org/q/removed-site-wide-links If a competitor decided to add negative links to our site, it would take longer to find and remove negative links than it would for them to add them. It seems odd that google would allow negative SEO to be that easy.. What do you think?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | timscullin0 -
Remove content that is indexed?
Hi guys, I want to delete a entire folder with content indexed, how i can explain to google that content no longer exists?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Valarlf0 -
301 a page and then remove the 301
I have a real estate website that has a city hub page. All the homes for sale within a city are linked to from this hub page. Certain small cities may have one home on the market for a month and then not have any homes on the market for months or years. I call them "Ghost Cities". This problem happens across many cities at any point in time. The resulting city hub pages are left with little to no content. We are throwing around the idea of 301 redirecting these "Ghost City" pages to a page higher up in the hierarchy (Think state or county) until we get new homes for sale in the city. At that point we would remove the 301. Any thoughts on this strategy? Is it bad to turn 301s on and off like that? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisKolmar0