Metadata configured, but Google only shows URL with sitelinks. Something wrong with my code?
-
Hi guys!
I have a metadata problem with my home page. If I look for the brand's keyword, the SERPs don´t show the metadata I configured, instead it shows the URL with sitelinks. If I use the "site:" command, it doesn't appear at all. This happens only on the home page, not the rest, which are roughly 700 pages. Those appear fine.
I already have a meta title and meta description configured, which include the mentioned KW. It used to appear correctly before. GSC shows it indexed. Most audit tools (configured to crawl JS) detect the metadata. Moz's On Page tool doesn't. Could it be because of the JS configuration? Or am I missing something else? Here´s the meta description code:What do you think? I'd appreciate your input. Thanks!
-
Google could ignore any given metadata when it wants and how it wants. Ive seen this nummerous times that a manual set title and description is being thrown overboard and google simply selects the content thats onpage in this case.
Dont stare blind on it; make sure your content is relevant on which you wanted to be searched for in the first place. The rest will pretty much follow.
-
It would help if you shared your website URL.
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
-
I have made my new website live. But while checking in Google it is not showing in search result ( site: www.oomfr.com ). Can anybody please advice.
Hi Team, I have made my new website live. But while checking in Google it is not showing in search result ( site: www.oomfr.com ). Can anybody please advice.
Technical SEO | | nlogix0 -
What coding works for SEO and what coding doesn't?
Hi: I recently learned about inline styles and that Google started penalizing sites for that in October. Then I was told that Wix and Flash don't work (or work well) either for SEO as the engines won't crawl them (I think). Does anyone know of a blog that goes over everything that doesn't work so that I could recognize it when I look at someone's code. Anyone know of such a resource? Cheers, Wes
Technical SEO | | wrconard0 -
Google Search Results Display URL
Our urls show as www.domain.com/getproduct.aspx?productid=48376 (url #1) in Google search results. When you click on the link and go to the site the URL is www.domain.com/product-name.aspx (url #2) I checked in Google Webmaster Tools (Fetch as Google) and there is a 302 redirect from url #1 to url #2. It also shows a Set-Cookie value, ASP.NET_SessionID= If we make it a 301 redirect instead, will the url displayed in Google search results be the url #2? We need to get rid of the Set-Cookie for crawlers correct?
Technical SEO | | Guy_Huyett0 -
"INDEX,FOLLOW" then later in the code "NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW" which does google follow?
background info: we have an established closed E-commerce system which the company has been using for years. I have only just started and reviewing the system, I don't have direct access to the code, but can request changes, but it could take months before the changes are in effect (or done at all), and we won't can't change to a new E-commerce system for the short to mid term. While reviewing the site (with help of seomoz crawl diagnostics) I noticed that some of the existing "landing pages" have in the code: <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">INDEX,FOLLOW</a>" /> then a few lines later <meta name="<a class="attribute-value">robots</a>" content="<a class="attribute-value">NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW</a>" /> Which the crawl diagnostics flagged up, but in the webmaster tools says
Technical SEO | | PaddyDisplays
"We didn't detect any issues with non-indexable content on your site." so the question is which instructions does google follow? the first or 2nd? note: clearly this is need fixed, but I have a big list of changes for the system so I need to know how important this is tthanks0 -
Google Published Date - Does Google Lie?
Here's the scenario. I create a page called "ABC" and it gets published and found by Google lets say on the 13th of April. on the 15th (or 14th) i decide to update the URL, page Title, and content. (Redirect old URL to new URL as well) Will Google still show this page as being published on the 13th? or would it update the publish date according to the new URL? Greg | | | | | | <a id="question_reply-to-question-36769-description_codeblock" class="mceButton mceButtonEnabled mce_codeblock" style="color: #000000; border: 1px solid #f0f0ee; margin: 0px 1px 0px 0px; padding: 0px; background-color: transparent; cursor: default; vertical-align: baseline; width: 20px; border-collapse: separate; display: block; height: 20px;" title="Create Code Block" tabindex="-1"></a>Create Code Block | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Technical SEO | | AndreVanKets0 -
Can Google show the hReview-Aggregate microformat in the SERPs on a product page if the reviews themselves are on a separate page?
Hi, We recently changed our eCommerce site structure a bit and separated our product reviews onto a a different page. There were a couple of reasons we did this : We used pagination on the product page which meant we got duplicate content warnings. We didn't want to show all the reviews on the product page because this was bad for UX (and diluted our keywords). We thought having a single page was better than paginated content, or at least safer for indexing. We found that Googlebot quite often got stuck in loops and we didn't want to bury the reviews way down in the site structure. We wanted to reduce our bounce rate a little, so having a different reviews page could help with this. In the process of doing this we tidied up our microformats a bit too. The product page used to have to three main microformats; hProduct hReview-Aggregate hReview The product page now only has hProduct and hReview-Aggregate (which is now nested inside the hProduct). This means the reviews page has hReview-Aggregate and hReviews for each review itself. We've taken care to make sure that we're specifying that it's a product review and the URL of that product. However, we've noticed over the past few weeks that Google has stopped feeding the reviews into the SERPs for product pages, and is instead only feeding them in for the reviews pages. Is there any way to separate the reviews out and get Google to use the Microformats for both pages? Would using microdata be a better way to implement this? Thanks,
Technical SEO | | OptiBacUK
James0 -
Updating content on URL or new URL
High Mozzers, We are an event organisation. Every year we produce like 350 events. All the events are on our website. A lot of these events are held every year. So i have an URL like www.domainname.nl/eventname So what would you do. This URL has some inbound links, some social mentions and so on. SO if the event will be held again in 2013. Would it be better to update the content on this URL or create a new one. I would keep this URL and update it because of the linkvalue and it is allready indexed and ranking for the desired keyword for that event. Cheers, Ruud
Technical SEO | | RuudHeijnen0 -
Redirected Subdomain Development URLs Showing In SERPs?
I develop client websites within a subdomain of another website (with noindex, nofollow so that incomplete websites on the wrong domains aren't ever seen by web users). Then, when we launch a client's site on their own domain, we redirect all of the development URLS to the appropriate page on the new live site. (meaning at site launch, all pages on http://client-site.developersite.com would be set to 301 redirect to identical pages pages on http://www.client-site.com). This system has always seemed to work fine, but today I discovered 94,700 pages indexed by Google on my root domain and found that these were mostly old URLs of sites in development that redirect to the actual client sites. Many are several years old. Any idea why Google would be indexing these pages? Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | VTDesignWorks0