SEOMoz says i have errors but goole webmaster doesnt show them - which one is right ?
-
I have about 350 websites all created in farcry 4.0 cms platform. When i do a site crawl using any seo tool ( seomoz, raven, screaming frog) it comes back telling me I have duplicate titles, description and content for a bunch of my pages. The pages are the same page its just that the crawl is showing the object Id and the friendly URL which is autocreated in the CMS as different pages.
EXAMPLE these are the samge page but are recognised as different in SEOMOZ crawl test and therefore flagged as having duplicate title tags and content ...
<colgroup span="1"><col style="width: 488pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 23771;" span="1" width="650"></colgroup>
|www.westendautos.com.au/go/latest-news-and-specials
<colgroup span="1"><col style="width: 488pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 23771;" span="1" width="650"></colgroup>
| www.westendautos.com.au/index.cfm?objectid=9CF82BBD-9B98-B545-33BC644C0FA74C8E ||
GOOGLE WEBMASTER however does not show me these errors ? It shows no errors at all.
Now i believe i can fix this by chucking in a rel=canonical at the top of each page ? (a big job over 350 sites) But even so - my problem is that the website developers are telling me that SEOMOZ and all the other tools are wrong - that google will see these the way it should, that the object ID's would not get indexed ( although i have seen at least one object id show up in the serps.)
Do i believe the developers and trust that google has it sorted or go through the process of hassling the developers to get a rel=canonical added to all the pages?
(the issue sees my homepage as about 4 different pages www.domain.com/ www.domain.com/home /index AND object id.
-
No i have the webmaster access and its not done there. 345 ??? wow is that coding stuff ?
-
I had a think about what your developers said about not erring in Google WMT, and I there is some truth in that as I assume they have exclude the parameters in WMT. But this is the poor mans way of fixing such things. You need to do this at the source for all search engines.
That was probably the most urgent problem the site had, but all up I found 345 violations all up.
If you want me to send you a detailed report email me [email protected] if you want any help with IIS I can give you some help. -
I have 350 franchise type businesses. Independant but have the marketing etc done for them I inhertied them this way. I am adressing the www to non www canonical issue seperately to this 'friendly url + objectID" canoncal issue. Yes all 350 of them were pretty much duplicates and i am slowly working towards them all being fixed and individualised. I know I can fix it by putting in a rel=canonical but I am looking for some support so that when i go back to the developers they cant just fob me o with some excuse that i dont understand. I have a real hard time to get some of these pages to rank and i sincerely beleive that it is no in my content ( which is in my control ) but coding errors which are holding some of them back ( which is somewhat out of my control) i had to push just to be able to write a page title that wasnt automatically used as the paragraph heading on the page 0_o
Oh and i have addressed the domain canonical via webmaster, which obviously doesnt solve ii for bing - but thanks to the awesome tutorial on your site http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/tutorials/how-to-fix-canonical-domain-name-issue I know what i have to ask the developers for
now ! I do have access to the IIS but with onlylimited knowledge about the whole set up I am afraid of screwing something up - but that shows that with the right plugin it EASY to fix !! thank you so much !!
-
I did find out, his web sites are a chain of auto shops called Repco here in australia
-
I would also like to ask why you have 350 sites,
I was going to ask that too but didn't want to seem like a wise guy if the OP has 700 people workin' on 'em.
-
No CMS is perfect, but you can cetainly build a site free from any of these issues, i get a perfect score on every site i build using teh Bing SEO Toolkit, wich finds ever viollation that bing finds.
-
As one assuie to anouther, your deveopers are just not up to it.
I scaned your site, with software from bing that sees the exact same violations as bing.
and for a small site it has a lot of issues.
here is the same error SEOMoz foundThe page with URL "http://www.westendautos.com.au/index.cfm?objectid=9CF82BBD-9B98-B545-33BC644C0FA74C8E" can also be accessed by using URL "http://www.westendautos.com.au/go/latest-news-and-specials".
Search engines identify unique pages by using URLs. When a single page can be accessed by using any one of multiple URLs, a search engine assumes that there are multiple unique pages. Use a single URL to reference a page to prevent dilution of page relevance. You can prevent dilution by following a standard URL format.more on teh error http://perthseocompany.com.au/seo/reports/violation/the-page-contains-multiple-canonical-formats
You problems go deeper still, you have domain name canonical issues, this is a big one and a obvious one your developers should of not let get by
if your site can be resched by www and non www without 301 redirecting the SE will see the sites as 2 seperate sites, and you rank will be split
I would also like to ask why you have 350 sites, are you saying they are duplicates of this one www.westendautos.com.au
-
No tool is 100% accurate in the SEO world.
If Google webmaster tool doesn't detect any error today that doesn't mean there is no error at all.
rel=canonical is a perfect solution and go for it.
-
I agree with you about Joomla, It is awful in my experience for creating duplicate content issues.
-
No big deal, these URLs can be generated if you are using a non SEO friendly CMS. This happens to me when I was using Joomla (Joomla is not bad but It didn’t worked out well for me!).
The simple solution to this is download the CSV from screaming frog and go to these pages and set rel=canonical to the page so that Google if crawling, knows what page contains the original data that crawlers should be looking for.
On the other hand it’s a good idea to look in to some good SEO friendly CMS.
-
...my problem is that the website developers are telling me that SEOMOZ and all the other tools are wrong...
Trust developers/designers for making things look good - if you like their style.... but when it comes to SEO you need to have your head examined if you are going to listen to your developer instead of trusting SEOmoz.
Here's something every professional SEO knows.... developers/designers generate a lot of business for SEOs (and lose a lot of money for webmasters) because they don't understand search engines, change all of your URLs, hide text because it stinks up their design, want to make your entire site in images, create navigation bars that spiders can't crawl, allow session id's to generate duplicate content and suck up all of your linkjuice.... I could go on and on here... You must be very careful and watch what they are doing - closely.
Do i believe the developers and trust that google has it sorted or go through the process of hassling the developers to get a rel=canonical added to all the pages?
lol.... I don't think that "hassling" is a very good word. I would either be kicking their asses or firing them and getting a different developer who understand who owns the website!!!
Sometimes you have to assert yourself when somebody is going to screw up one of your websites. If they were trashing one of my good sites I would exert my authority as owner of the site. If it is a choice between my site and their opinion... they lose swiftly.
Now i believe i can fix this by chucking in a rel=canonical at the top of each page ?
Great, you know what to do.
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 with Duplicate Content Error
Hello, the result of renewed content appeared in the scan results in my Shopify Store. But these products are unique. Why am I getting this error? Can anyone please help to explain why? screenshot-analytics.moz.com-2021.10.28-19_53_09.png
Moz Pro | | gokimedia0 -
Search Console says 111 links. Moz says 3\. Do I have a site problem?
I understand that Moz doesn't show all links; but i would think that out of 111 links from 43 root domains, they'd at least show 20 or 30 root domains. I definitely have more than 3 credible sites linking back to me. So do I have an issue? I've been trying to get my site ranking for 9 months, and I've tried EVERYTHING. Still no significant movement. Please help me figure out what's going on. I've been trying to get my site ranking for 9 months, and I've tried EVERYTHING. Still no significant movement. I'm wondering—maybe even hoping—that this will help me uncover a problem that could set the whole thing back on course. Please help me figure out what's going on.
Moz Pro | | jheath0 -
Webmaster Tools shows mystery errors that Moz does not
One of my campaigns is doing great in the sense that the website has been running fault free for a few months now. Great, of course! But... in Google Webmaster Tools errors keep coming in showing older media documents and pages. And it does not say where they are from. Probably this is more a Google question, but I thought I'd try to find some answers here first. I would appreciate any suggestions and help. Monique
Moz Pro | | MarketingEnergy0 -
Does SEOMOZ planing to restructure OSE metrics?
As you know SEO slowly turning into SEM and some metrics and numbers from Open Site Explorer are no so relevant any more. As a customer of SEOMOZ product i am warning if you guys are planning to add more value and ranking metrics according to the new ranking metrics and factors to your tools?
Moz Pro | | JasonOliveira0 -
Keyword analysis - error with difficulty %
Hello everyone! Edge of all, I like and I use very often the "Keyword analysis" tool . However, recently, I have some difficulty to rely on the difficulty % of the keywords I've added. As an example I entered as keywords for a french speaking client, words with a geographical reference. It gives me a percentage too high because I am almost convinced that it would probably not be difficult to work with. My question is: is there any known errors with keywords georeferenced French (google canada - english) and also what to trust when I want proof of the difficulty of a keyword in case of some errors may occur in the tool.
Moz Pro | | PTech-1885830 -
It would be Great if their were further integrations with Google Webmaster Tools
It would be great if their were plans to integrate Google Webmaster Tools into the mix. Specifically the Errors section. I am currently working on a new Campaign where I am seeing a little bit of overlap, but Google is finding all sorts of different missing pages from 3 redesigns ago but also quite a few current ones. Currently in SEOmoz: 0 Errors, while Google is reporting 12 - 403 Errors for some content the client unpublished. While the addition of Google Analytics was a nice, it would be great to dig further into Webmaster tools and Analytics with features that discover errors and provide actionable next steps. Is anyone else seeing these discrepancies between SEOmoz and Google Webmaster Tools?
Moz Pro | | drewschug0 -
SEOmoz bot and "noindex"
As a recent newbie to SEOmoz, I've been implementing some suggestions and doing a general tidy up. I removed URL's from our robots txt, and rolled out instead the noindex meta tag to pages we don't want indexed. But surprised to see issues that are now flagged from the last crawl by the moz bot from pages that have this meta tag? Does the SEOmoz bot not ignore this tag? Just want to make sure I've implemented it correctly, so the google bot does ignore it. Meta tag syntax is and is placed below the title tag. cheers Steve
Moz Pro | | sjr4x40 -
SEOmoz Toolbar vs. Opensiteexplorer
Dumb question, why is the SEOmoz Toolbar reporting vastly different data than opensitexplorer? I had assumed they pulled from the same data set. False assumption? Am I misinterpreting the metrics? The discrepancies with which I am most confused are differences in number of root linking domains between OSE and Toolbar. Please enlighten me.
Moz Pro | | Gyi0