Roger has detected a problem:
-
_ Roger has detected a problem:_
We have detected that the root domain livefit.co.uk does not respond to web requests. Using this domain, we will be unable to crawl your site or present accurate SERP information.
Can anyone see why?
Cheers
Stephen
-
Cheers Joel
I did push past it and the crawl has run!
Stephen
-
Hey Stephen,
That message can sometimes mean that there is a deeper issue with the site that prevents it from being accessed. However, if your site isn't currently having any issues you can likely just continue past that message. It may be that your site was just a little slow to respond to our initial ping.
Bottom line: I'd say you can just continue past that with no issues.
Of course, if you do see any crawl issues, let us know at [email protected].
Cheers,
Joel. -
Stephen
You are a Guru and I suspect you are already working on this but there are some issues on the site. Some pages do not have meta description, have multiple H1/H2, image sizes are large and image alt is not there. A lot can be done on this site.
- Nitin
-
You should check with http://pro.seomoz.org/tools/crawl-test / Google Bot so that the error can be found. BTW I checked with spider and it was working fine.
Also It may be one time issue i.e. your website was down technically and Roger crawled it same time. So check website logs as well.
- Nitin
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
-
Index problems, Part 2
Hi Guy's A few weeks ago i posted a question:
Technical SEO | | Happy-SEO
https://mza.seotoolninja.com/community/q/index-problems After some good advice, we changed a few things: www.domain.com <<< NL version www.domain.com/fr/ <<<< French version (domain.com/nl/ 301 redirect to domain.com). So the SERPS for keyword ‘shutters’ went from #32 to #8...... for 2 day's.... and gone.... and not comming back anymore.... Did we missed something? Help is much appreciated, thanks 🙂3 -
Problems with Wordpress and Yoast SEO Plugin
Hi, I've been working with a Wordpress site and the Wordpress SEO plugin for a few months now and I've managed to get pretty decent results for some of the keywords I was targeting, however since last week I've lost all my rankings sharply and everything dropped out. This had happened once before and the problem was that the plugin was somehow stopped but not this time. I've had a look through all of the MOZ resources and I cannot find what the problem might be. Page optimization hasn't changed and the on page rankings are the same here. Everything seems to be the same except that all my top 10 ranking disappeared. I'm new to all of this and I'm still learning so I'd appreciate if anyone could help me on this. I'm up for trying any ideas you might have but I've tried almost everything I could. I've reinstalled, updated and done everything I could with the plugin, I've checked that Google is indexing the pages and it is. I've monitored for errors on the pages and critical issues, nothing major to report so I don't know anymore what to do. Thank you so much in advance for your help. M3rgAcQ paFNOlb
Technical SEO | | rodcunha0 -
Local searh results instant preview photo problem
A search result that contains my google plus / places page in the local results is not displaying photos correctly in the preview. It shows an image that appears to represent a broken link or missing image, however, when you click on the "See Photos" link it to takes you to the G+ page that displays the photos without any issues. I also checked the google places account and the photos appear fine in my dashboard. It's seems like maybe a 3rd party uploaded photos or something? It may have to do with the recent upgrade to pages at Google +? (Thats another story, thanks for making me create a circular logo and a cover photo that doesn't style well in your mobile app) Anyway, any thoughts? Where are these photos coming from, plus or places account? I submitted the question on google groups and a non googler told me to submit photos from a unrelated account.. This seems like gaming the system to me and when I looked into it, it takes me to the Google + page.. Search URL - I am first result in local, Yale Creek Seasonal Care. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&site=&source=hp&q=new+market+mn+snow+removal&oq=new+market+mn+snow+removal&gs_l=hp.3...1801.1801.0.2686.1.1.0.0.0.0.143.143.0j1.1.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.5.hp.nKsMdxTGiW0 Also, I noticed the G+ account says service area is 20 miles from address while I specifically selected an area greater than that in my places account.. So what is it plus or places?!?!? The way they are rolling out this move to plus is frustrating! As a consumer, I prefer listings without the plus page!!
Technical SEO | | dwallner0 -
A problem with duplicate content
I'm kind of new at this. My crawl anaylsis says that I have a problem with duplicate content. I set the site up so that web sections appear in a folder with an index page as a landing page for that section. The URL would look like: www.myweb.com/section/index.php The crawl analysis says that both that URL and its root: www.myweb.com/section/ have been indexed. So I appear to have a situation where the page has been indexed twice and is a duplicate of itself. What can I do to remedy this? And, what steps should i take to get the pages re-indexed so that this type of duplication is avoided? I hope this makes sense! Any help gratefully received. Iain
Technical SEO | | iain0 -
Auto genrated content problem?
Hi all, I operate a Dutch website (sneeuwsporter.nl), the website is a a database of European ski resorts and accommodations (hotels, chalets etc). We launched about a month ago with a database of about 1700+ accommodations. Of every accommodation we collected general information like what village it is in, how far it is from the city centre and how many stars it has. This information is shown in a list on the right of each page (e.g. http://www.sneeuwsporter.nl/oostenrijk/zillertal-3000/mayrhofen/appartementen-meckyheim/). In addition a text of this accomodation is auto generated based on some of the properties that are also in the list (like distance, stars etc). Below the paragraph about the accommodation is a paragraph about the village the accommodation is located in, this is a general text that is the same with all the accommodations in this village. Below that is a general text about the resort area, this text is also identical on all the accommodation pages in the area. So a lot of these texts about the village and area are used many times on different pages. Things went well at first and every day we got more Google traffic, and more and more pages. But a few days ago our organic traffic took a near 100% dive, we are hardly listed anymore and if we are at very low places. We expect the Google gave us a penalty. We expect this to be the case because of 2 reasons: we have auto generated text that only vary slightly per page we re-use the content about villages and area's on many pages We quickly removed the content of the villages and resort area's because we are pretty sure that this is definitely something Google does not want. We are less sure about the auto generated content, is this something we should remove as well? These are normal readable text, they just happen to be structured more or less the same way on every page. Finally, when we made these and maybe some other fixes, what is the best and quickest ways to let Google see us again and show them we improved? Thanks in advance!
Technical SEO | | sneeuwsporter0 -
132 pages reported as having Duplicate Page Content but I'm not sure where to go to fix the problems?
I am seeing “Duplicate Page Content” coming up in our
Technical SEO | | danatanseo
reports on SEOMOZ.org Here’s an example: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/williams-sound-ppa-r35-e http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/aphex-230-master-voice-channel-processor http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/product/AT-AE4100.prod These three pages are for completely unrelated products.
They are returning “200” status codes, but are being identified as having
duplicate page content. It appears these are all going to the home page, but it’s
an odd version of the home page because there’s no title. I would understand if these pages 301-redirected to the home page if they were obsolete products, but it's not a 301-redirect. The referring page is
listed as: http://www.ccisolutions.com/StoreFront/category/cd-duplicators None of the 3 links in question appear anywhere on that page. It's puzzling. We have 132 of these. Can anyone help me figure out
why this is happening and how best to fix it? Thanks!0 -
Problem with 1 Domain but not 60 Others
Hi, I have about 60+ domains which are spread across a few different IP address's and a couple of Servers The domains use the same template, which is modified per the specific domain Out of the 60, a single domain attracts virtually no traffic. In google webmaster, there are no messages, nothing out of the order The supporting blogs etc... for that domain are all fine. Any idea why one domain does not perform, while the other 60 plug are successful?
Technical SEO | | Bucky0 -
WordPress E-Commerce Plugin Duplicate Content Problem
I am working on a wordpress website that uses the WP E-Commerce plugin. I am using the Yoast seo plugin but not totally familiar with it. I have noticed that WP E-Commerce creates duplicate content issues. Here's an example: http://www.domain.com/parent-category/product-url-1/ is the same content as http://www.domain.com/parent-category/child-category/product-url-1/. I was wondering which of these following options are the best solution: 1. 301 redirect the multiple instances to one page
Technical SEO | | theanglemedia
2. noindex all but one instance
3. Use the canonical tag (i've used this tag before for telling SE's to use the www version of a page but not sure if it's the appropriate for this)
4. a combination of one of these 3 options? Thanks in advance!0