Page omitted from search results for specific queries

[2004mark]

I am having trouble with one of my sites. I have a 6 main product pages, each one targets it's own keyphrase and resides in its own directory with other pages that contain further supporting information, spec, colour options etc.

5 of them are fine, but 1 doesn't show in the search results for it's targeted keyphrase. However the home page dose but only on Google's second page.

When a site search is performed in Google for the keyphrase the page is not listed until 'filter=0' is added to the URL or "repeat the search with the omitted results included." is clicked.

I rewrote the copy, description and title tags with no success. I then started to get paranoid and reduced the keyphrase density dramatically and removed footer links (to other pages in the site), again this is showing no success.

The page does show in a site search for other queries though. When the query is simply 'site:domain.com' with no keyphrase it is listed in 4th position (out of 310 pages) which tels me that Google knows it is an important page. However it is omitted from the site search when other certain keyprases are used (not targeted by that page).

I know that this filter is usually reserved for duplicate content, but this is definitely not the case here, I have a suspicion it is only tripped when the query contains a 'popular' keyphrase, but for what reason I have no clue.

The page is now very very clean, with 400 words of unique content and unique meta information, it has incoming links from external sites. Other pages on the site perform well. The only other thing worth mentioning is it also has a 301 pointing to it which was setup 2 years ago when we moved domains (due to company name change), however so do all the other pages.

Any advise or suggestions will be gratefully received.

[tedster]

I know that this filter is usually reserved for duplicate content, but this is definitely not the case here

Are you sure that none of the urls that rank well are using identical sentences to your page? It sounds very much like this is the case.

[2004mark]

Thanks for the reply Tedster.

No, Even though I know the website intimately I thought this myself actually, so I've got my copy writer to rewrite the page twice now, once 6 months ago and 6 weeks ago, the latest version has been cached for over a month now. Title and description tags were also rewritern. To double check I have just run it through copyscape, no results as expected.

I've also added a canonical tag, which again has been cached for a couple of weeks with no luck.

Most recently I've removed a text link to an even more text heavy page (in the same directory) that has a heavy kw density. The page has not been cached since that change, but I feel I'm getting paranoid now.

The directory that this page is the index of targets a keyword in the same way that our other directories target other kw with success. All other pages in this directory feature in a regular site search for the kw just not the index page, so obviously I'm not playing my strongest card at the moment.

[tedster]

I once had a similar struggle - and it took over a year to get that directory to rank "as expected". The approach that finally got results for me (and this was within 24 hours of Google indexing the change) was to broaden the co-occuring phrases on the page, rather than focusing the copy solely on the exact keyword phrase.

[2004mark]

Thanks Tedster, that sounds like good advise. Like I said, I've already drastically reduced the keyword density on the index page, but in the directory there is also a page that is extremely text heavy with a high kw density, I've temporally removed the link from the index page to this page so I might also reduce the kw density of it and introduce some other related kws. As it was my top kw I may have 'over done' it compared to the other directories possibly.

What is really odd thought is the way that it drops out a site search for certain keywords but not others. Anyway, I'll implement the changes above and see how that gets on.

[2004mark]

Some interesting observations:

It is not included in a site search for any 2 word phrase that made from a combination of words out of the meta keywords tag, until filter=0 is added to the URL - then it ranks high, especially for the target keyphrase.

It is included in a site search for some of the words taken from the kw tag when searched singularly. Even shown when the two words that make up its taggart keyphrase are searched for singularly (in position 2 behind the home page for both)!

It is included in a site search for any combination of words taken from the kw tag are searched for when a third word (non kw) is introduced.

It is included in a site search (in position 2 behind the home page) when no words are queried.

[tedster]

until filter=0 is added

Have you studied the urls that ARE included? Apparently at least one of them is seen as a duplicate, or so it sounds.

[g1smd]

Does Google WMT/WMC have anything useful to tell you in the "Content Analysis" section?

[2004mark]

Hi Guys, thanks for the input.

No WMT shows no issues, and unless I've missed something in 6+ months of looking there is no duplicate content issue, as I said Copyscape confirms this.