Referrers — Google, Search Engines

• 

  jongleason · Member · Jan 22, 2013 at 6:30 pm

  • Copy link
  • Add topic to favorites

  This has been going on for a while, but seems kind of strange to me.

  Under referrers, the first item is Search Engines. When I expand it, I see things like:
  google.com/search
  google.se/search
  google.ca/search
  etc.

  Then, further down my referrers list, I see things like this:
  Google
  google.ca
  google.co.uk
  google.co.in
  etc.

  I’ll also see (though not today)
  Google Reader

  So, I’ve assumed the last one is when someone has subscribed to my rss feed and clicks through from Google Reader to comment or read comments. But why are the second group not included in search engine referrals? Are these not search engine hits, and if not, what are they?

  The blog I need help with is: (visible only to logged in users)

• 

  timethief · Member · Jan 23, 2013 at 12:59 am

  • Copy link

  I tagged this thread for a Staff response. Please subscribe to it so you are notified when they respond.

• 

  jongleason · Member · Jan 23, 2013 at 12:19 pm

  • Copy link

  Thank you, TT.

• 

  richardmtl · Member · Jan 23, 2013 at 9:50 pm

  • Copy link

  Hi jongleason, the reason you see Google, Google.ca etc as referrers, and NOT listed under Search Engines, has to do with how Google searches work with logged-in users. You can read a bit more about it here:

  http://www.business2community.com/seo/google-changes-referrer-data-again-co-mingles-search-and-referral-traffic-0153166

  caveat: That post is almost a year old, so I can’t vouch for it’s exactness.

• 

  jongleason · Member · Jan 23, 2013 at 10:02 pm

  • Copy link

  Thanks, that makes sense, I guess. Logged-in meaning logged in to Google, apparently.

  But it’s still a search engine referral, simply one in which WP isn’t told what the search terms were, is that right? If so, wouldn’t it make sense to include it under search engine referrals and count it as “unknown search terms”?

  I appreciate your help.

• 

  richardmtl · Member · Jan 24, 2013 at 3:02 pm

  • Copy link

  I understand your reasoning, but from my understanding of that article and other things I read, we can’t always be certain that it comes from a search, maybe it comes from Google+, for example. And yes, I meant logged into Google and/or the Chrome browser.

• 

  jongleason · Member · Jan 24, 2013 at 3:29 pm

  • Copy link

  OK, makes sense.

  Seems stupid of Google. If it comes from Google+, you would think they would want people to know. Would be a nice advertisement for them, if they want to try to build participation there. If I were getting lots of traffic from Google+, I might be motivated to join and start a page there — like I did on Facebook. A nebulous “Google” referral means nothing to me.

  I’m marked this as resolved, thanks.

• 

  namawinelake · Member · Jan 28, 2013 at 11:30 am

  • Copy link

  Thanks John, makes sense but in principle, it’s wrong.