Google: Rankings Drop After Mobile Functionality Fail?

Posted by

Google’s John Mueller responded to a Reddit SEO discussion where a search console alerting about mobile usability was soon after followed by a rankings drop in a medical related website.

The timing of the drop in rankings taking place soon after search console released a cautioning about mobile use issues made the two events appear to be related.

The person despaired due to the fact that they fixed the problem, verified the fix through Google search console however the rankings changes have not reversed.

These are the significant information:

“Around Aug. 2022, I saw that Google Browse Console was saying ALL of our pages were now failing Mobile Use standards. I had a designer “fix” the pages …

… I resubmitted the sitemap & asked Google to “Verify” all of my repairs on Oct. 25, 2022. It has actually been 15 days without any motion.”

Understanding Changes in Ranking

John Mueller reacted in the Reddit conversation, observing that in his opinion the mobile use issues were unrelated to the rankings drop.

Mueller wrote:

“I’ll go out on a limb and say the reason for rankings altering has absolutely nothing to do with this.

I ‘d check out the quality raters standards and the material Google has on the recent updates for some thoughts, especially for medical material like that.”

This is an excellent example of how the most obvious reason for something happening is not always the right reason, it’s just the most obvious.

Obvious is not the same as precise or correct, even though it might appear like it.

When diagnosing a problem it is very important to keep an open mind about the causes and to not stop diagnosing an issue at the very first more apparent description.

John dismissed the mobile use concern as being major enough to affect rankings.

His response suggested that major content quality problems are a likelier factor for a rankings modification, particularly if the change happens around the same time as an algorithm upgrade.

The Google Raters Standards are a guide for examining site quality in an unbiased manner, free of subjective concepts of what makes up site quality.

So it makes sense that Mueller suggested to the Redditor that they need to read the raters guidelines to see if the descriptions of what defines site quality matches those of the website in concern.

Coincidentally, Google recently released brand-new documents for helping publishers comprehend what Google thinks about rank-worthy content.

The file is called, Developing practical, dependable, people-first content. The documents consists of a section that pertains to this issue, Get to know E-A-T and the quality rater standards.

Google’s help page describes that their algorithm uses numerous elements to comprehend whether a webpage is skilled, reliable and credible, especially for Your Money Your Life pages such as those on medical topics.

This section of the documents describes why the quality raters guidelines info is necessary:

“… our systems give much more weight to content that lines up with strong E-A-T for subjects that might substantially impact the health, monetary stability, or safety of individuals, or the well-being or well-being of society.

We call these “Your Cash or Your Life” subjects, or YMYL for brief.”

Browse Console Repair Validations Are Typically Informative

Mueller next discussed the search console repair validations and what they really mean.

He continued his answer:

“For indexing problems, “validate repair” helps to speed up recrawling.

For whatever else, it’s more about offering you details on what’s occurring, to let you understand if your changes had any result.

There’s no “the website repaired it, let’s launch the hand brake” impact from this, it’s actually primarily for you: you said it was good now, and here is what Google found.”

YMYL Medical Content

The individual asking the concern reacted to Mueller by noting that most of the website material was composed by doctors.

They next point out how they also write material that is meant to convey proficiency, authoritativeness and credibility.

This is what they shared:

“I’ve tried to truly write blog site short articles & even marketing pages that have a gratifying response above the fold, but then discuss the details after.

Practically everything an individual would do if they were legitimate attempting to get an answer throughout– which is likewise what you read to be “CONSUME” best practices.


They regreted that their rivals with old material surpassed them in the rankings.

Detecting a ranking problem is in some cases more than simply navel gazing one’s own website.

It may be useful to really dig into the competitor site to comprehend what their strengths are that may be representing their increased search visibility.

It might seem like after an upgrade that Google is “satisfying” websites that have this or that, like excellent mobile functionality, FAQs, etc.

However that’s not actually how search algorithms work.

Search algorithms, in a nutshell, attempt to comprehend three things:

  1. The meaning of a search questions
  2. The significance of web pages
  3. Site quality

So it follows that any improvements to the algorithm may likely be an improvement in one or all 3 (most likely all three).

And that’s where John Mueller’s support to check out the Google Search Quality Raters Standards (PDF) can be found in.

It might also be valuable to check out Google’s great Browse Quality Raters Guidelines Overview (PDF) due to the fact that it’s shorter and easier to understand.


Check Out the Reddit Concern and Answer

Impact Of “Confirming” A Repair In Browse Console/Mobile Use

Image by Best SMM Panel/Khosro