SEO Issues with Avactis Shopping Cart Please Help
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
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
-
Is this helping?
A few months ago, in hopes of a) helping new customers navigate the sometimes-arcane language used in the precious metals industry and b) earning some props from Google for making the site more user friendly, I talked the Powers-That-Be into allowing me to create a glossary with links from some unfamiliar terms in each product description and added appropriate <title>tages for each term.</p> <p>My question is: <strong>In the opinion of SEOMoz was this endeavor a brilliant, transformative SEO brainstorm—or just a waste of my time?</strong></p> <p>We haven't been running analytics, so we are flying blind.</p> <p>Here's the 411:<br /> <br />Website: www.goldmart.com<br />Glossary: www.goldmart.com/glossary</p> <p>A sample description: http://www.goldmart.com/1-oz-pamp-suisse-lunar-snake-gold-bar-9999-fine-in-assay.html</p></title>
On-Page Optimization | | RScime250 -
Google Authorship for SEO Content Writers
I am interested to know the best way to go about about Google authorship on blog articles written for a client. For example is it a bad idea for an SEO content writer to publish articles under their own identity, what are the potential footprint downsides to this?
On-Page Optimization | | Clicksjim1 -
Help with Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical
Whenever i enable Canonical URL through the 3DCart Control panel I get this Critical Factor error when running the on page report card: Appropriate Use of Rel Canonical Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Canonical URL</dt> <dd>"http://rcnitroshop.com/Nitro-Monster-Truck"</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>If the canonical tag is pointing to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. Make sure you're targeting the right page (if this isn't it, you can reset the target above) and then change the canonical tag to reference that URL.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>We check to make sure that IF you use canonical URL tags, it points to the right page. If the canonical tag points to a different URL, engines will not count this page as the reference resource and thus, it won't have an opportunity to rank. If you've not made this page the rel=canonical target, change the reference to this URL. NOTE: For pages not employing canonical URL tags, this factor does not apply.</dd> </dl> Now if I disable Canonical URL then run the on page report card again the critical error goes away but I get this Optional Factor error instead: Canonical URL Tag Usage Moderate fix <dl> <dt>Number of Canonical tags</dt> <dd>0</dd> <dt>Explanation</dt> <dd>Although the canonical URL tag is generally thought of as a way to solve duplicate content problems, it can be extremely wise to use it on every (unique) page of a site to help prevent any query strings, session IDs, scraped versions, licensing deals or future developments to potentially create a secondary version and pull link juice or other metrics away from the original. We believe the canonical URL tag is a best practice to help prevent future problems, even if nothing is specifically duplicate/problematic today.</dd> <dt>Recommendation</dt> <dd>Add a canonical URL tag referencing this URL to the header of the page.</dd> </dl> So basically I disabled it because obviously a Critical error is much worse then an optional error. Is there a way I can get rid of both errors?
On-Page Optimization | | bilsonx0 -
Breadcrumb position SEO impact
Hi all, Our UX designers are working on a new page design, and the breadcrumb position looks somewhat strange - it's almost in the middle of the page. The new page looks like this (the breadcrumb is below the head banner), but it's a showcase page that contains about 150 items. Each of them has a small thumbnail, title, category and short description. They've decided to use the head banner's place and have there all items, grouped in categories that visitors can browse. The breadcrumb menu is at 900 pixels from the top of the page In other words, you have the major part of this page content in front of the breadcrumb menu. Are there any SEO implications in such case? Should we use breadcrumbs on this page if they're not at the top? Thanks,
On-Page Optimization | | lgrozeva
Maggie0 -
SEO for Blogs - Top Tips
Hi People, This may have been covered before (i am sure it had) but I was wondering if people use the same SEO tactics for blogs as they do for other sites. Really wondering if there are any tips for blogs specifically ? 🙂 Thanks all
On-Page Optimization | | wedmonds0 -
Is an Overflow SEO friendly
Is an "overflow" (scrollbar) seo and Google friendly? I only ask because it hides part of the visible text.
On-Page Optimization | | BradBorst0 -
Formatting issues WordPress 3.1.2
The and _formatting tags format the text in the WYSIWYG editor but not in the browser (I've tried in Firefox and Internet Explorer. It doesn't help if I add non depreciate Html _and Is this a theme Issue? Is there a way to fix it? Does anyone know why and are added instead of and ?__
On-Page Optimization | | catherine-2793880
