Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Thanks, Doug, but I only meant that as an example (there's a green Nalgene bottle on my desk).
I guess what I was asking is whether or not breadcrumbs should show the category at hand and not just the category that precedes it. Looks to me like Google is voting yes.
Anyway, I think I'll call this question "answered." Thanks again for your help!
That makes sense. The breadcrumbs on the website do not show the current page. They only provide a link to the previous page.
For example, if the page was for "Green Nalgene Bottles" and it was a subcategory of home --> water bottles --> Nalgene, the breadcrumb would read "home > water bottles > Nalgene." It sounds like it should read "home > water bottles > Nalgene > green."
Obviously, that's confusing Google. Is it against best practices in general?
Because my vocabulary isn't up to par, it may be easier for you to skip ahead to the image I've attached.
One of my web pages shows up in the Google SERP like this. It has the blue "title" link that goes to one page (URL A), and under that, there is a green "breadcrumb" link that goes to a different page (URL B).
Any idea why this is happening and how it can be fixed?
Thanks in advance,
Benjamin
Thanks, Rand!
Like I said, it's difficult to find any recent information about TLA or TLB at all. I hadn't even heard about the link penalty or the sale.
I've skimmed over Scott's experiment and will watch your video in a bit. Honestly, I'm not surprised that the experiment worked.
One of my clients was recently surpassed by a competitor in the SERPs for one of their "bread-and-butter" keywords. The competitor very obviously bought links...and lots of them, too. Especially in a post-Penguin (even post-Panda) environment, I found that a bit disheartening. Though I don't wish bad things on anyone, I'm hoping (and betting) that Google will quickly pick up their "unnatural" links.
I've searched the web for any objective articles, good or bad, written about Text Link Ads or Text Link Brokers written in the past two years. Other than the occasional discussion board question, SEOs are silent about these services.
I know back in 2006, Rand looked upon them almost favorably. But what has happened since then? Is there any legitimate use for these services anymore (as a link builder)?
I've run into the same problem. As best as I can tell, it can't be done.
To link your personal Google+ profile to your content, you have to use the "Contributor to" section under the "About" page of your profile. Google+ Pages have no such section.
The only work-around I can think of is the "company persona" option you mention, but like you said, that defeats the point of authorship.
In the past couple of months, Google rolled out a tab called "Social Settings" in the Admin area (see image). It's an optional setting, and Google is rather vague about what it does.
GA already tracks social in "Traffic Sources," so what is the advantage of using Social Settings?
If you've used these new settings, what have your experiences been? Were the settings helpful? Did they completely screw up your analytics?
Thanks,
Benjamin
So how would you go about assigning a score or a rank to your site's keyword diversity? For example, when would you say that a site's keywords are "too diverse" or "not diverse enough"?
I recently read this awesome article by Ian Lurie on the Portent blog: http://www.portent.com/blog/analytics/seo-analytics-middle-earth-style.htm
However, I keep getting stumped by what he means under the "Grade Yourself" section by "keyword diversity." Of course, I've tried to ask him, but he hasn't yet responded. Besides, I like to get the opinion of the SEOMoz crowd anyway.
So what is "keyword diversity"?
Thanks,
Benjamin
Well my site has over 10,000 pages, so I probably shouldn't do that 
Either way, I had forgotten that OSE gives me the +1's for my top 25 pages. Since those are the most likely to get +1'd anyway (at least that's my guess), it gives me a good idea.
If for nothing else, thanks for that reminder.
And keep working on your +1 app, you'd have something very unique if you built the first user-friendly way to get complete +1 data, especially since Google's own Webmaster Tools can't seem to do it!
I tried that, but it looks like it only allows me to pull data from the last 30 days.
Ah ha! The backslash is the secret.
Here are the results for Apple: "http://www.apple.com/",13476
Unfortunately, that's roughly the same figure I get from OSE (13,472), so I think your application is also only pulling data for the home page.
Either that, or I'm misreading OSE, and it really is pulling +1 data for the entire domain...
Cool idea, but it doesn't seem to be working for me.
For example, here's the results I got for Apple:
Thanks, Andrew. I just tried that, but it seems like OSE only gives +1 data for the exact URL.
I need +1 data for the entire domain.
I can't for the life of me figure how to see the total number of Google +1's my site has.
Yes, I've tried Webmaster Tools, but it only shows +1's from the past 30 days. All days prior to that are grayed out.
Any help is appreciated. Thanks!
