Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I guess the question is in the subject. We have a client that wishes to buy a domain and use it to replace the primary URL on their website. Although the domain is currently not in use, it was back in 2002 until about 2010. We're concerned that this could cause issues if we change the name over and the domain itself has had penalties in the past

OK - bear with me... We have a .co.uk website. However, we only want it indexing in the US Google and NOT the UK Google. Is there a way of configuring this in Search Console /Webmaster tools?

I am working with 2 local businesses that are joining forces to create 1, new business. Both individually hold consistent position 1 and 2 in Google for the majority of their chosen terms. However, the merger will see a new brand name and therefore a fresh out of the box domain. I have suggested setting up a partition on the hosting for both old URLS. All that will be hosted there would be .htaccess files with 301s to the like-for-like pages on the brand new domain / website. This will obviously also aid UX. However, is this overkill? I personally think not... but would a domain level 301 redirect work just as well from preserving / passing on any authority to the new URL.

We have successfully implemented run-of-the-mill 301s from old URLs to new (there were about 3,000 products). As normal. Like we do on every other site etc. However, recently search console has started to report a number of 404s with the page names with a trailing forward slash at the end of the .html suffix. So, /old-url.html is redirecting (301) to /new-url.html However, now for some reason /old-url.html/ has 'popped up' in the Search Console crawl report as a 404. Is there a 'blobal' rule you can write in nGinx to say redirect *.html/ to */html (without the forward slash) rather than manually doing them all?

We're writing more out of curiosity... Clicking on "Download latest links" within 'Links to your site' in Google's WebMaster Tools would usually bring back links discovered recently. However, the last few times (for numerous accounts) it has brought back a lot of legacy links - some from 2011 - and includes nothing recent. We would usually expect to see a dozen at least each month. ...Has anyone else noticed this? Or, do you have any advice? Thanks in advance, Ant!

OK – bear with me on this… I am working on some pretty large ecommerce websites (50,000 + products) where it is appropriate for some individual products to be placed within multiple categories / sub-categories. For example, a Red Polo T-shirt could be placed within: Men’s > T-shirts >
Men’s > T-shirts > Red T-shirts
Men’s > T-shirts > Polo T-shirts
Men’s > Sale > T-shirts
Etc. We’re getting great organic results for our general T-shirt page (for example) by clustering creative content within its structure – Top 10 tips on wearing a t-shirt (obviously not, but you get the idea). My instinct tells me to replicate this with products too. So, of all the location mentioned above, make sure all polo shirts (no matter what colour) have a canonical set within Men’s > T-shirts > Polo T-shirts. The presumption is that this will help build the authority of the Polo T-shirts page – this obviously presumes “Polo Shirts” get more search volume than “Red T-shirts”. My presumption why this is the best option is because it is very difficult to manage, particularly with a large inventory. And, from experience, taking the time and being meticulous when it comes to SEO is the only way to achieve success. From an administration point of view, it is a lot easier to have all product URLs at the root level and develop a dynamic breadcrumb trail – so all roads can lead to that one instance of the product. There's No need for canonicals; no need for ecommerce managers to remember which primary category to assign product types to; keeping everything at root level also means there no reason to worry about redirects if product move from sub-category to sub-category etc. What do you think is the best approach? Do 1000s of canonicals and redirect look ‘messy’ to a search engine overtime? Any thoughts and insights greatly received.