Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thank you. Waiting is frustrating

I'm working with a brick and mortar store that is planning to move to a new location in a few months. All the citation information is going to have to be updated. Is there anything productive you can do in the interim to help their rankings when you know you'll be facing an update of all their citations?

I'm dealing with a website that received a partial links penalty with no example provided the first time around. Clean up was done and we submitted for reconsideration. We were notified that the penalty is still in place and given 3 example links that are all from blog rolls. The puzzling thing is they are all natural links using the brand name. The domain name is an EMD, so it seems the logical explanation is that when your brand is and EMD, it's no longer the natural type of link it used to be. If this is the case, does anyone have any recommendation regarding a "safe" percentage of  external links using the brand as the anchor? Thanks.

Thank you!

Since you have to be consistent in all your review website information (business name, street, etc.) is it possible to have a website rank for both of their business locations which are about 50 miles from one another in the same state or do they have to pick just one location to promote offsite?

Is there any type of tool that can monitor a large website's outgoing links? I'm dealing with a huge site and was hoping there was something available that could check outgoing links without having to go through each page manually. (I'm looking to remove anything that links to a bad neighborhood). Thanks.

When you have a photo gallery with many search filters and loads and loads of pages, is it best to block all the filters and use google's pagination code?

Ex: http://photo.net/gallery/photocritique/filter

This site has pages for many different queries. While the page titles are unique, the pages are showing duplicated content.

I've read a number of articles and am getting opposing answers. I've been checking pages of Photo.net in copyscape for duplicate content. I'm finding a number of domains have the site iframed onto them. I was wondering why copyscape could read the content if the search engines supposedly didn't crawl iframes. Copyscape said Google can read the content.  I just want to know if these sites need to remove the iframe (is it hurting Photo.net)? Thanks.

Examples:

http://www.copyscape.com/?q=http%3A%2F%2Fphoto.net%2Freviews%2F

I work with Afternic.com and they are restructuring their website. The current search results pages generate tons of duplicate content, but it's not so clear to me what the best solution.

Navigation links to all of these pages which are exactly the same and do not generate content on the specific url indicated. The results all display on variations of the url names.php

http://www.afternic.com/names.php?feat=1

http://www.afternic.com/names.php?cls=1

Then they have this page with categories:

http://www.afternic.com/categories.php

And when you select a category, it generates sort results of names.php

Now because there is no real content on names.php I'm wondering if all these url variations ought to have a rel canonical tag for names.php or if they should be blocked. If blocked, it seems we're stuck with a page that doesn't display any content.

Thanks for any suggestions.

A site I'm working on is being redesigned because the current platform does not allow for content to be changed easily. In the process, they are going from .php to .html. I am concerned about their losing link juice. Can a site work with the old content remaining .php and the new content being .html or should all pages stay .php?

If you have a page whose only purpose is to allow searches and the search results can be generated by any keyword entered, should all those search result urls be no index or rel canonical? Thanks.

The client wants to remove existing content to create a cleaner look on the page. I suggested we find a way to keep that content to avoid losing the traffic it generates and turning the page into a low quality page. My thought was to display a portion of the content and have the visitor click to view the rest.

There are so many conflicting opinions out there, one of which I recently read indicated that if you are putting your keywords in javascript, the new google update would have an issue with this.

If you want to keep a page clean looking and have visitors click to read more text, is the opinion here that this is okay or an issue? The main purpose of adding text in javascript would be to have enough content on the page without making it look cluttered.

Webmaster tools says that when you have hidden text in javascript, the same content should be placed in a no script tag?

Thanks.