Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I have a blog post that ranks pretty high for the term "justin bieber tickets". We are running a ticket giveaway and have received tons of responses on Facebook and G+. The responses are often poorly written in they sense that they are from younger fans, but it is a bunch of related content that I thought could be a "good "addition of unique content to the post.

1. Is this a good idea in general?
2. Is it still a good idea if the comments are poorly written and contain lots of slang an exclamation points?
3. Is it bad form to put people's Facebook comments live on the web, even though it is a public page.

• Here is the post
• Example of what this would look like in the post >http://cl.ly/1Q3N0t091V0w3m2r442G
• Source of comments >http://www.facebook.com/SeatGeek

Another less aggressive option would be to curate some of my favorite comments...

Thanks for any thoughts.

Cool. When we launched them separately we overvalued the potential for ticket prices rankings and had so little respect from engines that double ranking was hard. Also, I wasn't as on my game with SEO back then.

I think merging is the way to go, I am filing it into our dev. queue for the coming weeks.

Thanks for the helpful response. And I definitely am with you on the idea of having better data on all our pages. I initially set it up separately but have been leaning towards merging those ticket price pages with the tickets pages and killing off (301ing the price pages to the tickets pages). Make sense?

We are trying to switch to a tabbed version of our team/product pages at SeatGeek.com, but where all tabs (only 2 right now) are viewed as one document by the search engines.

I am pretty sure we have this working for the most part, but would love some quick feedback from you all as I have never worked with this approach before and these pages are some of our most important.

Resources:

http://www.ericpender.com/blog/tabs-and-seo

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=03fdefb488a16343&hl=en

http://searchengineland.com/is-hiding-content-with-display-none-legitimate-seo-13643

Sample in use: http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors

**Old Version: **

http://screencast.com/t/BWn0OgZsXt

http://seatgeek.com/boston-celtics-tickets/

New Version with tabs:

http://screencast.com/t/VW6QzDaGt

http://screencast.com/t/RPvYv8sT2

http://seatgeek.com/miami-heat-tickets/

Notes:

• Content not displayed stacked on browser when Javascript turned off, but it is in the source code.
• Content shows up in Google cache of new page in the text version.
• In our implementation the JS is currently forcing the event to end before the default behavior of adding #about in this case to the url string - this can be changed, should it be?
• Related to this, the developer made it so that typing http://seatgeek.com/miami-heat-tickets/#about directly into the browser does not go to the tab with copy, which I imagine could be considered spammy from a human review perspective (this wasn't intentional).
• This portion of the code is below the truncated view of the fetch as Googlebot, so we didn't have that resource.
• Are there any issues with hidden text / is this too far down in the html?

Any/all feedback appreciated. I know our copy is old, we are in the process of updating it for this season.

(please ignore ridiculousness of hypothetical situation)

Lets say Amazon had a food division which was at food.amazon.com. I partnered with Amazon's food division and now food.amazon.com will point to my website (food.com). Amazon adds a CNAME record so food.amazon.com resolves to food.com. If food.amazon.com has built up significant page rank / domain authority, will food.com be getting those benefits? Also, lets say food.amazon.com/rice has a lot of PR / authority -- will food.com benefit from the value of those internal pages?