Welcome to the Q&A Forum

For a large jobs site, what would be the best way to handle job adverts that are no longer available?

Ideas that I have include:

1. Keep the url live with the original content and display current similar job vacancies below - this has the advantage of continually growing the number of indexed pages.

2. 301 redirect old pages to parent categories - this has the advantage of concentrating any acquired link juice where it is most needed.

Your thoughts much appreciated.

Wow - never knew that - Thanks!

How does this page get a Rich Snippet, there is no microdata or schema code?

job-rich-snippet.png

I am looking to remove some old directory links that now look spammy.

Some years ago the site was redesigned. The links are all to the old pages url, which is 301 redirected to the new.

If we remove the 301 and let the page 404, will that suffice in Googles eyes?

I have a page with 10 links.

5 of the links are normal links to pages on my site

5 are links contained within an iFrame

My understanding is that Google will only pass link juice to the 5 normal links and the iFrame links will be ignored.

Am I correct?

Hi,

A large site with tens of thousands of pages, but lots of the pages are very similar.

The site is about training courses, and the url structure is something like:

training-course/date/time

I only really want the search engines to index the actual training course pages, which is the better option for me and why?:

a) rel=canonical

b) noindex, nofollow

Thanks,

Gary.

Hi Matt & Marie,

Many thanks for your comments.

I think it is Google only. Having not identified any other likely cause, I think that the Panda update on the 21st of November is the likely culprit, the timing is definitely correct.

Thanks again,

Gary.

At the end of November a client site dropped significantly in the rankings.

The drop effected almost all the keyphrases we monitor.

Historically the homepage has always ranked higher than the sub-pages - however now it seems Google is no longer ranking the home page, and instead ranking the sub-pages, just far far lower down.

Any ideas what could cause this?

I currently work for the UK arm of a Company with headquarters in Germany - The have outlets in half-a-dozen European countries, and up until now each country has had it's own website.

The group has decided that from next year they will close all the individual country sites and then run new sites each from a central .location, I guess with a shared database of products. I see the sense in having central stock control etc, but I'm worried about the SEO impact.

I have searched Q&A and the blog but could not find much to help me.

What I would like to do is to provide some advice and pointers at to what they should be aiming for, both in terms website structure and on-going SEO for each country.

Any advice welcome, thanks in advance.

Please see the attached example, why is the date here and how can I get rid of it?

Capture.PNG

Many many thanks Rebecca!

The quality of this answer makes this years subscription worthwhile, and we are only a month in.

Must have taken you some time, it is much appreciated.

Cheers, Gary.

My client would like to redirect all non UK traffic from their UK site to their main group site.

I am intending to use a .htaccess redirect, like this:

RewriteCond %{ENV:GEOIP_COUNTRY_CODE} !^GB$
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.group.com$1 [R,L]

I have tested the redirect at it works fine.

My question is if I put this in place would it have any negative SEO impact on the UK site?

Thanks guy, lots of what you say make great sense and has given me lots to think about and research further.

Much appreciated.

If I intend to have 5 versions of an e-commerce site, one for each countries marketplace, would it be best to:

a) Host each site in its own country

b) Host all sites from 1 server/1 country

I'm presuming that hosting in each country is better? But how quantifiable is this, and is it worth the extra hosting and management costs?

Any advice gratefully received..

Hi Mike,

Thanks for your answer.

Both organic and local.

My main concern was whether displaying the 3 addresses in the footer  as well as just one of the addresses on each location page was a good idea.

Thanks.

We have 3 offices, at the moment we have the address of each office in the footer using the schema.org format.

We are also creating individual pages for each location, the address on these pages will also be in the schema.org format.

Is having locations in both the footer and on individual location pages the best way to go?

I thought that content in iFrames (including links) was disregarded by the search engines.

It's my understanding that including links in an iFrame is the only fail-safe way not to leak link juice?

Is there any issue with adding multiple clients websites/locations to our Google Places account?

They would use a Head Office telephone number, same for each listing.

I have seen other companies with multiple listing with the same telephone number, so I am presuming that Google alllow this.

My client offers training from many locations within the UK.

These locations/venues are not owned by them, however I see no problem in setting up a different listing for each location in Google Places.

At the end of the day if a user searched for “Training London” they are looking for somewhere that they can book a course that would be in their local area. As my client has a “venue” there I think there is a good argument to say that your listing would be valid.

What are your thoughts.