Welcome to the Q&A Forum

One of my concerns is that I'm transferring the content to a site that we don't own.  Essentially a previous competitor.  I want to make sure that even though we are transferring the content related to these particular products that it would negatively impact the things I'm not transferring.

I realize there are no absolutes on things like this, but I'm trying to get a general field of where the pitfalls would be and make sure that I'm thinking it through thoroughly.

Now that you have a bit more information, anything else you might warn me about?

Our e-commerce store is moving away from a set of products.

Instead of just redirecting these to an another section of our site, we were considering redirecting them to another site that sells the product.

I don't mind losing that traffic, but I don't want it to inadvertently hurt our other product lines.

Any thoughts on the impact of 301 redirecting a certain section of traffic to another domain?   Anything I should we on the lookout for or consider?

Ugh... not the answer I was looking for.  I've removed all the things that would tell google that there is video on the page.  I just wasn't sure if there was anything else I could do.

Thanks!

Ok, so here's a good one for you.  I was ranking well (2-3rd) position when I got it into my head that I should implement some video SEO to get the video to appear next to my ranking.  Well I did that with the help of Wistia.  Only problem is my 2-3 ranking become 4-5, and I also became convinced that the page seemed less desirable as video content when I saw it in the rankings.  So... I want to undo what I did.

I removed the video sitemap and the SEO video markup from wistia, but it's been weeks and Google has still got me listed as video content.  Any thoughts on how to accelerate the undoing of this damage?

Ok, I rewrote the content completely on the www.simplifiedbuilding.com site, so I guess we'll see where this goes.

Thanks for the input.

I have a piece of content (that is similar) that legitimately shows up on two different sites.  I would like both to link, but it seems as if they are "flip flopping" in ranking.  Sometimes one shows up, sometimes another.  What's the best way to differentiate a piece of content like this?  Does it mean rewriting one entirely?

http://www.simplifiedbuilding.com/solutions/ada-handrail/

http://simplifiedsafety.com/solutions/ada-handrail/

I want to the Simplified Building one to be found first if I had a preference.

Is there a way to get a keyword ranking summary report emailed to me for specific tags?

Yeah this is a good thought, but unfortunately these images are hosted on flickr so that won't help me too much.  I'm in the process of moving them to my site and I'm trying to figure out what impact that might have on my search traffic.

I have a general followup to this question:

If I find out that an image is indexed in google images, is there a good way to track (using google analytics) how much traffic a particular traffic is being driven by the image?

Thanks for all the help.

I think this sounds like the way to go.

Is there a way to tell if an image is indexed in Google Images?

yeah it seems as if the image tag as thrown int out of proportion, I will try to correct.

Ok a couple of followup questions:

What about shortening the title tag? Currently it's "How To: Build a Custom Ergonomic Computer Desk - Blog - Projects, Ideas, Inspiration, Kee Klamp, Fittings".  The stuff at the end was added by the CMS and I want to shorten it to "How To: Build a Custom Ergonomic Computer Desk".  Is there any fear in shortening the Title tag when I am refining it and make it more potent (e.g. getting rid of the crap)

**What about changing the image file names and adding alt tags when they are nonsense or garbage? **

Here's an example of what's there now:

src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3039/2770274783_e9c2df4616.jpg"

width="500" />

You can see it's just junk.  I could see improve the meta substantially and also giving the files real names and putting them on my own CDN.  Doing this of course would cause google to see them as different (but better?) images.

**What about adding a "finish" picture to the top?  **Maurizio mentioned not editing the top of the page.  But what if I wanted to add a nice "finish" picture to to the top?  Would that cause any issues?

**What about making these changes incrementally?  **Would it be better to make a little change.  Like change an image a week or something silly like that, or make all the changes at once.

I have a page that is very well indexed and has a 1st position ranking in google.  It is the best landing page in my site.

That being said, it's several years old and I honestly think it could be better.  The images could be enlarged, the the images could have fancy box enlargements instead of just linking out to flickr, there could be more content about follow up projects that people have done.

I'm noteably nervous about changing such a clutch piece of content on my site.

I do want to improve the content for users, not just make it more SEO friendly (it's already SEO'd), but I'm afraid that any change could cause a set back in ranking.

Am I being afraid of nothing, should I just go for it and improve my content, or should I be extra cautious when editing well indexed content like this?

Thanks for the advice

So you're saying that the H1 should "agree" with the keyword density and that would be a better approach.

What about the aspect of varying taxonomy.  Does anyone have any thoughts about this?

In the case of trying to hit a wide taxonomy, is it better to keep your title and URL in agreement, or to vary them slightly for exact search matching.

For instance this blog post which has the following url:

http://www.simplifiedbuilding.com/blog/build-your-own-standing-desk/

has the title "Make a Stand Up Desk - Better Working, Longer Living"

The ideas is that build and make are similar words and "stand up" and "standing" are also similar.

So what is the better way to go?