Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I have worked for a mental health institute treating addiction and associated problems. There is no way to engage with clients or have people that suffer from it participate in open forum discussions like social media. Maybe it's an option to niche it with a related but not the same theme like: things you can do the stay mentally fit tips Tweet channel (I like short names you see). Not associating it directly get's attention and people not bothered to participate in discussions like: how not to feel dead tired and empty when not working tips. This is a prelude state to becoming a client so its prospecting nevertheless.

A more seen and practical alternative is to start expert communities with doctors and other experts that post and interact in a community for example about staying mentally fit. It's a double edge sword as the experts can build online authority and people in real need for medical attention can linger and interact around general items like news clippings on new treatments etc. Why not send a PM to the doc that was discussing e-cigarettes about you not being able to quit smoking pot?

communities recommended:
Social Media Strategies (Google+) with 133K members, high quality posts and moderation
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/100354381402619402956
And of course my very own community on everthing Google + marketing:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/114482540072196914877
But i'ts in Dutch but he where else do I get a change to mention it once i a while on all these EN media:)

Your welcome. Interesting question. My answer is that if the HTML TITLE is set with client side JavaScript then it's has little change of being picked up as the title by crawlers or Google. Let's say we alter the node element Title value with like this:

In this case it will alter the value after the hard coded HTML title was send to the browser. It would need the crawler to load the document in full and read the HTML title value only after fully rendering it as if it where a human user. This is not likely.

Then we could also try a document write to construct the HTML HEAD tag Title as a string to use for the browser as the title like this:

Will not work as the title text is not actually altered after evaluation of the script line.

This does not work because the title is not set but because it's not actually printed to the browser as a string. The source code for the title still looks like this in to any browser:

As you can see the script does not print the result string of the evaluation to the browser but still sets the value of the document object model node HTML TITLE to the value it evaluates to.

Try it for yourself with this dummy page I made just to be certain.
http://www.googlewiki.nl/test/seojavascripttest2.html And this is the DOM info for this page http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/testanchor.php?url=http://www.googlewiki.nl/test/seojavascripttest2.html&anchor=test

Or am I missing something here?

Hope this helps.

Hi... I would not prefer a client side approach to this. If it's readable depends on the script itself. Although some JS fans will say this alright I would prefer to do this server side with php, or similar, and make a template that does this rewrite. It's not to hard. Or why not a batch run to modify all pages once to hardcode the correct title in the page? Have some scripts that can do this for you if you would like.

Hope this helps.

Thanks Jane!

Maybe I just will port it to a chrome plug-in. Thanks for the tip!

And I know and have used ayima plug-in!

Hi everyone,

Im sort of a Google+ nutter and I wanted to figure out exactly what is required for a full bleed image to appear for +1 share on the page itself. I got it figured out and I think it requires:

• canonical url
• og:image
• image wider then 506px
• type article or page (microdata format)

But sometimes it seems that pages without a canonical url still show full bleed image when shared as link when I insert the url directly into a google+ post. My question is if this could be a cached version of the page where it had a canonical url?

Don't really know if that anyone is interested but I made a simple tool that checks if a page meets requirements for having a full bleed image when share as link on Google+. Think I nailed it pretty close but can't seem to get the full bleed image to appear for the tool itself do:) Please dont ask. It's driving me mad already.

http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/check-fullbleed.php

Try it. Take a blog post url, check it with this tool and then see for yourself if it's accurate. If not I would like to hear very much as it would help me pin point it better!

Examples of pages with specific no no factors for you to try are:
http://www.copyblogger.com/google-authorship/ (img to small)
http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/14/5896979/gmail-api-isnt-the-end-of-email-its-a-new-beginning (no og prefix but works)

ha ha this is hysterical: I use an example of a optimization project for local search. It's an marina and in Dutch it is: 'jacht huren near Makkum' which google translate translated to 'rent Yacht near Makkum'. Just try to input this query into google. I'm sometimes scare myself Exact match in English for my set out applied method done in Dutch. This is new because when I set it up I already tested this so it's not luck so to say. And see how the suffix descriptor yacht rental delivers what I promised: marina + home town or rent yacht + marina city. I should have asked more for this:) O yeah it's Alpha Sail that I done it for. The company name for the marina.

I have a nice and valued guide to optimizing google my business that I published in Dutch and am translating to English. Hope to publish it here some time soon if they let me that is:) This is the raw translation with google translate but it reads ok already I think? If there was only more time )

http://translate.google.com/translate?langpair=nl%7Cen&u=http://google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-handleiding/

How must I see this last comment in context of above?

Have you looked in your webmaster tools dashboard for this site? It has a section structured data in your website and shows exactly which structured data has been picked up? Or are the errors showing up there?

Agreed. I use my own method which I call Business alignment for on and offline business which describes this process for Dutch companies. Works like a charm, idiot proof and not economically viable to copy for the technically skilled borderline criminal seo that look for the loophole alone instead of the grand scheme and sustainability in the long run. Something like that you mean?

To bad moz local is not available in the Netherlands but I get around.

Does this _service provided (keyword) _also include the company name suffix for the google my business listing?

Hi,

Use schema org 2.0 tags for pages and blog post entries. Google uses these to distinguishes between the two. Use page tags for the category and blog page templates and blog post tags for the posts. A blog home page is essentially a categories page that displays all posts for all categories and shows an excerpt and deep link. Use rel previous / next for pagination for these pages.

Then implement a 3-link system for authorship which is optimal for blog seo. Each author has a author page on the domain and all post for an author point to his / her author page. Use the rel=author tag for blog post with the author name in the byline linking to the author bio page. Link the author bio page to his Google+ personal profile with rel=me and make sure they link back from there profile to the domain of the blog under the tab About and then Contributor to. Place a Google+ badge for pages on your blog page and presto your are a nasty mean blog.

Hope this helps.

PS. see the diagram for 3-link schema. It's Dutch but still understandable I think/hope.

Daniel

google-authorship-3-link.png

Your welcome. Like to share some of this stuff sometimes especially if it's helpful and appreciated. I also get very good feedback and insights from comments so it's a win/win I like to think.

It could be a lot of things. I recommend that you check all bases before moving on and assuming it's Google's blackbox and it's not meant to be understood. Bases:

Is it a real genuine Google+ local page?
(look for address, opening hours etc)
Is it really associated with the right company?
Verified on address?
No duplicates for this listing (on address and or name and town ie)?
(is reason to demote or deactivate the listing and not showing live for local searches)
Is the local +page generated with Google My Company?
Is the local +page connected with rel=publisher to website and verified?
Does the business name contain the primary keyword as descriptor (suffix to business name)
Do other high authority listings contain similar information for company name, city and tel. number?
Does the +page show opening hours (mandatory and address but only city for business that only visit customers and have no office for customers to want to visit?)

Well this what came to mind for the bases and are all of importance.

Hope that this helps. If not you can send me a PM via moz with the url of the page and I'l  be glad to look at it if you like (no strings attached).

Gr Daniel

Just some code. To tired for branding discussion But a 302 is the sort of redirect to use when wanting to maintain PageRank on domain.old and redirect to domain.new in the same practical manner as with the 301. Difference: 302 means moved temporarily and 301 moved permanently. I would actually not advice a 302 redirect and maintaining 2 parallel domains in most cases. It doesn't solve the problem structurally and is like insulin. It keeps the patient alive and well but it doesn't cure an obsolete system running only to serve the next few lines of code and nothing else. For Apache best method for 302 redirect:

mod_rewrite method 
RewriteEngine On
rewritecond %{http_host} ^yoursite.nl
rewriteRule ^(.*) http://www.newsite.nl/$1 [R=302,L]

PHP method
Please lookup http://moz.com/community/q/experience-of-moving-to-a-new-domain

JavaScript or other client side scripts Don not redirect with client side scripts. This is the fools choice!

Microsoft Internet Information Server and MS family See Client side scripts and you cant be a SEO if you want this. For the instructions I refer to: ~back of server disc and dial the number on it for someone who cares

!!! Watch out if you do not know what you are doing when adding rules to mod_rewrite. It is called the voodoo module by webmasters and developers for a good reason.

It's fuzzy stuff and they say it's logical as can be. It's like telling someone something really important in reverse while they answer normally or something, It's just weird and if not understood in 4 hours then you will probally never understand. Catch is that if done wrong Apache is not answering anymore for no one until undone manually. If comfortable add it to Apache httpd.conf. Alternative is putting it in .htaccess and placing this file in the document root(!) of the website which usually equates to http://website.com. Last method is sort of stupid as it simulates the vodoo box but it's not as cost effective for system resources as mod_rewrite which is the reason to want risk it in the first place.

It’s a complex question with no definitive answer at the moment I believe. Momentarily all we have to go on is our own observation. I try my best as I write blogs on the subject and I’ll be happy to share my personal idea’s on this with you. First of all lets us establish sort of little synopsis for terminology used. some designations in the terms used is necessary as the devil is in the details:

- ‘A vanity URL with the city on it’. You mean a Google+ custom url with the name of the city in the readabletext part of the url like: plus.google.com/+agency(TLD)city?
- Property agent + local town EQUALS organic search not being local?
- Property agent + near + hometown EQUALS organic + local search?

• You assume that that text in a custom Google+ url is a ranking factor in google?

Well if so then this is my 20ct. It is vastly more complex yet surprisingly easy to rank for once you know which elements of (google) pages rank for what sort of search types. I call the Google My Business listing a local page which is short for Google local page and it consists of a company listing with specific properties like address and opening hours stored in the Google My Business directory which actually is a vertical search column for addresses linked to coordinates in the coordinates column Maps.

The business directory of google are the company listings and those rank when verified on address. Then they rank on business name most strongly when it’s a semantic search like: property agent near hometown. This triggers a combined search where the Maps and Google My Business listing are sort of leading ranking factors. The query parameter near is a 1-on-1 instruction for google to search for an entity type business where the question is where it is located. The term property agent is a symantic construct as well. It is a category in the business listing and in combination with near and a city then google constructS the following query: get business entities in category property agents located in the greater city area of hometown.

When you leave out the word near it changes the vertical to Google Search instead of Maps (so to say). In the first example the business name is the 1 factor that is ranked on (that we can significantly influence). Google allows one generic descriptor in this name field (hint!). When you leave it out (near) then it’s back to old fashion onpage and link metrics. Need some proof to see with your own eyes? Look for business: Daniel Mulder Marketing Advies and look at the query marketing advice near Apeldoorn and now at the query marketing advice Apeldoorn. My website (not proud of it but it works for local search for now) www.danielmulder.nl. See anything you like and that collaborates my story? PS. To get listed as place filler in case of lack of property agents you need some reviews via the Google+ page that is associated with Google My Business. Again look at the query Marketing advice near Apeldoorn and then in the top reviews or whatever that box on the top left is called. Fact: asked for those REAL reviews from real people and got them overnight the same as the instant ranking thereafter for the queries with near in it.

Hope this helps.

Gr Daniel

edit?usp=sharing

I agree. I think it's primarily is a measure of the DOM efficiency of the code it self and how efficient it is when rendering by a browser. Server speed is a minimal part of it. All the caching in the world does not make it faster for to restart the rendering because of inline css. A faster responding server and download of the page only makes it possible to start faster with 90% of jobs that are relevant for PageSpeed but which are mostly handled by the browser alone?

What does the PageSpeed tool actually measure?

Does it say that a webserver is fast or slow?

Thanks in advanced!

That's skew any way you look at it. But still. Put them all in a secondary sitemap.html so they are not orphans, remove from sitemap.xml, place noindex in the HTML HEAD and still try to consolidate where possible.

In general we do not want to get rid of pages that are not a problem as they can receive organic traffic for not targeted keywords that we have no real other way of discovering. The web is an organic momentum flux and is not a solid state structure. It needs some degree of unintended and not calculated behavior also in website structure. Otherwise the sum of the parts of all pages in google would equal the value of google which is not the case. google connects dot's, we interpret and find new meaning and relations translating into traffic we did not expect.

The momentum flux is a joke of course. It's a quantum state of course

No do not use a 301 and certainly do not remove any pages from the index as mentioned here. That's foolish and uncalled for and potentially harmful against zero to no risk if you would let them be and only make them less prominent to users of the site. And if you really feel you need to cut drastically in the number of tag pages then use rel=canonical instead of a 301!

Consolidate not decimate! When we 301 we assimilate pages to 1 page. We say the old page is gone for good and the new 1 is the new page for the old link. This diffuses the keyword that the page was found for as it melts all different pages that 301 to a page into 1. However when we use a canonical url we consolidate the pages into 1 new one that bundle the old. When we search for a page that has and canonical to a other page it still ranks next to the new page for a while. Only the title in search is the same as the page referred to with the canonical. With the 301 it will disappears completely from the index and google cache along with it's internal keyword binding it hat before. So use canonical not 301! And my advice: consolidate to 1 useful tag page with a real body of work and optimize this for a primary keyword like 'seo news' or something and leave the pages with the 301 be but don't link to them anymore from then on.

Hope this is helpful.

Gr Daniel

Your welcome. Well it's to be honest I thought that "write and develop for your users" etc was stating the obvious but maybe I was to quick to draw this conclusion but II agree totally. Thing to me seems that people in general start making things progressively complicated when they start thinking and acting this accordingly while I believe that an effective link structure is the same for users and crawlers alike.

Crawlers and humans both read right to left starting at the upper left corner. All content closest to this point is more important than content after it. Also logical as we also do not place the name of a company at the bottom of the corporate website and start with the disclaimer (ok some people will never learn but I mean effectively function beings). So rule of thumb is we place our most important navigational links at the top left and then to the right. We link in 2-3 words to page because they are important and we want people and crawlers alike to find them. If we make those links nofollow then that’s the instruction for Google NOT to go and index these pages so the can be found. This would be the same if we correspondingly place the same link in the main menu and put a sign with it: to all readers: do not read this page.

Bit strange right? Use a nofollow for links in the main navigational menu that are not as important like your disclaimer and general terms etc. Link there once from a less significant place on the page that is a followed link. Get it?

Funny thing is that this script makes it very easy to see all links with anchors for a page and analyses for each link on the page how well the linked page is optimized for the anchor used in the link. Complicated? Not at all. Just fill in a front page of any website, set option to show links, wait a moment, find the followed links section and click the link to see for yourself.

Link follower script Hope this makes it more clear for you as it's not to difficult once you see the essence?

Gr Daniel

believe I found a hint

opensiteexplorer linking pages: limboland.net

| *.limboland.net/

| Top Linking Pages | Page Authority |
| http://business.limboland.net/factoring/delaware_llc/delaware_llc.html | 29 |

| 39 | 281 |

See http://www.opensiteexplorer.org/domains.html?page=2&scope=domain_to_domain&site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.delawareinc.com%2F&sort=domain_authority&target=domain

Anchor text linking to some page on https://www.delawareinc.com/

| your story heidi lowe gallery,1,6 |

Query Google if the phrase with myamar girls etc is indexed for the limbo land site:

myanmar girls site:http://limboland.net/

See the smoking gun? This site links to yours and uses the exact keywords and is a doubtful site at best.

I would disavow this entire website.

Hope this helps.

Gr Daniel

edit?usp=sharing

Hate to quit but without any specifics it's not sensible to search more thorough and I would like to second the remark by Marks Ginsberg. But if you do I would love to take another look into it. Nothing like some could old investigating I always say.

I got nothing :D... sorry..

The link I provided is a script that I wrote that does some checks. Was wondering if anybody thinks it's useful. I'm thinking about developing it a bit further and then offering it as a free open source SEO script? Try the script yourself

Does this query contain any site you might know?

Google serp

Easy on-page checker idea feedback

Some script I wrote. Is this handy for someone? Try the script yourself

like most things I like the Moz on-page grader (a lot!) but it does not do everything I want it to. So sometime I write my own little checks and other times I want to see list for of example all images without ALT tags. For this I wrote some code for myself the last few weeks. Now I bundled them for a handy little checker that is as is and not meant to make money with. It's just my handy work so to say and I would like to hear some feedback on the very simple but I think effective method of checking anchors on a front page against the page they link to.

This is a very basis page checker for some important on-page ranking factors. If you type links in the option field then all links found on the page are listed

Per link anchor quality check:

The idea is very simple: if we assume for the simplicity of this method that the anchor text found first linking to an other page on the website this anchor text determnines the keyword with which the page is indexed. In made the links found on the page clickable. When clicked it starts the same scan but then only for the anchor text provided with the link clicked. If the on-page checks are ok I reccon your doing alright.

idea is to start with the front page of any website and click the followed links, The page linked to is graded for match with anchor text as keyword.

Try the script yourself

Gr Daniel

dns and domain hijack? Mm... Then I would advice to hire a security expert. Not a SEO.

mm and a lot of 404 let me clean that up:)

yes but that's to easy and where is the fun in it:-) But could also fast become a case of chasing ghosts and shadows it it originates from websites with millions of pages?

Some suggestions:

Use rel=canonical on your front page., 
Check if these images need ALT tags:

/Content/Images/ISSUE/8/0/4/1/LatestIssues/f6c25686-8406-461e-b168-7b59c386f61a.png - Geen IMG AlT tag!
/Content/Images/ISSUE/7/0/4/1/LatestIssues/c590fea9-c0f8-4097-8923-4f379e6dd060.png - Geen IMG AlT tag!
/Content/Images/ISSUE/6/0/4/1/LatestIssues/539a23ed-b37b-41c2-9404-9d739efb3388.png - Geen IMG AlT tag!
/Content/Images/ISSUE/5/0/4/1/LatestIssues/b17ef249-fbb8-4765-8c21-2aa7370c8cba.png - Geen IMG AlT tag!
/Content/Images/ISSUE/M/N/4/1/LatestIssues/8ff6a032-6b71-4f77-9309-f6a68d25dd74.png - Geen IMG AlT tag!
/Content/Images/ISSUE/9/0/3/1/LatestIssues/7facd043-aec5-4785-8bd5-5d551cb38ac5.png - Geen IMG AlT tag!

You link for you main page to these pages with similar anchor tekst and dynamic urls?

/en/Shop/Detail?c=1408&r=%2F - More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1407&r=%2F - More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1406&r=%2F - More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1405&r=%2F - More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=14NM&r=%2F - More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1309&r=%2F - **More info **

These anchors are bit long for my taste (and dynamic urls)

/en/Shop/Detail?c=1409&r=%2F - The Great War - 100 Years: Part 1 August 2014 This set of six stamps, Miniature Sheet and Souvenir Sheetlet represent Jersey's participation in WWI. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1408&r=%2F - Red Arrows July 2014 This set of six stamps and Souvenir Sheetlet feature dynamic photographs of the Red Arrows celebrating their 50th display season. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1407&r=%2F - Seasons - Summer June 2014 The first part of a new series, featuring coastal photographs taken within the Bailiwick during the summer months. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1406&r=%2F - D-Day +70 June 2014 Commemorating 70 years since the famous World War II campaign known as D-Day. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1405&r=%2F - Remembrance 2014 May 2014 Real poppy seeds encapsulated in these stamps commemorate the historic and significant occasion of the Centenary of the First World War. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=14NM&r=%2F - Nelson Mandela Folder February 2014 Featuring Nelson Mandela, this Commemorative Miniature Sheet issued by the South African Post Office is presented in a souvenir Folder. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=1309&r=%2F - Man of Steel June 2013 CLICK HERE FOR SALE Jersey`s own superhero, Henry Cavill, star of the new Superman movie ‘Man of Steel’, on a unique set of stamps. More info /en/Shop/Detail?c=3000&r=%2F - **Albums and Binders June 2013 Albums and binders to store your stamp collection More info **

Hope this helps.

Gr Daniel

Well if we would be punished for this then I would have no blog at all. I optimize for this exactly and rank nr 1 for months on end with dozens of nice saught after keywords. Like this one google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-handleiding/ keyword Google Mijn Bedrijf handleiding (Google My Business guide)
or this one 
http://google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-opzetten/ for Google Mijn Bedrijf opzetten (set up Google My Business) It a landing page on position 1 since it has been created.

So you see why I dont give a r.. as... what they say. It works just fine for me.

Hope this helps

Gr Daniel

Do suspicious domains show up in referring domains in the opensiteexplorer? Also if you connect the moz pro dash with Analytics it will start to pick up on landing pages receiving traffic. These would eventually show up as landing pages? But then they would somethimes need a keyword provided by Google. That could take a while.
And if not they must surely be logged on the webserver log files?

Hi Carson-Ward,

That's a nice and clean solution. Thanks for that!

I actually did something similar without realizing it by creating an actual canonical file to start with for my latest guide Google My Business which in Dutch is Google Mijn Bedrijf handleiding google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-handleiding/ I have had the nr 1 position ever since it launched a week (or has it been 2 already? Dont know:) or so ago. I made it in to one large file not linking out to anything for the first week accept one strategic link to the google.com help file. This was mend as the canon indeed. Instead here I chose to optimize the category page for Google My Business and not a bulky paginated file or something like that. This category page now ranks 3 to 5th places since Google My Business is released so it's working I guess. The category page which I consider a basic keyword theme landing page -> google-plus-marketing.nl/category/google-mijn-bedrijf/

me really happy with traffic I get from it:) I think I prefer the patter approach for now above a nicely paginated multi page posts.

I experimented with this one first last few months and although it looks better it does not rank better to start with google-plus-marketing.nl/google-plus-handleiding-inhoudsopgave/ although it's ranked 1-3 for months I think simple version is best?

That's probally the only answer I could think of. Thanks.

Yes I have recently done something similar 2 times. One time for a local company which had a SEO targeting an geographically unsuitable service area for my client. It is a traffic school operating in a large city situated next to an even larger city. The SEO took a new domein xxxcity.nl and focused the keyword strategy on this as well. But how do the instructors pickup and drop off students in city A north and city B south within a hour or 90 minutes. Never going to happen 8 times a day on time. And it doesnt convert well either because people now this when the see an offer.

But I undid the city in the url part by copying the website enterely and placed a simple php script in the WordPress index.php file in the root. This replaces the domain for all request and redirects with a 301. The destination domain is the domain the client previously used.

// Permanent redirect of all PR from A > B

// Get http request headers for requests on old page
  $uri = $_SERVER['REQUEST_URI'];

// Get the path after the old domain to redirect to corresponding page on new
  $url_path = parse_url($uri, PHP_URL_PATH);

// drop the city from the url and go to new location
  $location_new = 'http://www.xxxrijschool.nl' . $url_path;

// send 301 and load destination url
  header("HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently");
  header("Location: $location_new");

exit();
?>

The above script I place on the old domain A but only after copying the whole website to the new domain B. If it's a 1-on-1 copy then this script is places on A. Thats all. It will cost some PageRank to move 2 times for 1 page but the transfer starts in a few days and will be noticeable in 2 weeks or so. After 6-8 weeks it will mostly be moved and normalize from there on. If in between we optimize on-page and aquire good backlinks then it will turn the decline of rank and can outperform the old site in a matter of 8 weeks.

For larger and large site it's recommended that the time to live for DNS records is set to 5 minutes at least a week in advanced, This is recommended by google somewhere in the guide for transfering domains in webmaster tools I believe.

Hope this helps/

Gr Daniel

Just courious to why http://moz.com/learn/seo does not appear to have the meta tag:

name="description" content="">

Is this purposely done this way for some reason? Or has it become less important?

Just curious.

Hi Denis,

The thing is: if a website offers inbound links that pass PageRank then by definition they do not comply with the Google guidelines. Google is quick to call all things not compliant spam and sometimes makes arbitrary choices as to what are considered bought links.

During a conference I once asked an ex Googler who was a webspam specialist that I thought that an advertorial on big websites are de facto paid links if they pass PageRank? I never got a real answer but I guess it all depends on the standing a website has with Google. If a small blog asks a fee for an advertisement with an followed link then it's a slippery slope, large news sites are not a problem.

All being true the link they offer is not an advertorial and is an paid link in a link directory and in the end has a high risk of being classified as such. But if you would need to put a price on it: the DA in combination with the anchor text of the link makes it more or less valuable. A DA of 30 is significantly more then 20 and will pass significantly more PageRank so us more valuable. How much more is up to the person who is in the market for buying I guess.

Hope this helps.

Gr Daniel

Hi,

Good question. I would apply APA style references if you want to be sure that you are giving credits where due. A strategy that I sometimes employ is to team up with the authority. If you have something significant to add that is significant in the body of work it takes to add to the original then most authorities will take a request to team up serious. The motive for them to do so is that they get an extra bang for their buck as their original work get's more rank and they can co create a newer work, or share some credit of the original updated work, without having to do much. Also this will ensure their leading position instead of it being in competition with a relative newcomer as yourself. Everybody wins or someone got to give. These are the 2 main flavors and wise people tend to work together in this situation.

Hope this helps.

Gr Daniel

Hi Denis,

The value of all paid links is a negative one as they are forbidden by Google as they violate their user policies or quality guidelines. If you have competitors that buy links that pass PageRank and you feel that this leads to unfair competition you can report the link selling site. The will be corrected if they make it their business ot sell those kind of backlinks.

Info: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.nl/2013/02/a-reminder-about-selling-links.html
report link seller: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/paidlinks?pli=1

So do not buy your links. Earn them! Social media and being helpful to others is a good place to start I like to think.

Gr Daniel

Hi to all SEO wizards,

For my Dutch blog google-plus-marketing.nl I'm using WordPress Genesis framework 2.0 with news theme pro 2.0 responsive theme. I love the out of the box SEO friendliness and features. One of those features is that it allows for a blog post or page to be divided into several pages. This results in MOZ signaling duplicate titles for all pages after the 1st page.

Now I was thinking that a canonical url set to the first page should do the trick for me as I reason that the rank will go the the first page and the rest will not be seen as duplicates. Genesis does some good stuff on it's own and places the following meta tags in the header for the first page. All looks well and my question is about the same meta tags for the 2nd page and higher that I pasted below this one for the 1st page.

Meta tags page 1 of X for blog post

Meta tags page 2 of X for the same blog post

Would it not be better to point the canonical url for page 2 till X to always point to the first page? In this case: