Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Applies to Travel for sure. Personally I think if you have the "award" or proof that you own the status as No 1 then use it. Your title tag is like your sales pitch. If you sell shit to me and you are the No 1 or the Best and don't say it, you might have missed new customer. I am more likly to click on something that claims to be No 1 or the Best, however, if I get there and it isn't true then bey bey. So I don't think it could hurt unless it's not true.
I have a rewrite on the CMS I work on. What happens here is that if someone creates a page on the website and uses spaces as the name then the CMS automatically replaces the spaces with -'s. I noticed this morning that the %20 URLs are accessible but not indexed at all. Only the - URLs are indexed. could this cause duplicate content or penalties? I know best practice is to have only ONE URL for a page but somehow the developer can't redirect the %20 URLs to the - URLs.
Opinions?
I had a few hundred URLs that died on my site. Google Webmaster Tools notified me about the increase in 404 errors. I fixed all of them by 301 redirecting them to the most relevant page and did multiple header checks to ensure that the 301 has been implemented correctly. Now a few weeks later, Google is giving me the exact same message in Google Webmaster Tools but they are all still 301 redirected. WTF?
Hi Mozzers
I would like to know how crawlers see the ampersand (& or &) in your URLs and if Google frown upon this or not? As far as I know they purely recognise this as "and" is this correct and is there any best practice for implementing this, as I know a lot of people complained before about & in links and that it is better to use it as &, but this is not on links, this is on URLs.
Reason for this is that we looking to move onto an ASP.Net MVC framework (any suggestions for a different framework are welcome, we still just planning out future development) and in order to make use of the filter options we have on our site we need a parameter to indicate the difference on a routing level (routing sends to controller, controller sends to model, model sends to controller and controller sends to view < this is pattern of a request that comes in on the framework we will be using).
I already have -'s and /'s in the URLs (which is for my SEO structuring) so these syntax can't be used for identifying filters the user clicks or uses to define their search as it will create a complete mess in the system. Now we looking at & to say; OK, when a user lands on /accommodation and they selects De Kelders (which is a destination in our area) the page will be /accommodation/de-kelders on this page they can define their search further to say they are looking for 5 star accommodation and it should be close to the beach, this is where the routing needs some guidance and we looking to have it as follow: /accommodation/de-kelders/5-star&close-to-the-beach. Now, does the "&" get identified by search engines on a URL level as "and" and does this cause any issues with crawling or indexation or would it be best to look at another solution?
Thanks,
Chris Captivate
Hi Dr Pete
Thank you so much for your input, I really appreciate it. Always fun learning something new 
I also don't prefer the engine-specific approach. However, could it hurt implementing both solutions?
Regards,
Chris Captivate.
Hi Mozzers
I have a bit of thing I was pondering about this morning and would love to hear your opinion on it.
So we had a bit of an issue on our client's website in the beginning of the year. I tried to find a way around it by using wild cards in my robots.txt but because different search engines treat wild cards differently it dint work out so well and only some search engines understood what I was trying to do. so here goes,
I had a parameter on a big amount of URLs on the website with ?filter being pushed from the database we make use of filters on the site to filter out content for users to find what they are looking for much easier, concluding to database driven ?filter URLs (those ugly &^% URLs we all hate so much*.
So what we looking to do is implementing nofollow noindex on all the internal links pointing to it the ?filter parameter URLs, however my SEO sense is telling me that the noindex nofollow should rather be on the individual ?filter parameter URL's metadata robots instead of all the internal links pointing the parameter URLs. Am I right in thinking this way? (reason why we want to put it on the internal links atm is because the of the development company states that they don't have control over the metadata of these database driven parameter URLs)
If I am not mistaken noindex nofollow on the internal links could be seen as page rank sculpting where as onpage meta robots noindex nofolow is more of a comand like your robots.txt
Anyone tested this before or have some more knowledge on the small detail of noindex nofollow?
PS: canonical tags is also not doable at this point because we still in the process of cleaning out all the parameter URLs so +- 70% of the URLs doesn't have an SEO friendly URL yet to be canonicalized to.
PSS: another reason why this needs looking at is because search engines won't be able to make an interpretation of these pages (until they have been cleaned up and fleshed out with unique content) which could result in bad ranking of the pages which could conclude to my users not being satisfied, so over and above the SEO factor, usability of the site is being looked at here as well, I don't want my users to land on these pages atm. If they navigate to it via the filters then awesome because they are defining what they are looking for with the filters.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Thanks,
Chris Captivate.
Hi Mozzers
I have a bit of thing I was pondering about this morning and would love to hear your opinion on it.
So we had a bit of an issue on our client's website in the beginning of the year. I tried to find a way around it by using wild cards in my robots.txt but because different search engines treat wild cards differently it dint work out so well and only some search engines understood what I was trying to do. so here goes,
I had a parameter on a big amount of URLs on the website with ?filter being pushed from the database we make use of filters on the site to filter out content for users to find what they are looking for much easier, concluding to database driven ?filter URLs (those ugly &^% URLs we all hate so much*.
So what we looking to do is implementing nofollow noindex on all the internal links pointing to it the ?filter parameter URLs, however my SEO sense is telling me that the noindex nofollow should rather be on the individual ?filter parameter URL's metadata robots instead of all the internal links pointing the parameter URLs. Am I right in thinking this way? (reason why we want to put it on the internal links atm is because the of the development company states that they don't have control over the metadata of these database driven parameter URLs)
If I am not mistaken noindex nofollow on the internal links could be seen as page rank sculpting where as onpage meta robots noindex nofolow is more of a comand like your robots.txt
Anyone tested this before or have some more knowledge on the small detail of noindex nofollow?
PS: canonical tags is also not doable at this point because we still in the process of cleaning out all the parameter URLs so +- 70% of the URLs doesn't have an SEO friendly URL yet to be canonicalized to.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Thanks,
Chris Captivate.
Hi Irving
Fully aware of that, but if I am not mistaken a URL with a - in and one with %20 in is still seen as 2 different URLs and is duplicate content if they both have the same content on?
Here is an example of the SERP, you can check on it is the URL that is indexed with the - but once you click it, it goes off to the %20 version, however, if you navigate through the site to this blog post it shows as the - URL, now comes the interesting part, if you use the site search and search for "Southern Right Whale" this blog post comes up first and it is indexed in the site search as the %20 version.
Here is the serps
let me know your thoughts.
Chris.
Hi Mozzers I have a little issue on a rewrite that was implemented on a CMS. The CMS was built for my client without the option to put custom slugs in. So it takes the title of a post or page and uses it as a URL, the site was launched with a rewrite so that any space in the title is replaced with a - and that is the permanent URL for that post/page. This morning when I was busy doing my checkup on the site I found that the URLs are being indexed as %20 and not - however, if you navigate through the site the URLs are displaying correctly. How is it that search engines pick this up as a space in the slug if it has clearly been set as a -
anyone had this issue before? Its causing duplicate content issues on the site because both ways display the same post/page. Cheers, Chris Captivate.
I would suggest you change to the .com version and keep your site hosted in the UK. UK rankings will fluctuate when the site gets re-indexed but should potentially get back on track seeing that the site is still exactly the same and all your .co.uk URLs are now pointing to a .com version. This way you can rank world wide and still rank super well in your local SE.
just my opinion.
Hi Yoavm
I know I am not answering your question directly, but here is what I think you should, especially considering current tends in the search industry. If it is quality content, that you have produced, rather put it on your own website and try finding communities online that might be intrested in the content and maybe link to it. It terms of helping your websites in the SERP, that will be much more beneficial
Reason: Unless your article in the article website is so good and attracts links there (and if that is the case, rather put it onto your own website), you will get basically no value from the link....
If still need references, best I can give you of the top of my head is:
Sounds like you need to be looking at implementing some canonical tags, here is a blog post from Rand Fishkin when this advancement was made, probably a good starting point to launch your understanding into canonical tags http://www.seomoz.org/blog/canonical-url-tag-the-most-important-advancement-in-seo-practices-since-sitemaps
Hi, I'm from South Africa, and we are seeing the 6 pack result on all branded search too.
Hi Yesenia
The answer is quite simple. I had a detailed look at the first 5 sites and compared some metrics....as you said, the metrics you mentioned indicate that jenzabar.com should not rank number one. However, if you look at their website in detail you will see they are all about higher education services (and the other sites all have this as a sub product, it isn't their main product), so jenzabar (in terms of content) is by far the most relevant than any of these websites, and users looking for higher education software probably spend alot more time on their website than the other websites (so here user statistics metrics might be influencing the rankings). Google has clearly flagged this as the most relevant reliable source, and thinks its giving its users the best experience by ranking jenzibar no 1. Remember, Googles number 1 goal is to give the customer a good experience, and not show the website with the best ranking metrics....makes sense?
Hi Ryan
I agree with you 100%, but that is a bit easier said than done, even once you have written this great article to find people to link to it is the next challenge (A big one). And what happens if after your article what got a couple of links, you still dont rank...what then? I agree with your perception of directories 100%, but if google still values them (which in many cases it looks like it might), should we just neglect them all in all? We obviously do not want to prioritize directories over quality content, but the questions is does google still value those links? I would love to know this from someone who has run an experiment, as I do believe directories can sometimes be helpful to increase number of links and get good anchor texts. If someone could give me proof (besides the user argument) that directories don't help at all, I would appreciate it.
Hi Leitpix - yes it technically should improve the domains overall authority - however as these are different languages - the relevance is not really being boosted. You should redirect each language to www.example.com/language/ and in that way your root domain should gain some more authority - but to what extent it will help you rank better in the main language - that is not so clear...
Hi Yesenia I don't have time to look at it in much detail, but had another look, and I think it boils down to relevant links. jenzabar might have less PA and DA, but the links flowing to jenzabar must be more relevant. So I think datatel, probably has more trusted links, but not necessarily relevant,.
Hi Sunu
The current trends in the search industry are signalling a decrease in valuation for those kind of links, and that valuation will further decrease (definitely not increase) in the future (with new valuations being introduced, like social media signals). However there is still valuation in those links, just not as much as used to be. However if you want to prepare yourself for a long-tern ROI in your SEO efforts, then the only way to do link building is, identify communities that are relevant to your product, look what kind of content they would think valuable, create that content, and get into touch with them regarding linking to that content. The user is king (Google wants to serve the king best he can), and the user wants quality content, and no quick fix link building. Hope that helps. Regards
Applies to Travel for sure. Personally I think if you have the "award" or proof that you own the status as No 1 then use it. Your title tag is like your sales pitch. If you sell shit to me and you are the No 1 or the Best and don't say it, you might have missed new customer. I am more likly to click on something that claims to be No 1 or the Best, however, if I get there and it isn't true then bey bey. So I don't think it could hurt unless it's not true.
Hi Mulith
Haven't checked out the situation, but I don't think it is the paid links from directories, here is a blog post from Matt cutts addressing the topic http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/how-to-report-paid-links/ (It's old, but I don't think much more has officially been released by Google). Often when you do big changes (the right way) on a website your ranking initially drop, just to recover when Google has understood what has happened on your website. Could be alot of factor influencing the drop in traffic, and is probably the result of tampering with the existing site structure/content. I have often had it that when I replace old content, ranking initially drop and later on increase again. Hope you recover Cheers