Welcome to the Q&A Forum

These two URLs are being flagged as 98% similar in the code. We're a large ecommerce site, and while it would be ideal to have unique product descriptions on each page we currently don't have the bandwith. Thoughts on what else might be triggering this duplicate content? https://www.etundra.com/restaurant-parts/cooking-equipment-parts/fryers/scoops-skimmers/fmp-175-1081-fryer-crumb-scoop/ https://www.etundra.com/restaurant-equipment/concession-equipment/condiment-pumps/tablecraft-664-wide-mouth-condiment-pump/ Thanks, Natalie

We have seen consistent network traffic over the past month, then starting yesterday, huge spikes in hits (hits as in crawls to pages causing an increase in megabytes downloaded) started coming in from Rogerbot, Google, Bing, and Yahoo. A specific example from Rogerbot is as follows: rogerbot/1.1+(http://moz.com/help/guides/search-overview/crawl-diagnostics#more-help,+rogerbot-crawler+pr2-crawler-104@moz.com) Useragent from the bot IP address: 54.226.73.52 Domain / hostname: ec2-54-226-73-52.compute-1.amazonaws.com Physical location: United States flag United States, VA, Ashburn We've have thought about doing a crawl-delay to prevent these bots from hitting us so hard, but that still doesn't help us answer why this even started in the first place. Any clue on what may be going on here?

We have more than 80k products, each of them with data-vocabulary.org markup on them, but only 17k are being reported as having the markup in Google Webmaster (GW).  If I run a page that GW isn't showing as having the structure data in the structured data testing tool (http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets), it passes.  Any thoughts on why this would be happening?  Is it because we should switch from data-vocabulary.org to schema.org? Example of page that GW is reporting that has structured data: https://www.etundra.com/restaurant-equipment/refrigeration/display-cases/coutnertop/vollrath-40862-36-inch-cubed-glass-refrigerated-display-cabinet/ Example of page that isn't showing in GW as having structured data: https://www.etundra.com/kitchen-supplies/cutlery/sandwich-spreaders/mundial-w5688-4-and-half-4-and-half-sandwich-spreader/

This one is tough, and I've asked it once here, http://www.quora.com/Search-Engine-Optimization-SEO/Is-having-rich-snippets-placed-below-a-review-that-is-pulled-via-javascript-considered-bad-grey-hat-SEO, but I feel that the response was sided with the company. As an SEO or digital marketer, it seems that if we are pulling in our reviews via iframe for our users, but serving them through a nonscript tag when the user agent is a search engine, that this could be considered cloaking. I understand that the "intent" may be to show the same thing to the bots as the user sees, but if you look at the view source, you'll never see the reviews, because it would only be delivered to the search engine bot. What do you think?

I know that going through a site redesign it's essential to make sure that 301s are implemented for any changed URLs, but I wasn't sure if this was the same for the images on the page and the parameter URLs that are created by marketing campaigns - do those URLs also need to be 301 redirected? For example, this URL: www.mysite.com/32-inch-round-aluminum-table/ Could have a parameter at: www.mysite.com/32-inch-round-aluminum-table/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Social%3A+My_Site And an image at: www.mysite.com/images/32-inch-round-aluminum-table.jpg Would the first two URLs mentioned need to be redirected to the new URL, and the image redirected to the new image URL? Thanks for the help.

I have error messages in Google Webmaster that state that Googlebot encountered errors while attempting to access the robots.txt.  The last date that this was reported was on December 25, 2012 (Merry Christmas), but the last cache date was November 16, 2012 (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3Awww.etundra.com/robots.txt&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a). How could I get this error if the page hasn't been cached since November 16, 2012?

I saw this article, http://www.distilled.net/blog/seo/common-ecommerce-technical-seo-problems/, and noticed that Geoff mentioned that product URLs format should be in one of the following ways: Product Page: site.com/product-name Product Page: site.com/category/sub-category/product-name However, for SEO, is there a preferred way? I understand that the top one may be better to prevent duplicate page issues, but I would imagine that the bottom would be better for conversion (maybe the user backtracks to site.com/category/sub-category/ to see other products that he may be interested in). Also, I'd imagine that the top URL would not be a great way to distribute link juice since everything would be attached to the root, right?

I was recently approached by Catch Marketing about a service they provide that uses a product data feed to create hundreds of pages with "unique" (algorithm generated) content on a subdomain of a website targeting long-tail keywords not already driving traffic to the site. It's an affiliate type setup with a commission-based fee structure. Admittedly not the most elegant solution to driving long-tail keyword traffic but my company is short on resources and long on revenue goals. I'm not really interested in hearing about creating awesome unique content written by a human as the better solution here; although I understand and aspire to those ideals the reality is that I have 60,000 products to market and I'm the only one who writes product content - after I tend to my other responsibilities. Has anyone used or heard of this service?  Your feedback appreciated.

My company decided to start a Link Share affiliate program at the beginning of this year.  I've had serious reservations about the value of the program since the beginning but was overruled. Here are my concerns: The majority of publishers seem to be coupon scraper sites or borderline link farms I am told the biggest revenue earners in our network are publishing articles about my company with links back to our site but if they are Google Alerts sure isn't finding them and a manual search hasn't turned up anything either.  This makes me think these publishers are using some sort of unsavory way to drive traffic to our site or maybe even cookie traffic that was coming to our site anyway in order to get credit for the sale. Most of all I'd like to hear from anyone else who has used Link Share in the past. Secondly I realize there's not a lot of information here but I'm wondering if this passes the smell test for anyone else. Any feedback would be appreciated.

Ever since Google Analytics changed their session parameters August 12th I have seen a 20% jump in organic traffic & bounce rates along with a decline in pages/visit and conversion rate. To be clear, I don't put a whole heck of a lot of stock in these metrics as stand-alone indications of how my site is performing.  I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this blip. I noticed some other people mentioned a similar phenomenon in other SEO forums and blog comments, but nobody seems to be talking about this here at SEOMoz (unless I just haven't looked in the right place). I'm not saying the change I noticed has anything to do with the session update, I'm just wondering if anyone else has experienced something similar so that I can either cross it off the list of possible causes or explore further.

A competitor is consistently beating my website on non-competitive, long tail keywords.  His DA is 32 compared to my 46.  His average PA is 23 to my 28.  His average On Page Optimization Grade is a C compared to my A.  His page speed score using YSlow is a 71 compared to my 78. The only thing I can think of at this point is that he has a better URL structure.  We both have the keyword in the URL, but his structure goes like this (keyword: apw wyott parts): www.competitor.com/apw-wyott/parts While mine goes like this (I had nothing to do with this site's architecture; this is what I'm stuck with for the time being): http://www.etundra.com/APW_Wyott_Parts-C347.html It should be noted that the last word in these keywords is always the same - "parts."  These keywords are for parts by different manufacturers so they follow a consistent pattern: [manufacturer-name] followed by "parts." Also, the "C347" on the end of my URL is the category number given to this particular category of products in our database. Are his URLs beating me or should I continue to look for other factors?  If so, what other factors should I consider?

At some point in the past I read or was told that No Index, No Follow tags on category and tag pages were a good thing on a standard WordPress blog in order to prevent duplicate content issues. Is this still true or was it ever true?

It only took me a year and a half to get the code Will Critchlow laid out in a blog post last year put on my website. Now I've finally got it but I need more instruction on how to create the custom report I need in GA! Will said he was going to expand on how to set up the custom reports but I'm not sure he ever did. So, can anyone either direct me to Will's follow-up post about setting up custom reports for first click attribution or tell me how to do it? Thanks!