Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Any help would be great!

As our content can be quite long at the top, we introduced js anchor scroll going straight to the products, by passing the banner and the content at the top. Can this have an issue on seo?

I've been asked the question of whether if we should nofollow all of our social links, would this be a wise thing to do?

I'm not exactly getting a clear answer from search results and thought you guys would be best to ask

Thanks in advance.

Thanks for the reply, this makes a lot of sense. Very much appreciated

This stems from Link Explorer, pretty much all of the links are from external sites out of our hands.

We are currently having very old pages dating back 5+ years ago appearing on moz all of a sudden, we don't necessarily get traffic from these links anymore and i doubt they still hold any weight.

Currently they take you to a 404 page, would there be any worth in redirecting these links?

Okay makes sense, but what about inbound links that have an attribute of nofollow, do these also pose a threat / issue.

Thanks for the response and really insightful, but at what degree do we consider links to be spam worthy? Is there a recommended thresh hold to remove? Say 5 spam score and above or what?

We have a fair few of inbound spam links in the 1000s with a spam score going all the way up to 90.

What would be the best thing to deal with this, i'm thinking to disavow anything about 40. But we are fearful of any issues which could come of this.

Any advice would be really helpful.

I've gone through my logs and the last time this happened to a different brand website was on the 15th of February. If people want to cross reference this date with anything.

Then before that, the dates are not clear on my end but it was around November/ December last year.

Aye we pretty much established what that article spoke about well before it came about.

The real annoyance is that it's not the first time and has happened several times over the last 6 months and we have no idea how to track when it's happened other than visually checking ourselves.

I'm trying to understand why this is happening and how to better solve this issue, as at the moment no one has provided a solid theory to which we can adjust our efforts towards.

As title suggests we are running into a serious issue of the home page disapearing from Google search results whilst the rest of the site still remains. We search for it naturally cannot find a trace, then use a "site:" command in Google and still the home page does not come up.

We go into web masters and inspect the home page and even Google states that the page is indexable. We then run the "Request Indexing" and the site comes back on Google.

This is having a damaging affect and we would like to understand why this issue is happening. Please note this is not happening on just one of our sites but has happened to three which are all located on the same server.

One of our brand which has the issue is: www.henweekends.co.uk

So a self referencing canonical on both mobile and desktop versions of the site, regardless if they chuck out two version with the same content?

I've been told to pass on a URL, thanks for your help Thomas!

https://www.stag.com/

So both mobile and desktop require a self referencing canonical(in both headers)?

Sorry for the questions, just need to make sure! It's a very touchy subject!

Just to confirm, are we suppose to have a canonical on desktop and mobile or just desktop?

This would mean removing the alternate?

Want to confirm everything before iterating this across to others.

We are not using AMP, just a standard site setup.

Hi,

I can't give off too much information as it's not my call, but I can answer your questions without mentioning the brands.

1. We have multiple brand sites, that have a similar setup. They all have mobile and desktop versions of the sites running on the same URL, both of which show the same content.

2. The server determines whether if you're on a desktop or mobile devices using the header information, and points the user to the site relevant files for the given device.

3. Our sites would quite clearly fit in the dynamic serving category.

We have 301 redirects on none www to www and http to https.

Would this mean we need canonical only on desktop or mobile site?

At the moment for most of our sites, we have both a desktop and mobile version of our sites. They both show the same content and use the same URL structure as each other. The server determines whether if you're visiting from either device and displays the relevant version of the site.

We are in a predicament of how to properly use the canonical and alternate rel tags. Currently we have a canonical on mobile and alternate on desktop, both of which have the same URL because both mobile and desktop use the same as explained in the first paragraph.

Would the way of us doing it at the moment be correct?

A while back we had a 'bleed' on one of our sites, which basically meant one of our sites started to leak across pages to another and that site started to rank for the same pages and now we have hundreds of pages ranking for urls that do not exists. It's hard to explain, bare with me.

If you were to click on the cached view in Google for the ranked page it would show you the main site, but if you were to click it as usual, then you would be taken to the site but a 404 would show as the intended page was not for that site.

We believe we fixed the 'bleed' and have setup 301s for all the affected pages to go to the home page for the site it affected. But these pages have not been removed from Google, which we thought a 301 would do. So we still have hundreds of pages being ranked but are redirected to the home page.

Why hasn't these pages been removed?