Both Egol and Ricky have pointed out major some failings - duplicate content and lack of links.
But I ask other than cleansing links what else are you doing for them besides tracking them on MOZ?
Here are a few more things that shout to Google that this domain is a flash in the pan:

• domain expires in six months
• reference to a favicon that doesn't load
• social is weak - last G+ post 4/22/2013, only 4 have them in a circle. last tweet 4/22, only 23 FB likes, no post since 4/22
• is there a XML sitemap?
• only local listing I could find was on <cite>www.placesforward.com</cite>
• no schema.org markup for address and location
• unclaimed on Yelp.com - claim them and get reviews (and on Google places)
  Google maps returns 8,970 results for insurance near Las Vegas, NV - lots of competition here you need to get them to stand out
  First solid link I would procure for them would be one from the LV chamber of commerce. then Henderson, and Boulder City and other local CCs.
  Develop some good national link bait - a top ten list built around LV and insurance would be a good start - with some humor. Then top ten things that stay in Vegas that are insurable...
  Time to roll up the sleeves and get to work...

Ferguson-

Hard to answer definitively without knowing your content/target. Numbers in your URL don't mean anything to SEs unless it's a keyword (like a ZIP, area code or model) - what does 0304 tell me or Google? You mention the possibility of multiple pages for a location, so if I assume the nature of the content for these pages is different I'd say you'd want to optimize the URLs to bolster your on page SEO. Let's say you have a site for dentists and the like, then your URLs might be:
Domain.com/locations/Columbus/OH/orthodontists
Domain.com/locations/Columbus/OH/dentists
Domain.com/locations/Columbus/OH/oral-surgeons

If the differences are purely location within a ZIP code for nearly identical stores (think Starbucks) then I'd let Google Places do the SEO work for you.

James-

We are also considering using Zemanta - I've been quoted $2k a month minimum for related articles and $3K for In-text links. Did you just negotiate a lower minimum?

Also are you using In-text or related article and in your opinion which method is the more valuable link.

Thanks, Chas Blackford-LegalMatch

Yes it's acceptable - the key is utilizing CSS and use a DOCTYPE with a DTD to present a different UX based on the device. Work with an experience coder who can structure the page template to put the content first, minimizing scripts, etc - you want to score high on the Google page speed test (https://developers.google.com/pagespeed/).

Then test across all devices you think 80% plus visitors will be using (check your Google Analytics to profile browsers, OS, devices and resolution)

BTW - Here's what Google has to say about SEOmoz (scoring an 83/100)
High priority. These suggestions represent the largest potential performance wins for the least development effort. You should address this item first:
Leverage browser caching
Medium priority. These suggestions may represent smaller wins or much more work to implement. You should address these items next:
Minimize redirects, Optimize images
Low priority. These suggestions represent the smallest wins. You should only be concerned with these items after you've handled the higher-priority ones:
Inline Small CSS, Enable compression, Defer parsing of JavaScript, Minify CSS, Specify a cache validator, Minify JavaScript, Minify HTML, Specify a character set, Optimize the order of styles and scripts, Remove query strings from static resources, Specify a Vary: Accept-Encoding header

F-

Google Places permits an upload of multiple business locations @ https://www.google.com/local/add/g?hl=en-US&gl=US#uploadfeed
you may want to review this help page:
Common issues that delay the bulk verification process:
http://support.google.com/places/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=173669
This caveat may hinder a bulk upload:
Multiple listings at the same physical location are not permitted within one feed. Please consolidate multiple services or businesses under one title.

As for your example URL from an SEO perspective, underscores between words are a programming legacy from days when spaces could be misinterpreted between Unix and Windows servers and are not conducive to good SEO. With an underscore Google joins the two words and sees them that way so landing_page is seen as landingpage whereas landing-page is seen as landing page. See this Matt Cutts video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AQcSFsQyct8

Is there any other way to differentiate locations (branch ID) that convey more meaningful information (from an SEO perspective) and that would permit you to utilize Google Places? A suite number, even if it's superfluous?
C

Are your rivals outpacing you in quality inbound links over time? It would appear that way as the #1 SERP http://www.zeldadungeon.ne has a PA of 70 ( root domains links) and while http://www.zeldainformer.com/16-skyward-sword/walkthrough.html has PA 39 ( 4 root domains 318 links) its DA is much higher than yours with 708 linking root domains vs, your 125.

Also compare your page's Page Speed score with your competitors and see if you can improve it's load time (you score an 82/100) https://developers.google.com/pagespeed/.

Also I think your title could be improved with some branding -
Skyward Sword Walkthrough | Legend Zelda Net
Also change out the images for H tags in the page headers

I disagree. One might infer that using Google's site search product on your site might be a ticket in that just doesn't seem to be the case as the site I work for utilized Google's first search appliance back in 2004 and now uses Google's site search. As a "go figure" example, here's two large online cycling retailers - one earns search, the other doesn't (Performance Bike, Bike Nashbar). neither is using Google site search.

A terse response on the GWT help forum answers that same question with "There is nothing you can do. Google will add it automatically if the algorithm deems the site worthy." Just as with sitelinks being a product of search volume and clear navigation choices, it would seem Google would be looking for similar qualities here. It's not necessarily site traffic volume, as neither Macys or Target earn this feature. This is an ask Matt Cutts question at the next SES or SMX.

To throw in my 2 cents, the benefit in rewriting the URL (and making a 301) comes from Google's ability to then clearly recognize the keywords that you're using within it (assuming that you're synching your on page KWs). Google views hot_keyword_landing_page.html as hotkeywordlandingpage.html -  Matt Cutts on underscores vs. dashes in URLs. The downside is having to keep the 301 in place if the page has IBLs.

Your H1 is coded to render as an image (in Firefox, not so in Chrome ) but I don't know how well the bots read this kind of code - here's what I pull from your source code for your H1 tag::
<div class="uscontinue">

<div id="post-3126" class="post"><div class="ptitle"><h1><cufon class="cufon cufon-canvas" alt="Skyward " style="width: 125px; height: 38px;"><cufon class="cufon cufon-canvas" alt="Sword " style="width: 93px; height: 38px;"><cufon class="cufon cufon-canvas" alt="Walkthrough" style="width: 176px; height: 38px;"><canvas width="192" height="38" style="width: 192px; height: 38px; top: 1px; left: -1px;">canvas><cufontext>Walkthroughcufontext>cufon>h1>div>

here's what I would expect (and the bots as well!):

Skyward Sword Walkthrough

Google will index them all if they are correctly built to prevailing SEO standards, with optimal nav navigation, good hierarchy, perfect on page optimization, etc. Each of your domains is targeting a slightly different segment of the same market, so "retail leather sofas" and wholesale leather sofas" target their specific niches; you'll be competing against yourself for "leather sofas' (and a whole lot of other sites) but if your content is good (and differs across properties) you shouldn't have an issue getting indexed.

Our sites has 12 sub-domains covering specific sub-categories of the same general topic - with over 600K pages - 95% are indexed, and frequently pages from two or more sub-domains appear for the same search query, even though the page layouts and templates are virtually identical and have the same IP address. It's the content that differentiates them, yet at the same time makes them relevant for the same KW phrase.

Q1. Google won't index incoming tagged links from email, bookmarks, etc. (although Google Analytics will pick them - and you can configure Analytics to ignore tags - see screenshot - a necessity when understanding PPC traffic in GA). To be sure, try this query to see if you're getting any pages that have tagged incoming links like that indexed:
site:www.mysite.com html?
Q2. Xenu (or a bot) will only find what is put out to be crawled. If tagged URLs are published somewhere, all bets  are off (or bots on).
Why not tag with unique identifiers that only you have the key for? RB92102 = Rob Brown in San Diego?

removequerystring.png

I've been curious about this question myself and your post prompted me to do a little research. I'm not sure I've reached a ironclad conclusion yet but here's a little of what I found. First there are mixed opinions about the value. A SEO for WordPress presentation @ San Francisco in 2011 by Sujan Patel indicated that using tags weren't worth the potential broken link and duplicate content hassles (see slide 15 of his PPT).

In another opinion I came across, "attaching tags to each content asset, article or post does very little for the SEO (search engine optimization) of any singular article on a B2B blog or website. Used properly, however, content tagging makes your blog or website much better.

The author goes on to say "the SEO value of tags (as well as categories) is not in the association of keywords with a particular article or content asset (as many believe), but instead in the aggregated content that appears on the tag/category page that most CMS platforms generate automatically."

A third article flatly stated "Tags add specificity to your blog posts that help both search engines and visitors find relevant information on your webpage." My takeaway is tags are good for the user if used relevantly and not gratuitously (e.g. keyword stuffing). That seems to mesh with Google's mantra about writing for the user.

Jonathan -

Always a difficult task chasing (and obsessing over) a high a SERP. My search for your KW in Google found you at position 8. Perhaps your results are skewed by your search history and/or being logged into a Google account, which can personalize search results that give a higher weight to frequented searches and results (your own site).

Looking at you your competitors link profiles show much stronger domain authority and vastly greater number of links. You have only 1 externally followed link.Your on page SEO is better than some of them, but the strength of their link profiles trumps that.

Also check you loads times - I noticed your site was slow to come up, and I checked it in Google Page Speed where it time out, although a refresh did bring up an acceptable 83., so perhaps there is a third party item loading that is hanging up.

All things being equal, Google will put the most (or best) linked to site ahead. Quality links from trusted domains are the best way to insure a stronger, more consistent ranking.

Chas