The # Root Domains Linking? That's a number, not a logarithmic scale.
Best posts made by Linda-Vassily
-
RE: RDLinkback numbers measured Logarithmic scale or Raw count?
-
RE: Why is my website not ranking? Has A grade on-site from Moz.
I agree with what Timbronze said, especially about the links. You have very few. And as far as the business name, there are other businesses with the same name, including one with an exact match domain, so there is some competition there as well.
-
RE: Despite canonical duplicate content in WMT
Is that exactly how you have the URL written? If so, I think your problem is the missing http://
From webmastercentral:
"Specifying (a relative URL since there’s no “http://”) implies that the desired canonical URL is http://example.com/example.com/cupcake.html even though that is almost certainly not what was intended. In these cases, our algorithms may ignore the specified rel=canonical. Ultimately this means that whatever you had hoped to accomplish with this rel=canonical will not come to fruition."
-
RE: Deleting old obsolete pages from the Page Grades section?
If those pages are still ranking in the top 50 for one of the keywords in your campaign, they will continue to be graded. The on-page tool automatically grades pages in the top 50, giving you the opportunity to do a little work to improve a page that is already starting to rank. The fact that they have an F doesn't make any difference to anything.
However, you might not want sub-optimal pages hanging around--you could either redirect them to an appropriate new page (301) or else just 404 them (not found). If you have already done this, it might just need more time for Moz to catch up.
As far as the links, which links do you mean? Sometimes people do link to sites using links with extra, unnecessary characters.
-
RE: Cross Domain Rel Canonical tags vs. Rel Canonical Tags for internal webpages
No, rel="canonical" is the same internally or cross-domain. You are just telling Google which copy of that content to serve, wherever it is. (And rel="author" is no longer used by Google to show authorship in results nor is it tracking data from content using that markup. http://searchengineland.com/goodbye-google-authorship-201975 https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JohnMueller/posts/HZf3KDP1Dm8 )
-
RE: 301 and 302 for same link
Yes, using a 302 redirect loses link equity. You can take a look at: http://moz.com/learn/seo/redirection for more information. "A 302 redirect is a temporary redirect. It passes 0% of link juice (ranking power) and, in most cases, should not be used. "
*I also love this infographic: http://moz.com/learn/seo/http-status-codes -
RE: Why do all traffic curves show a "saw tooth" pattern in Google Analytics
I see something similar; in my case it's because we get less traffic on weekends, so there is a weekly sawtooth. Do your dips correspond to weekends?
-
RE: Removing Low Rank Pages Help Others Shine?
If they have no traffic and no links, I would not move them.
I would only re-purpose them if you think that by combining/editing them they would have value, but in a situation like this, that usually isn't the case.
(Unless we are talking about a significantly large percentage of your website becoming 404--in that case some rewriting/repurposing would be in order.)
-
RE: 301 and 302 for same link
According to your description, http://site.com/oldurl is the link with equity and https://site.com/new is the final destination link. Is this correct? To get from one to the other you go via a 302 and at that point you lose your equity. Whether it is a redirect of a redirect or not.
And in general, multiple redirects should be avoided. Google will follow multiple redirects, but you will lose some authority with each jump, and at some point, maybe more than 3 or so, Google will give up.
-
RE: Is there a tool for finding shared interests?
Google Analytics has the option to capture demographic and interests information about website users. It is not as granular as what you are describing, but might give you a direction in which to start looking.
-
RE: H Tags Vs "H Style" Tags?
Yes, the question is a bit unclear. H tags (which are not meta elements) are used in the body of your page to indicate headings of sections, with h1 being the most important. Usually the style of the h tag is defined in the CSS, but sometimes people do use inline styles like this: <h1 style="color:red; text-align:center;">Centered red text</h1>.
This is still an h1 tag, and the text will be red and centered. If you want to change the style, for example <h1 style="color:blue; text-align:left;">Left-aligned blue text</h1>, you will not affect the SEO of the page, only the appearance. Search engines do pay attention to h tags (particularly h1) so you will want to keep that, even if you edit the style.
-
RE: 301 and 302 for same link
Use the infographic. Seriously. That is what I did to explain the concept to our developer and it worked better than any long-winded descriptions I had tried.
-
RE: Direct 100+ URLs to our sister site?
The first thing that occurs to me is if they are serving for similar terms anyway, would it make sense to combine the sites? Or is there some business reason you cannot? A combined site would be easier to maintain and would be stronger (more links, content, traffic, etc.), which could help ranking overall.
-
RE: URL Capitalization Inconsistencies Registering Duplicate Content Crawl Errors
http://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
"Another option for dealing with duplicate content is to utilize the rel=canonical tag. The rel=canonical tag passes the same amount of link juice (ranking power) as a 301 redirect, and often takes much less development time to implement."
-
RE: You have exceeded your rate limit error while trying to add listing to Mozlocal. What's wrong?
David Mihm (Moz staff) has replied to this: "We do limit the number of searches per day to prevent abuse and comply with the terms of service of our API partners. It might be an issue with your IP address. If you email the help team they can hopefully help sort things out for you."
-
RE: 301 and 302 for same link
And here is Matt Cutts talking about multiple redirects: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1lVPrYoBkA
-
RE: Duplicate Content Dilemma for Category and Brand Pages
According to Moz: "Another option for dealing with duplicate content is to utilize the rel=canonical tag. The rel=canonical tag passes the same amount of link juice (ranking power) as a 301 redirect, and often takes much less development time to implement." http://moz.com/learn/seo/canonicalization
Why do you think it does not pass ranking power?
-
RE: Keyword rankings for new website good in Yahoo and Bing but no movement in Google?
When I put your site into Open Site Explorer, I do not see any backlinks at all. I see 12 in Majestic (with a zero trust flow) and three in SEMRush. Google cosiders links to be very important, so I'd think that this could be your problem. Here is a webmasterworld discussion on the topic of ranking on Bing/Yahoo but not Google.
-
RE: How would you handle this duplicate content - noindex or canonical?
First, are you sure that the people who are arriving at the arctic page really want to see all of the holidays and not the arctic ones? The arctic page is pretty well optimized for "arctic", and it is in the title and description. Take a look in your Webmaster Tools at those pages and see which keywords are bringing them up.
If you have a good reason to think that people really want the more general page (page A) but it is not getting a lot of traffic, putting that content on the arctic page (page B) probably won't solve your problem as there is obviously some reason page A is not doing as well and you are just spreading around the content that is not working.
I don't think your answer lies in making the pages duplicates--you should actually be making them more different from each other so the arctic one is very clearly specific for arctic trips and the overview one for general inquiries.
And in the meantime you could put a prominent link at the top of your arctic page linking back to the overview page, saying something like, "For more ideas, see all of our suggested holidays." (In fact there should be a link like that on each of your specialty pages, pointing back to the general page--that will help build the authority of page A and help it rank higher in the SERPs.)
-
RE: What software do you guys use to generate a sitemap?
I use the paid version, so that's not an issue for me.
I know Wordpress has sitemap plugins and a number of CMSs have built-in sitemap generators, I don't know if either of these applies to you.
-
RE: How would you handle this duplicate content - noindex or canonical?
OK, I think I understand what you are asking now.
Canonicals are for identical or near-identical pages. I don't know that those two pages would be considered to be identical, even after you added the arctic listings to the Canada page, especially as the above-the-fold content is different.
Keep in mind that the "penalty" for duplicate content is that Google will choose only one page to show, depending on which one it thinks is most relevant. And if you have one page that gets a lot more traffic and engagement, that is likely to be the one Google chooses, anyway.
If I were you, I'd probably make sure the description sections at the top of those pages each has a good bit of unique content and maybe I'd change the titles and h1s to make them a little more different from each other (if you can do that) then I'd just leave it at that and see what Google makes of it.
If it seems that your higher traffic page starts to lose traffic, you can always add the canonicals then, and resubmit the URL through Fetch as Google in Webmaster Tools.
-
RE: Screaming Frog showing 503 status code. Why?
I just checked that link in Screaming Frog and it is 200.
-
RE: Establishing if links are 'nofollow'
You can also use Screaming Frog to look at the linking page--look in the "Meta & Canonical" tab to see if it's nofollow or not. [It is free for a limited number of pages.]
-
RE: Why are my webpages not getting indexed?
If you have set pages to noindex, then Google will not index them.
Are you saying that you have other pages besides the ones you marked noindex that are not getting indexed?
-
RE: Training events - optimisation and avoiding cannibalisation
A couple of thoughts--yes, that is not what rel=canonical is for. It is meant for identical or nearly identical pages. If you wanted that effect you could noindex the training pages, but you say you don't want that, so both of those choices are out.
If you have multiple training pages that go to one product, you will presumably have links on those multiple training pages back to that one product page, and that will be a sign to Google that the product page is important.
Also, if the product page stays up and the training pages are up for a short while and then go away, those short-term training pages are unlikely to overtake the product page that remains up and is able to attract links and other positive signals.
-
RE: Page Title Displaying differently on Google
What Google will show in the search results is partly based on what the person searched for. What was your search? (I see, based on the bolding, that it included camera and filters--were there any other terms?)
Also, what happens if you do an anonymous search? If you are logged in, you might be seeing things based on your history.
Here is a link with information from Google that might help.
-
RE: Removing Parameterized URLs from Google Index
The reason that duplicate content is an issue is because Google will eventually drop one of the duplicates from its index, and if you have both page A and page B canonicalized to page B, Google will eventually drop page A in favor of page B.
If you are concerned that page A is not being crawled, you can use Fetch as Google to ask Google to recrawl it. But if A is not being crawled and B is, again B will be chosen over A in the results pages.
-
RE: Responsive Site - Is restivejs a solution?
I agree with Highland that this type of solution probably won't be your best choice.
How much of your traffic is actually mobile? Rand Fishkin shared this post on Google+, saying that Moz wasn't worried about making the deadline since they have very little mobile traffic.
Also, in this discussion here in Moz, Peter Meyers posted that this update is page-based, so if you have a smaller number of pages that are very mobile-crucial, perhaps you could fix those first, and then work on the larger fix for your website.
-
RE: Base copy on 1 page, then adding a bit more for another page - potential duplicate content. What to do?
I agree with Ryan, doing it all on one page with the different number of days/itineraries sectioned out is the way I'd go.
First, a page actually can rank well for more than one search term, especially when they are so closely related.
And second, what is the point of optimizing different pages for different numbers of days and then canonicalizing them to the ten day trip? The canonical indicates that only the ten-day page should be indexed, so who cares whether the shorter trip pages are optimized or not? They won't be findable in the SERPs.
Lastly, there is no penalty as such for duplicate content. Google just decides which page is the most useful to show and the others drop out of the index. If your pages are very similar, Google may well make the decision for you and drop some of them out of the index.
-
RE: Using Product Page Content from an Offline Website
You can use a cross-domain canonical from site 1 pointing to to site 2, or 301 redirect the pages from site 1 to site 2.
Duplicate content isn't a penalty, it just makes Google choose which version to show. If you use one of those signals (probably the 301, if you are sure this is a permanent change), the correct site will get the benefit of the content.
-
RE: URL Errors in webmaster tools to pages that don't exist?
Sometimes people make pages like that as landing pages for PPC or other types of campaigns and then abandon them.
I found one like that on one of my sites once by noticing that a page I did not recognize was getting a lot of search traffic--I ended up integrating it into my structure with a new URL, and 301 redirecting the old URL to that new page.
If you think those might be good pages for you, different from similar pages you might already have, you can update them and do that as well.
If they are not especially useful to you, you could just 301 them to the most similar pages. [Are they getting traffic? I think Google must see something in them, if they are still indexed.] They probably wouldn't do any harm if you just leave them, but I'd take care of them anyway.
-
RE: Using Product Page Content from an Offline Website
Not at all, Dirk. I was just clarifying my answer.
If the pages still exist (just not listed on the website) and were doing well = Redirect or canonicalize to take advantage of their residual authority.
If the pages no longer exist = Not much you can do...
In either case, no problem with duplicate content as Google will soon figure out where the content now (exclusively) lives.
-
RE: 301 Redirect Showing Up as Thousands Of Backlinks?
My redirects from old domains show up as back links, which makes sense--it is a case of a link from one domain to a different domain. So if you redirected all of those pages to your new site, you'd see a lot of links. As far as why it would be more pages than you had, take a look at the links and see what they are. Maybe you had different versions of pages that are showing up as separate links?
-
RE: How do I deindex url parameters
Put a canonical tag on site.com/products to itself and the parameter versions will go away. (They eventually will anyway--duplicate content does not cause a penalty, it just causes duplicate versions to not be indexed, which is what you want anyway.)
-
RE: 301 Redirect Showing Up as Thousands Of Backlinks?
I sincerely hope not, as I am about to redirect most of my main website.
It is a common thing for websites to do a wholesale redirect of pages, whether to change domains or better structure the site. Matt Cutts said a few years back that there is no problem with this, even with sites of 100,000 pages and I have not heard anything to contradict this.
-
RE: Unfamiliar Meta Description Tags
When you say you see that on-page, do you mean when you look at the source inside the CMS, or on the actual webpage?
If it is the CMS, I agree, don't worry about it. When I first started with the CMS I am using now, I got very upset when I saw image links that looked like this: src="~/media/46166ADB93F248DDB7AF5C6CC8BD479C.ashx
I wanted easy-to-read links with appropriate keywords!
After wasting most of a day working on "fixing" them, I found out that once you get to the actual live webpage, everything looked fine. So I had to spend the better part of another day changing them back. [That is what you get for messing with objects.]
-
RE: New blog post URLs due to WordPress permalink structure changes. Any SEO repercussions?
If the old URLs are being 301 re-directed to the new URLs, you should not lose much link authority, so that by itself shouldn't be a reason to change back.
If you prefer the two-level structure (which I would, for a couple of reasons) then go ahead and change back, but as Andy says, do it carefully so you are not sending conflicting messages.
-
RE: 301 redirects- how long to keep and how many are too many?
It is not unusual to redirect a whole website and all of its pages, so it wouldn't make sense that you could have too many. And you should keep the redirects indefinitely--what if there is a link to the expired page? You do not want to lose that equity by having it go nowhere...
-
RE: My Domain authority dropped 9 points... Does anyone have any suggestions to fix this significant drop.
You should not look at Moz's domain authority as a fixed number; it will change, depending on their index that month. A good way to look at this number is relative to a couple of your competitors. Track them, and if their number also goes down when yours goes down, it is probably the index.
-
RE: Another Duplicate Content - eCommerce Question!
There is no duplicate content penalty, as such. (Google "duplicate content penalty" for many articles about this.) When Google comes across duplicate content, it simply decides which version should appear in its index and drops the other one(s). This won't affect the high-quality content you have on other parts of your site.
-
RE: SEO Title Versus Meta Description Tag
Yes, title tags are more important from an SEO perspective, but the real goal is to get people to do what the website is set up for, which in your case is rentals.
Rental pages by their nature are not evergreen (hopefully!), so getting interested buyers to click on a listing is more important than getting a page to rank well.
You do need to rank well enough so that people will see your results (so, first page, anyway) but I know that seeing square footage and pricing information right up front would certainly make me click on that result, even if it were lower on the page.
You could try splitting your listings and doing half with these details and half with descriptive keyword terms, and see what you get.
-
RE: As a beginner in SEO, how do I do 302 redirects/ rel="canonicals"
Why do you need 302 redirects? That is a temporary redirect--do you have some pages that have been temporarily moved?
Although many sites do put canonicals on every page (making them canonical to themselves) this is not necessary. You only really need them if you have duplicate content on your site. Do you have that? If not, you don't need canonicals either.
-
RE: Should I bother with a Video Sitemap?
This is an interesting question for me. We have been doing video for a while and do it like you, hosted on YouTube. I have never really considered a video sitemap, because I always assumed that YouTube will outrank us for any given video of ours (the typical situation if you have your content on a much more powerful website). And that is what I do see on video search.We do get some organic traffic to our gallery-type page, though. For now, I will probably keep things the way they are, since we get a good amount of traffic from YouTube and that is the main point, but I would like to hear if anyone has had video sitemaps boost traffic to their own site.
-
RE: How to show number of products in your Google SERP?
When I go to your site and search on USB flash drives, I see 53 products, same as in the Google snippet. What number did you expect to see? http://imgur.com/ZKZGvyb
[I know you obscured the domain in your image, but the name of the company is in the title.]
-
RE: Google User Click Data and Metrics
Here is a good explanation.
-
RE: 301 Redirects, Sitemaps and Indexing - How to hide redirected urls from search engines?
Why do you have it set up that way to begin with? Could you put the content on the higher level page? Or is it meant to be an easy-to-remember "vanity" URL? In any case, yes, do not put a page with no content in your sitemap.
And to get it to stop showing up in search, you can add a canonical to the page, pointing to the deeper page with the actual content.
-
RE: Is it possible that Google is pulling description from third party websites and displaying in the description section in organic result?
Here is a thread about the DMOZ/Open Directory project that ViviCa1 mentioned. [A lot of people are trying to get into DMOZ but can't, you should be happy you have the link. ]
One thing you could look at though is why does Google think that the directory description is the best one to return?
Check and see whether you can improve the descriptive content on the actual site. [At one point I got two new sites to work on, both in DMOZ, the rich, active one returned site-appropriate information, the long-neglected one returned the directory description.]
-
RE: What should I do with all these 404 pages?
The posts and articles with good backlinks, does that content still make sense in your renewed site? If so, I'd bring them back. If you don't have the content, you can try the Wayback Machine. The same goes for any old posts you think would be useful to your new readers.
The problem with redirecting a bunch of 404s to the same page (like the homepage) is that you end up with soft 404s and not a very good user experience. Pick the ones that correspond to specific pages that you have on the updated site and redirect those to the equivalent page.
Anything else, I'd let 404. A bunch of old posts, with no good links, the content of which you no longer have a use for on the site don't represent value to searchers—those pages will just drop out of Googles index (and crawl attempts) over time.
[This isn't just theoretical. We changed domains back in November and we had lots of old content—going back 10+ years, which is ancient history for a financial publisher. I ended up with about 6,000 404s. We are now down to about 4,000 404s as pages drop off. Google crawls us quickly and regularly and our organic traffic is up 86.49% .]
-
RE: Google ranking 301 redirected vanity urls
And that is causing a reporting problem for you, yes? You can't tell whether traffic coming in from that URL is campaign or search traffic. I am assuming you have checked and your 301 is correctly implemented and doing what you expect.
Have you tried doubling up by using a canonical URL? It might not make a difference since Google is ignoring the 301, but it might reinforce the message.
As far as why this is happening, is there something about the vanity URL that might make Google like it so much better? Are there for example some good links to it? [I know it is part of an offline campaign, but someone may have put the URL online.]
-
RE: Google Results Title vs My Page Title
Google will show the results it thinks will be most useful to the searcher--it doesn't always use the title that you gave it. (You will also sometimes see different titles depending on what the search term is.) What are you searching for when you see those results?