Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I don't think we can look at a word-count in a vacuum; not only because there are so many contributing factors, but because there are likely variables that effected this "magic number" (a concept that I feel is bunk) that weren't measured and considered or weighed in any way.

Most importantly, I don't think such a figure has any use to a specific person, business, site, etc. It's interesting data, but it says nothing about what any individual should do or expect. In my experience, my readers want anywhere between 300 - 2000 words; but again, this means practically nothing. There are different types of posts, subjects, content-uses, audiences based on these, and many other variables.

I think that, if one's data shows that their posts aren't doing well, word count is one area in which it may be worth exploring different solutions. But there are dozens of more vital and useful data points out there and readily available.

First, I'd note that using the same strategy for similar keywords doesn't necessarily mean they'll have similar results. Sometimes, keywords need very different strategies, content-association, and have different competition / difficulty.

Is it only you who are having ranking issues for this brand, or are other websites having the same issue?

If you can provide links to both, I could help you out - but without seeing your pages or any data, it's impossible to say. There are a lot of possible reasons for that.

First and most importantly, I strongly advise against ever suggesting a client "play the system". Everyone gets caught eventually and it's silly to make such a big risk for such a small benefit. How long before he's caught? Who knows. But he will be, and neither of you wants that.

I recommend removing his home and mother's home as locations in terms of Google Places. Then, optimize the website for these locations. Make mention of the areas he serves often (but not to a spammy degree), and create **good, long, unique content **for location- or area-specific pages.

There are effectively 2 ways you could handle this properly:

1. Consolidate all of those duplicate pages into one page; keeping these listings one a single page and using a gallery / ajax / etc. to bring up one specific car at a time.
2. Choose one page from each set of duplicates as the base page, and place "rel-canonical" tags in the duplicates.

Option 2 is likely the better of the two in terms of SEO and your business, but both are technically viable options.

While your site looks very nice and clean, there are a handful of things that are hurting it:

1. There's no header navigation on the initial page (the left-hand widget isn't "initial" in this sense).
2. There's barely any text on the homepage.
3. There doesn't seem to be an H1 on the page (certainly not at the top - even though it might seem that way, the slider content may not be getting picked up by Google as such).
4. Effectively, your homepage is a long list of products. Take a look at Amazon and even smaller ecommerce sites. Your site, and specifically, homepage, is lacking content.

I'm sure with a genuine audit, you could get loads more information, but these are all things you may wish to consider looking into.

I had this same issue not more than a few months ago; it seems that the option Google recommends is to delete the listing(s) you don't prefer. Unfortunately, this is currently the only viable option. If you have followers on the one you intend on deleting that aren't followers on your preferred listing, I suggest inviting them to follow the one you save.

In general, I think it's never a good idea to outright remove or delete a blog post - especially one that may actually be helpful to proper visitors. In this case, I'd suggest setting blog posts that disrupt your site's flow/funnel or otherwise cause this sort of issue to "no-index". Deindexing posts / pages like this will remove them from SERPs, but will leave them accessible to visitors. Don't be too heavy-handed with de-indexing though. Do this to one or a few posts, and see how that effects your site after a month. Then, if it's had a benefit, you could de-index more (not all) posts like this.

Never allow someone to take or steal your content. Ever. It's never good for your site, and it's just a matter of time before it causes an (even bigger) issue for you. Duplicate content hurts both parties, even if you added it first. Moreover, the backlinks wouldn't be worth the harm.

Send them a take-down request to their website administrator. If, after a short amount of time, they haven't responded and/or taken your content down, file a complaint with Google regarding stolen content.

If you could provide an example, I'm sure it would be easy to help you out and give you an answer as to why that might be.

No one can really answer a question like this without knowing more details about your product. However, generally speaking, I would say to try to do the following:

• Break the process up between at least several, related steps.
• Keep the design simple, and the clutter and/or extra content to a minimum during the process.
• The more a user can click rather than type, the better. Drop downs are generally preferable to text-input fields.
• Keep the design, headings, and placement of items consistent.
• Ensure that, if customers are inputting sensitive data, that the entire site or section is https (getting an SSL certification). That way their data will be secure.
• If you're worried that people may not be willing to spend 10-20 minutes, consider having a preliminary amount of data necessary for sign-up / login / etc. and then allow them to add more information before accessing the product directly.

These are just some general tips, but I hope they're helpful nonetheless.

Logan's correct - though I'll add that along with branding and which is most fitting to you and your target customers, I would take DA (domain authority) and historical data into account when deciding.

In business listings and directories, it's best to have a consistent NAP (name, address, phone). Meaning, the name listed on Google+ should be the same as Facebook, as Linkedin, as BestOfTheWeb, as Yellowpages, etc. However, this will have no direct effect on SEO or rankings whatsoever. Search engines (including Google) are typically smart enough to figure out that these are all the same company, even if there are slight discrepancies.

Generally, redirects should be *instantaneous (depending on how you do it, this can take a short while). However, the permanence of this takes, I'd wager, about 1-2 months. A redirect tells search engines that when a user goes to a page on your site, like www.example.com/old, you (the webmaster) would like the user to be redirected to www.example.com/new. After time, search engines will eventually do this automatically. The presumption, however, is that this is intended to be a permanent fixture. So you'll need to ensure that the old url is essentially phased out of existence.

To answer your direct question, if by "relevance" you mean the rank, quality score, etc. - this is done is as much time (again, with varying experience). However, be aware that the link juice passed from domain A to domain B will often be a little lost.

Certainly an interesting question. It's becoming more and more evident that image recognition software (more specifically, subject recognition) is gaining traction within big names including Facebook and Google. The software (still in development) can recognize subjects, objects, settings, etc. - to the point where they can "name" an image based on these factors. Which, of course, is extremely relevant to this conversation.

That said, I disagree with the notion that incongruities between an image name, alt-text, or title and the recognized subject of that image will have any factor at any point in time. I have two main points on why I suspect this will never become practice:

1. Naming an image based directly on its contents has never been a suggestible convention. Historically, naming an image has been more about the "message" or intended use of that image than about its direct, visual content. To push content creators to start doing this would be overly heavy-handed (yes, even for Google).
2. The web would be utterly polluted by images with the exact same name, all over the place. As you'd brought up stock photography and its proliferation across the web, I'd counter that this is exactly why it won't happen. The amount of images by this convention that would be named "man in suit at laptop" alone is staggering. More to the point, Google and other curators prefer specificity; so much so that it would be impossible for them to accurately define more than the visual assets - which often don't make up the bulk of a pictures meaning.

TL;DR version: Do I think what you're suggesting is possible? Absolutely. Do I think it will happen? No; this would go against naming conventions and Google's own desire for specificity.

Now that I have a clearer idea of what it is you were asking about, it sounds like the email in question is one sent directly to a client by Moz, as set by you within your own reporting settings. Sending reports to clients directly is a use-case I don't have, so I can't speak to this - hopefully someone more informed can assist you. Good luck!

It's extremely unclear what you're asking about without you giving a little more background. If this is an email you were sent by Moz, then here are answers to each of your 3 points as well as an additional point:

• Correct, clients can't login or make changes - however, whomever is using Moz can. Meaning, if you're running a campaign for a client and they want a change, you could make that change. This is what I'm guessing is the situation, but if you want to provide more information, I could revise my answer accordingly.
• In most business settings (and generally), it's unwise to give multiple people direct access to a login for any analytics platform. For security reasons, as well as protecting data and ensuring it's unaltered, it's best to keep one person to a login. However, if more than one person should want/need to see this data, then sharing these reports is the best solution.
• If this was sent to you (presumably the Moz user), then it makes sense for this to be in an email sent to you.

If I had to guess, you're forwarding this email directly to your client (again, please correct me if that's not the case). This email isn't generated with the expectation that Moz users will outright forward it to their clients; I think the intention is that you'd download the report and write your own email. As such, the intention of this email is disparate from an email you should send to a client.

Nope. You're in no way required or expected to tell someone why they've hit a 404. As long as you have a page with content, you're doing OK. Any effort beyond that will only benefit you.

Your 404 page is a great way to serve visitors links to the pages that would be most relevant in general to them. It's also a great opportunity to show your brand and personality - and yes, as you mention - blog articles are a great next step for these pages. However, make sure that it makes sense for them to be there. If a visitor is within your blog domain / subdomain, then go for it. If they're not, consider a combination of things.

And yes, you can have more than one 404 page. Whether having multiple versions makes sense is up to you.

A partner of ours, Open Moves, create very comprehensive strategy for SEO and marketing. I recommend looking into their services; whether you need a lot or a little.

Dmitrii isn't wrong, but I feel it's always important to determine which version is best for your branding, marketing materials, and which is most memorable/useful for your customers and leads. Some sites do better with "www", and some without. Don't leave it up to chance for Google to choose one for you.

Tim's correct, but I'll add a couple of things:

• Never take any analytics platform as gospel - meaning, each of them have their inaccuracies. This is one of the benefits to having multiple platforms running analytics on your site(s).
• In this case, I would recommend following Google's count. Not only because it's higher, but because their analytics are going to be more accurate (generally) to what's happening in SERPs. When I say the volume of page issues is a factor, what I'm considering is that either Google is simply seeing more errors than Moz, or Google's crawl is itself in error (which happens on occasion). Either way, that would need to be resolved, so solving the issues Google's provided should be paramount.
• Lastly, the Yoast plugin is wonderful in many ways. Don't take everything it gives you at face value, but more often than not, it'll be a fantastic resource for on-page SEO. There's also a plugin simply called "Redirection" that can setup 301s from a page that's 404ed to a more relevant page, should you wish to go that path. Either way, always make sure you have either a dedicated 404 page (with actionable content so users aren't lost), or some manner of populate-able content.

Good luck!

Without seeing the data in detail, I'd have to give a pretty general answer: If your old site has a poor DA, been penalized, or is itself spammy, then having it redirect to a new site is only one step better than just staying on the old site. When you redirect, you're passing link-juice from website A to website B; both bad and good. It's the same reason why you disavow bad links in the first place, though in this case, the redirect is at least under your control.

Anything that points to your new site factors in its overall stats. It sounds like your old site is hindering your attempt to break away from the bad links. My recommendation would be to cut the redirect, and only reinstall the redirect when you've cleaned up website A.

There aren't really any negative SEO implications to having a client's site backlink to yours. The only way there would be is if their site is spammy or something to that effect. This is true both for having a link to their site in yours, and vice versa (which I only bring up because of your last question).

There's also nothing wrong with offering a discount on the next purchase that customer makes. However, I've found that most customers are OK with doing this without having to do that. I've actually set it up so that, in our contracts, we have a clause that says we're allowed to, at our own discretion, add our logo and a link back to our site in the footer of theirs (with certain reasonable restrictions, etc).

Either method works. Asking how they feel about your service is an equally valid method of achieving this. You're good to go!

Not to sound cheeky, but neither is preferable. The solution with lots of thin content means you have a lot of pages that hold little to no use to a user, while also putting you at risk for, well, thin content. The solution that keeps all of this content on one page means that your page is poorly targeted (especially bad since this is a service page), that the content will be difficult to digest for users, and that you have no real options for navigation to a specific service.

Since it's clear you know you're in a "lesser of two evils" situation; my recommendation would be to go with the approach of having many pages. You can at least target these pages better, and it leaves you open to adding more content later on. However, this option is a bigger risk : bigger reward. You might get penalized for thin content. But if time is the absolute in this circumstance, I think that relatively thin pages may be more manageable.

As an amendment, might I recommend adding a couple of universal content sections? Meaning, within these thin pages, along with the 100~ words of good, unique content, having a content section that's the same throughout each, so that you have more content on these pages without sacrificing as much time. Something like links to relevant blog articles, customer testimonials, or a personable explanation of the company's methodology regarding the delivery of services.

Also, for the future, I recommend using two plugins for WordPress:

1. Redirection by John Godley: This plugin lets you set up redirects within the WP dashboard, which means you can keep track of what's being redirected where within your WP administration.
2. Yoast SEO by Team Yoast: This plugin lets you add and edit a lot of different SEO-related items, gives you tips regarding keywords you want to focus on, and a lot more. It's incredibly useful.

To be clear, I don't work for or with either of these developers/teams, but they're great plugins that sound as though they'd be especially helpful for you.

If I understood what you're saying, it seems as though you may have mistaken page title and URL for the same thing. You can alter a page title without affecting the URL and vice versa. For example, in Google SERPs (Search Engine Results Pages), the blue text shown for each result is the page title, while the URL is in green text.

Now, with that said, page titles shouldn't exceed about 150 characters. This is because after this point, the title will be truncated and the entire title will, therefore, not be shown (only part of it will).

Regarding switching the URLs back to their originals, I'd recommend simply changing them back to what they were rather than redirecting them. Either way, it sounds like this whole endeavor has hurt your SEO, and either method may have implications. When you do this, any URL that is not hardcoded should be fixed by WordPress automatically. What this means is, while links populated internally (ex: in menus, navigation, footer)  should be changed by WordPress without you having to do anything - though I'd strongly suggest you double-check these manually. However, the hardcoded links (ex: links in body text, images, some widgets) might not be resolved by WordPress automatically. These you will probably need to tend to on your own. Meaning, if in the second paragraph of blog article A, you link to blog article B: you'll probably need to edit the page for blog article A and replace the old URL with the new.

If you need any clarifications or further help, please ask! And sorry if I mistook anything you'd said.

Yes, you absolutely should add unique text to each of these pages. Not only so that they aren't flagged as duplicate, but because it's always an SEO benefit to have more good content. If you don't have the capacity to write such content, however, you may want to remove them from indexation.

The reason that these pages are being flagged as duplicates is that Google isn't parsing these PDFs. Which means that, all Google and others see are pages with no content and an iframe. It's also pertinent to note that Moz will flag anything with more than 90% overlap as a duplication.

I hope this helps!

That's still not quite enough to go on. Could you provide the message they're giving you, and/or URLs regarding the duplicate content? Examples in either should prove helpful.

You'll have to be a lot more specific. Try answering at least some of these questions so we can help you:

1. What content is being duplicated?
2. Where are the duplicates?
3. Is this all internal (on your site only)?
4. Are you receiving any duplicate content warnings from Moz, Google, etc.?
5. In what way does it "keep[s] growing?"
6. What kind of content is this?

Once you provide answers to some of these questions, I'm sure we'll be able to help you fix the issue.

I always run my searches incognito in Chrome, **private **in Firefox, and in-private with Internet Explorer. These settings remove any personal information, login data, stored cookies, and location data.

It's showing as duplicate content because aside from an image and caption, there's no content on this page. Low-to-zero content pages that follow the same template / structure will often be seen as duplicate content. Sorry to say, but these pages should either have content added to them, or deindexed. The latter is much easier, of course, and both are almost guaranteed to improve your site. But adding content would be the better solution. It'll add value to those pages, you won't be removing the pages from indexation, and it can incentivize engagement.

I don't see how that would even function. What comes after the root of a domain tends to be levels of folders and sub-folders, in cases where there are levels. So, example.com/hats/red-hats/big-red-hats makes sense because big red hats would be within the folder red hats, and red hats would be in the folder hats. Having your urls reverse this would not only not make sense to users, it wouldn't make sense to search engines.

If your thinking was that the closer to the domain a specific keyword is, the better ranking you can expect - think again. For any website - but especially for an eCommerce site - the structure of folders and subs is very important, and helps both users and search engines find what they're looking for and parse your site.

Bottom line: I strongly advise avoiding a strategy like what you're suggesting. I can't foresee it having anything but a negative influence.

It sure did. I'll email help@moz.com and provide more insight. Thanks!

I'm wary of giving more information as it's probably best that little to no one be able to access Moz staging for one reason or another. I should also mention that this was done very unintentionally on my part. That said, from the 404 from Moz Pro home, I tried to access "My QA", and that's when I realized that everything I did thereafter was within staging.moz.com (and posted a question similar to this one).

Does Moz permit access to their staging site, or did I stumble upon a mistake - or Moz-stake, if you will?

Hmmm. I'm not sure what the issue may be, but when I do this, I'm getting the information you're asking for by doing this on my property. Hopefully someone else can cue you in.

While in GSC, select the property you want to check out. Then, select Search Analytics. Within there, at the top of the graph, you'll see "Queries", "Pages", etc. Choose the page you want to see the keywords for by clicking the arrow by "Pages" and filtering by that page. Then, viola!

As for your second question, I doubt it. GSC replaces GWT. You'll have to get used to the new.

While it won't necessarily have SEO implications, I'd suggest steering away from duplicate headings, if only because it can be redundant for anyone consuming your content. It could be argued that, this sort of duplication could reduce your ability to diversify your keyword usage.

100% saturation is impossible to achieve while maintaining any semblance of value. Not only because any proper page inherently has navigation, internal linkage, and myriad other elements, but because to write content about a subject in that amount of detail, one would invariably need to write about sub-topics and related topics. It's just not feasible. But, and here's the kicker, you wouldn't want 100% saturation anyway.

Rich, dynamic content incorporates that which is related to it. Strong pages link out to others, and keep visitors within their media cycle, if not churning them lower down. Good content is content that holds information that's both detailed and general to a topic. I would say, at most, the highest saturation point that still remains within strong SEO and content optimization is about 85-90% when taking into account all page content - and even that's pushing it, really.

I'm unfamiliar with the plugin, but usually when a full url is shown after the base as a subpage or subfolder, it means that there was a redirect setup incorrectly. Meaning, that isn't a url that you can't redirect, it's a url that's already being redirected, and incorrectly looping back on itself. Check the plugin to see if that's the case, and if not there, check the htaccess as well as the page source itself.

There are a lot of options, and some of them take wonderful advantage of having access to a payload of data as you do:

• Blog about it! A blog that's well-written, informative, and has easy-to-consume hard data is always a plus. Especially if you create simple visuals, and provide overviews and insights into that data.
• Create infographics. While these can (and should) be part of the blogging experience mentioned above, even if you just post infographics that break down that data well on social media, it can be a big boost in engagement.
• Try to work with other media groups, bloggers, etc. to get exposure and bring that data to a larger net of people. There are so many avenues for content creation, and depending on what field your data is in, could be used in so many ways.
• Create either digital versions of your publications, or at the very least, white papers, case studies, and press releases.

The options you have are honestly only limited to your time, resources, and ability to represent that data simply and effectively. Don't let it go to waste!

I would change listings, social media information, and other external items once you've launched the new site. Think of it this way: your website is your main source, while the rest are secondary. Your website should always take precedence when it comes to change, especially when considering consistency with your users. If they go to Yelp, Google+, etc. and see "Bakery Y", but your website still says "Bakery X", it'll be both confusing and inconsistent.

As for your second question, about the catering business:

• Facebook: you can create a new page (try to get a short and related URL!) and "merge" the old one into the new. Ensure that you clarify this change in a post, however, as not to confuse followers!
• Yelp: Much trickier. In this case, the only option may be to try to change the name of the current listing, rather than creating a new one. Not only are reviews something you never want to give up, the length of time your listing is up actually plays a roll in rankings on Yelp (similar to search engines for websites).
• Google: This is actually a combination of the two previous. You can keep the page you have now (especially good if you have reviews) and change the name and branding. If there's some reason that's not possible, or if you've yet to create a solid Google Local / My Business, then you may choose to create a new page and contact Google, asking to move assets to the new from the old. The latter is more complicated, and can take a long while, however.

I think the important thing is that is show some thoughtfulness. If you know something that the client needs/wants in their office, or if there's something they could use for business, or even if you happen to know everyone likes a particular food (for which you could get a basket); something along those lines is typically best.

From my experience, several different Javascript and Ajax elements can confuse Google. While you obviously don't want to outright avoid their use, it's always good to have someone knowledgeable sift though any code written externally (like a WP theme or plugin, in your case) to ensure that content is always present, even when it isn't necessarily "called" yet.

I'd say your gut feeling is right - in fact, you may want your first post to be a simple "apology" for being absent due to being busy (or something to that effect), and alerting people that from now on you'll be posting often. Address the issue, and present the solution you've already come to.

Antonio is absolutely correct - in the 10th line of your homepage's code is a no-index tag.

To elaborate more on his second point, the reason the page: _kaya3976.com.au/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php  _is the only one being shown, is because Google sees that there's a website, but can't actually index any visitor-intended pages - and is therefore showing your WP Login page. You definitely want that to be resolved ASAP, but I would make absolutely sure with whomever's been developing the site that there isn't a reason it's de-indexed currently.

Before you do either of those things, make absolutely sure that you can even get the URLs you'd prefer. It may be that the reason your current URLs are less than ideal is because the simpler versions weren't available at the time of creation.

That said, if there are a substantial amount of posts, engagements, etc. it may not be worth making the changes. For Facebook, I suppose it can't hurt to create a new page and merge the two, favoring the new. But Yelp is a little trickier regarding that sort of process (or lack thereof).

Lastly, ensure that any webpage (on your site, partner sites, adverts, social media, etc.) that links to the Facebook and Yelp pages is updated with these new URLs.

It's hard to say without knowing the specifics and how these two measure up regarding their import, but I'd say give the landing page a go. After a month or so, if it still hasn't started ranking as well as you'd like, maybe consider tweaking the content even more on the landing page. Assuming this landing page could really move some KPIs for you, it's a semi-risk worth taking.

You would need to provide a link to the site for we Mozzers to look into this for you.

The answer to most of your questions is: it's counter-intuitive to have more than one Google + / Local / GMB page; unless you have multiple locations. Having more than one Google + or Google Local page will actually cannibalize your listings. Plus, it confuses Google often, leading to issues with your Maps location and other information. Plus, while the competitor to whom you linked has changed the NAP on their page slightly in each instance, this is a grayhat tactic and should be avoided. It's also possible that they'd done this by mistake (there have been times when Google's services were confusing and made it too easy to create a new Google + page rather than tying something to an existing page).

As a general rule, I'd avoid trying to trick or obfuscate the systems by which Google and other authorities work. It never ends well. Keep one Google + page per location. Make sure it's tied to your Google Local and My Business accounts, and that you're consistent with NAP and other information.