It should sort itself out if the technical setup is ok, so yes keep doing what you are doing!

I would not use the removal request tool to try to get rid of the non-www, it is not really intended for this kind of usage and might bring unexpected results. Usually your 301s should bring about the desired effect faster than most other methods. You can use a tool like this one just to 100% confirm that the non-www is 301 redirecting to the www version on all pages (you probably already have but I mention it again to be sure).

Are the www urls in your sitemap showing all (or mostly) indexed in the search console? If yes then really you should be ok and it might just need a bit of patience.

Hi Carla,

I have never heard of one file type being better or worse for image ranking, I would think it makes no difference so use the type that makes the most sense for the kind of image it is (ie jpg for photos, png for logos and generally whichever will give you a lower file size). That being said, I did a search for 'Línea Solarium Recto' and your images are the first ones shown so it might depend on what phrase you are trying to rank for with certain images, the pngs in other words are certainly showing up for quite specific searches.

@graceflack-0
Hi!
Check out this article which runs down a lot of the common reasons for traffic being labeled direct when it is not really and details steps to take:

https://www.analyticsmania.com/post/how-to-reduce-direct-traffic-in-google-analytics/

Hope it helps!

Hi,

There are some differing opinions on the benefits of using base64 images to reduce http requests. From an seo point of view I don't think it will make much of a difference one way or the other if you are only talking about 20 icon images, but from a performance point of view I would use css image sprites which also reduce http connections and are (in my opinion) easier to maintain.

My 2 cents: This does look like a wp hack - been having a nightmare with a recent Pharma hack like JV mentions and honestly I still cannot figure out how exactly they got into the site but suspect through an outdated plugin.

A couple of things to keep in mind are to check your htaccess file for weird lines and have a look for non standard wp files in various folders (things like cache.php or ms-writer.php if I recall right). These files were not showing recent change dates however so it was not as simple as just ftping in and seeing which files had been recently changed (still no idea how they pulled that off). It can also be that all these pages are being spun out of a handful of php files (or the database!) so not 100% the case that you would actually see the subfolders (although in some cases you might). Also seen dev versions of wp on the same server that have not been kept so up to date be used to get into the main production version (pretty sure they were indexed through links sent via gmail emails, thanks google!).

You can check the google cache for any of these pages to see what they looked like and when they were last cached for example: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Y0U-2Yyk3y4J:news.mshowells.com/CI/Ugg-Hazelwood-1437.shtml+

Most of them show late August cache dates so that should help narrow the timeframe. Interesting to note that all pages have a bunch of links at the bottom, some to your site some to other (probably infected) sites. All of the links are now 404s so maybe the hack got taken down by the originator (no idea why just a thought since its a bit odd that all of the links on the external sites also seem to be 404ing now). Needless to say, change all wpadmin, ftp etc passwords to be safe!

HI,

I doesn't look like exotravel.vn is redirecting right now, I get a 'page is not available' message so first thing to do is make sure the 301 redirect is set up and working as you expect it so that anybody clicking on that result will get to the right page. A look at the page cache shows that a coupe of days ago the site seemed to be returning normal content (it wasn't parked in other words but was actually serving html content). So between the redirect not working as expected and the site returning content until recently it is likely a bit confusing to google in regards what results it should/should not be showing for a branded search. If the redirect is implemented properly I expect the .vn site should fall out of the serps pretty quickly.