Welcome to the Q&A Forum

When working with angular (or any client side js framework) and ajax you have to stick to one simple rule, load content you want to feed to google bot on first load, without requiring an ajax round trip.

So in your case those first 18 rooms description is content google crawler will eat, digest and index, all the others dynamically loading using ajax won't.

Same goes for the 400 characters, show them on first load, don't retrieve them later through an ajax call.

Keep in mind if you want to show content gradually you can just serve it on first load to the client and show it gradually through javascript with ng-cloak + ng-show/ng-hide.

One word about ng-show/ng-hide, there have been some debate (even here on MOZ Q&A) around css display: none; because John Muller and Matt Cutts stated few times google doesn't like hidden content, meaning they do not index it, and they may penalize websites for hiding content. In my opinion it was clear they were referring to navigation menu or manipulative techniques.

To quote another of Matt Cutts videos "google knows today web is dynamic and content is show and hidden by user interaction", so I didn't expect google to penalize a fari use of ng-cloak (display: none;).

But these kind of things always worries me, so I tested it on few pages with 200/300 words content, which were already indexed and ranking around top20/top10 in SERP, adding some ng-cloak content on some, removing ng-cloak and just showing the content on some other pages. The results was no change at all, they didn't move, not a single a position one way or the other.

One final notice about gradually loading more content, like in your example, additional rooms after the first 18. Of course those are not going to be indexed in that page. But here you have to think about your content strategy for that listing page, and what is important to feed to google crawler for indexing. 100 titles of rooms? Do you really expect people to reach that page searching for one of those titles? I don't think so.

Blog Engine is just a dotnet framework. Use dotnet url rewriting to redirect properly, you just have to edit web.config to have iis redirect urls with trailing slashes to urls withiut trailing slash.

Yes, linking from duplicate content means potentially loosing SEO value.

google could detect those articles as duplicate and do not include some in the index, result the backlink will bring no value to you.

if google do not detect those articles as duplicate you should still ask yourself if it's really what you want to be linked from extremely similar articles. Because that's a signal, the content of the article where the link is placed, google will use to choose the keywords you will be ranked for. Same article content same keywords you are feeding google.

regardless of https you should redirect

choose if you want to show www or not in the url and redirect the other

that of course if the content is the same, if you are serving different content it's another story

ssl certificates come as standard or wildcard, if you need to secure a bunch of third level domains it maybe cheaper to get a wildcard

Honestly, I would strongly suggest to avoid blocking traffic on a geographic basis, these days you never know where traffic will come from and why.

User sitting in the building next to yours but accessing internet from a corporate network may appear as connecting from China.

Legit bot from services you are paying for may appear as crawling from Sweden, and other legit bot you don't even know about but which let you reach additional audience may appear as connecting from the other side of the world.

Blocking traffic is positively dangerous, the only case where I would consider it a good decision is when blocking blacklisted ips, and even this case I would suggest to secure the blacklist is updated regularly to avoid blocking false positive.

That megamenu is giving that page too many external links.

Choose a main keyword for each page and optimize for it, choose some (few sematically related) secondary keywords and try to optimize the page for them without jeopardaizing the first.

Please go again through MOZ guides and blog post and very nice whiteboard friday videos to better understand what "optimize" mean.

Once done if you will look back at the source code of those pages you will notice yourself they don't smell nicely.

Depending on the keyword competition level you may need to get some backlinks for those keywords, which means generate good quality links from relevant websites, within relevant content, without a spammy anchor, etc...

Work page by page, keyword by keyword. It's a long and draining process.

Instructions here: https://wordpress.org/support/topic/how-to-change-from-wp-loginphp-to-login

If I look at your backlink profile with ahrefs, there's few I don't like, I am referring to anchortexts stuffed with keywords which doesn't look natural to me, and I assume google would not consider them natural either.

Your competitor pinkcherry doesn't look much better, but that should not give you much comfort. And btw they have much more linking root domains so they beat you anyhow.

It's the on page which is really an issue in my opinion. Just starting with following advices from MOZ page grader would help a lot.

Take this page http://www.cupidboutique.com/vibrators which I assume from your early comment you would like to see ranked better than your competitors for the keyword "vibrators", and look at the source code. Starting from the head there's a lot I don't like, if you want to rank for vibrators, trim the title, that megamenu is overkilling with external links, the keyword density is overwhelming, and 50 h2 tag are simply too much. And content is thin.

You should rethink it. If you look at hushcanada.com page source for their best ranking results for the keyword vibrators you will see it's much much much better.

Pinkcherry rules because of the links, hushcanada beat you because of their onpage.

Change the name of the login page, I mean in addition to having a strong password of course.

Those automated scripts look first for the known wp login page if they don't find it the will give up, if they do they will keep trying forever and ever, an unecessary load for your servers.

Your opinion is reassuring. Thanks.

Hi Rand,

it's helpful.

But I can narrow my doubts/question to this: what is a safe range for the ratio of deeplinks vs rootlinks to get the best results?

If a website is getting a lot of deeplinks and few links to the root domain, google could perceive those pages as highly relevant but do not reward the domain as a whole?

I know what you are thinking, since google algo is not on github, we don't know exactly.

But if you at MOZ calculate DA as you explained, is probably because you think google is doing something similar, and thus rewarding a domain as a whole for it's deeplinks?

Hence, in terms of the broader SEO concept of Domain Authority, should we assume a website with 0 rootlinks and many deeplinks is getting a similar authority as if it had all rootlinks?

I know this is highly speculative, that's why at the beginning I was asking if anyone had some data/analysis on this subject.

Thanks a lot of your time!

I am a little surprised, because having those pages as "noindex, follow" should not bring GWT to flag them as errors.

Monica is correct in addressing google flag anything than 200 as errors, but... Your page with "noindex, follow" should return a HTTP code of 200. If it is returning anything else, it's probably wrong, and you should analyze why is doing it.

My religion has a law saying that GWT should return no errors, point. I have also witnessed few times a correlation between lowering GWT errors count to 0 and an improve in SERP ranking; but I have no proof one is causing the other.

I can see the total number of referring domains decreasing for cupidboutique.com while it's increasing for the two others. That's not good.

Usual metrics, like DA/Trust etc... are definitely better for pinkcherry who also has more backlinks, but cupidboutique values are supposely better than hushcanada.

But... The count of positions in SERP top 50 is surprisingly low for cupidboutique (209) when compared to pinkcherry (1.2k) and hushcanada (823), something is definitely wrong with your SEO on-page in my opinion; but it could also be your backlink profile, you should check anchor text diversity and backlink diversity.

In addition to all the good answers you already got.

Putting everything on a single page you lose opportunities to place keywords in url, <title>and <h1> or diluting <h1> value.</p></title>

I would be surprised.

Google knows a lot, but not everything. Unless GA tracking code is installed google shall not know about things such a user click.

If they were passing page juices only for clicked backlink they would be ruling out a too big chunk of the web. It doesn't sound logic to me.

Also it doesn't sound realistic to analyze all users click in the world when refreshing google index, they do have a lot of metal, but not that much.

Seems to be working. Today had no problem.

Sorry to report that, but it's either still broken, or broken again.

http://imgur.com/h3gWIui

Got this few times in the last couple of hours.

I have been using OSE over the weekend and it was still broken. Today it seems to work.

Thanks.

I must be misunderstanding something, how can you have 80-100 completely relevant keywords for each page?

they cannot be relevant for each page if each page is targeting only one keyword

of course each page will have other semantically near keywords in it, but 100? Doesn't make sense.

anyway, if you are targeting 100 keywords, and you have 100 pages, each page with content designed around one keyword

given that little information you are fine and I don't see any reason to cut the number of keywords/page, I don't see any logic in it and I am wondering why are you in doubt, what have you experienced or read to think otherwise?

How many words per page?

I regret I missed this question. Because I have been testing a lot with exit popovers and subscription popovers.

I strongly suggest you A/B test as well, including testing multiple copy for the popover.

While testing I would closely monitor bounce rate, signup rate and other target conversions you have. I would also use some visitors recording/playback service like http://www.hotjar.com/ or http://mouseflow.com/ (I suggest hotjar) to examine sample users interactions.

Depending on the nature/quality of the traffic and your target conversions you will likely find quite different results.

What I would expect based on my experience is

• users being annoyed and most of them closing the popup at an incredibly high speed,
• increase of signup,
• increasing bounce rate on pages with a high quality/targeted traffic, quality traffic mean low bounce rate, high user interaction and, if you have other goals/target a part from signups, high conversions
• lowering bounce rate on pages with poor quality traffic, if you have pages with high traffic, high bounce rate and good time spent on page a popover with a good copy is more likely to lead them to do something else than just leave

So, test it. And depending on your overall target and page specific target, choose if a popover is useless or harmful and which copy is best.

Of course adding unique content is the only way.

add unique categories description

if you have a blog, last excerpt of posts related to the category

alternative categories info

try to figure out possible user generated content, category related

define an algo to present different set of products for each category, even if many products fall on multiple categories you don't have to show always exactly the same

multiple product descriptions for the same peoduct, one for each category...

do some brainstorming and you will come up with more ideas

What make you believe limiting the number of keyword you are targeting would bring any SEO value?

unless you are stuffing to much keywords into the same pages I strongly believe it doesn't matter how many keyword you target

what it really matter is the backlink profile supporting those keywords

assuming you don't have unlimited resources, of course you cannot focus on unlimited number of keyword from the very beginning

make a list of all the potential keywords, filter by conversion rate and competition and choose a reasonable set of keyword to focus on at beginning

focus on agroup doesn't mean ignore the others, I mean I would still monitor other groups and I would still generate good content for those keywords if it make sense, if source materia is available if the topic is hot, etc...

Here you have it:

http://imgur.com/xNrxEuw

It's true sometimes it works, let's say 1 out of 3 queries, my guess is a load balancer is sometimes redirecting the query to something working.

xNrxEuw

Getting errors all the time.

A complete Bible then.

It's not complex to do, it's not harmful if done right, and it helps ranking.

If you want to lower bounce rate in analytics you can just trigger an event after a 30 seconds time out using one line of javascript.

But be careful in examining which figures is more interesting in your case, even after 10 minutes someone who leaves the landing page without browsing deeper should be considered a bounce in the majority of the cases in my opinion.

What impact? I am not sure I understand the question.

Good luck.

In theory a spam report should be the thing to do, but usually it doesn't change anything.

I remember seeing a video of either Cutts or Muller saying that a spam report is not going to produce any direct effect, they just use the information to improve their algo on next update.

I know for sure that in certain cases they take immediate action, because months ago a news site with DA90+ here in Italy started selling do-follow links in their articles (by the way for a small fee of 15k euro per month!), I reported that, and few others did, and within one month they got a manual action in their gwt account and they stopped doing it.

But in many other cases where both I and colleagues in the business did spam report for much smaller sites, nothing happen, and after years I can say they are still happily enjoying good ranking for very obvious black hat tricks.

SEO and democracy doesn't seems to get along well.

I was just addressing that few days ago.

Google have been kind enough to provide a very detailed guide on how to do that: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/configurations/separate-urls

You need to annotate your html accordingly, all the details are there, just read it.

In this whiteboard friday Rand is addressing this topic, and it's interesting that many (diverse) deep-links from same domain are quite valuable.

http://moz.com/blog/whiteboard-friday-link-diversity

But yet I can't find any clue about the effect on DA.

Maybe my question is not clear enough. I am not asking about a strategy to get backlinks. I know how to get backlinks.

What I don't know is if there's any analysis, study, data, test... Supporting any particular strategy on how to diversify backlinks among home and internal pages.

In other words, to be more clear... Let's make two examples (just for the sake of being understood).

Is there any analysis, study, data, anything... Saying that is generally better to have 50% of backlinks to homepage and 50% to internal pages. Or is better to have 90% of backlinks to homepage and 10% to internal pages, etc...

I know DA is increasing as well. I can see that. But I have no idea of what correlations are there. And if there's any best practice or strategy to maximize benefit for both.

Let's say you are collecting backlinks across a variety of pages for foo.com, like: foo.com/clown, foo.com/juggler, foo.com/lion-tamer and so on...

Page Authority will benefit for each of those pages, but what is going to happen to Domain Authority?

Is there any data available? Any educated guess in what's the best strategy to try to get best results for both PA and DA?

What's the background of your conclusion? What's the logic?

I am asking because my understanding about crawl budget is that if you waste it you risk to 1) slow down recrawl frequency on a per page basis and 2) risk google crawler gives up crawling the website before to have crawled all pages.

Are you splitting your sitemap into sub sitemaps? That's a good way to spot groups/categories of pages being ignored by google crawler.

There's few tools online offering traffic estimate service. In my opinion none is accurate enough to be relevant. you just need to try them with url of websites you have log access to see how poor their guess are.

as far as i know moz doesn't offer such a tool

if i have to name one of those tool i would name semrush, when I tested it's accurancy I found it to report traffic volumes between 10% and 100% wrong, which is more accurate than many others and it's still giving you an idea of a website traffic

It's normal.

Google as a crawl budget.

Once your website is indexed (sitemap submission) the crawler visits your website daily and depending on a number of factors does crawl a portion of your website only, a different yet somehow overlapping portion, everyday. It usually crawl every single page within few weeks but I have seen the crawler stubbornly refuse to crawl certain pages for longer.

A small website with just 100 pages it's unlikely to hit any crawl budget.

When it comes to fresh content, new pages, it's more hungry, google crawler likes fresh food, and google algo tries to index fresh content as soon as possible.

So what's happening to your website is perfectly normal.

Is the content staying the same?

If the content is staying the same, and just the url structure is changing, and if the new url structure is not depriving the url of the relevant keyword for the page content...

If all these conditions are satisfied, in my experience moving few websites, replacing only the url structure (theoretically improving it), nothing changed, I mean I didn't experience any traffic being lost in GWT or analytics, I didn't even notice any unusual fluctuation.

Of course keep in minds the traffic is moving, from the old urls to the new ones, so depending on your report and your new url structure you will see it in different places.

My experience improving page copy tells me the ranking improvement is not dramatic and the exact amount depends on a variety of factors, as far as I can tell the biggest of these factors are domain authority and keyword competition, if you change content on pages of a domain with a high DA, the ranking of those pages will improve more if compared with the improvement you may get with lower DA pages.

Also the improvement seems proportional to the previous SERP position, in other words it's easier to go from pos 20 to first page, but much harder to go from pos 3 to pos 2; considering all other factors the same.

Of course if you have a page with a a lot of backlinks and a decent ranking despite the content being thin, or poorly related to the keywords you are targeting, improving it will gives you the biggest jump.

Anyway that's just my experience, no golden rule.

EDIT, now I read EGOL answer I can see I totally missed the real core question.

I have never seen a page ranking improve just because a new fresh content replaced the old one. Only because new better quality content replaced old poor content.

And when I heard and read about fresh content boost, they were always talking about new content in new pages, and that depends on the query being searched. If you browse old whiteboard friday from Rand you will find one on this topic which explain that.

In one sentence, if you publish new fresh content about a sport event the night of that sport event you may benefit from freshness boost for query related to that sport event. For obvious reasons google believe new content about a recent event is more relevant than stale one.

targeting the keywords with the highest volume can be misleading, they are not necessary the best converting keywords, and since usually everyone prefer to shot at the biggest target competition is fierce

I am not saying it's wrong, but I would be more selective and choose keywords on the base of a variety of factors.

In addition to the good things said by others

check your backlink profile versus your competitors, probably they are getting more backlinks or more authoritative ones, or maybe your old backlinks are poor quality and dropping in value,

check your backlink profile for anchor diversity and cross check with your competitors

are you having traffic drops? Maybe not overall, but hidden in some traffic segments? are those drops linked to a dropping ranking for some keywords? If so why? Increasing competition? Due to some backlink related issues? See above.

is your content quality dropping compared to your competitors? are you serving pages with thin content and your competitors are offering better content? Less duplicate? More targeted?

i could go on, but this is at least where I would start my homework

Redirect with 301 the old urls to the new https ones. Check gwt for any crawl errors for weeks if not months (depends on how much index pages you have and how many are crawled per day) and fix them, if you have.

you should then see traffic move from http to https in gwt

again depending on the total number of pages indexed you have and the crawling rate you have, it make takes months, even many months before all pages are re-indexed and starts showing in SERP as https

but that's normal and it's not bad at all

i don't see any reason, in your exposition, to choose any different route than first option

check the domain authority of the second level domain your client is currently using and evaluate how much time and money you need to replicate the same DA to a new domain, then ask yourself and your client if it's worth it. Don't forget to mention all that work to rank for the new domain is not going to help the old one, and when same DA is reached you will still have to face duplicate effort to improve DA of both.

of course there are other factors which could still weight in favor of the separate domain, like banaly if she want to take distance from her main practice, if the existing domain suffered from penalization, etc...

but without knowing much I don't see a reason to go that way

Do you mean the plugin is redirecting all the traffic to that horrible url? Or just redirect users after clicking to share? Or that url is the one the plugin shares?

damage change depending on the answer

but I would get rid of the plugin anyhow

I have seen google algo rank the same page for very similar phrases where the keywords where just changing places, but it's not "always" doing it. You can help him learn that page is a good fit for both queries with the copy of the page.

google knows about synonyms and does often show same or very similar SERP for different keywords which are considered to have the same "exact" meaning and usage in language. But in my experience does treat plurals in a different way.

I would use exact match for title and exact match for h1 if it make sense, but avoiding using unnatural language.

Unfortunatelly SEO is a land where certainity is scarce, and I would recommend testing different versions to find out what works best in your case.

That's one of those cases where I would use buzzsumo, see what is most shared, and create similar content around those same keywords.

In theory they should discount it.

Usually it takes time. I have a domain I bought to test this technique two years ago, it had DA56, now it's DA20, that's giving you an idea of how slowly they do.

But I have also seen domain being bought, content changed, and still retain their value.

No one knows what is in the mind of google algo.

A part from the valid hints that have been already mentioned by others, please note google is very picky when it comes to display microdata and it shows them or ignore them depending on the search query too.

So for example if you search for "John Doe" it should show it, but if you expect to see that when searching for "Best Lawyer in Nevada", you are going to be disillusioned.