Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
I wouldn't redirect them all to the homepage as this is a common blackhat technique and G may think something fishy is going on. If you can redirect individual pages to relevant/similar pages on the new domain (and all the general ones redirect to the homepage), then that would be a very good strategy.
Just make sure that the links to the old sites are natural/healthy. If they are bad, the effects will transfer to the new domain as well.
You should attempt to remove them and add them to disavow list. Then in the RR, mention what you've done to fix the penalty.
If your rankings are based mostly on the manipulated links, your rankings will drop hard (which is most often the case). Once the penalty is removed though, start working on obtaining natural links so you can return to ranking. If the page/domain has no natural links, it may be easier to just start fresh.
Your homepage has this meta-tag on it
name="Robots" content="noindex,follow">
Remove it and you're good to go 
If you haven't done any link building to those sites, they are pretty much worthless. G knows about this strategy and best case scenario, ignores them. DA is irrelevant to rankings. I can show you many sites with amazing DA but shit rankings because they are penalized/crappy links.
Opportunity cost: 100 domains @ $10/yr + 100 ips @ $20/yr = $3k in yearly savings. You can easily put that money to better use.
#1 - That's probably too many links to have in the sidebar. I would make a link to a "Useful Articles" page and categorize the articles there. This does depend on how you want your visitors to flow through your stie.
Yes to #2. Link with keyword rich anchor text too.
#3 - only if those articles help your website accomplish its goal(s).
Go to https://adwords.google.com/ko/KeywordPlanner/Home, click "Enter or upload keywords to see how they perform"
Copy/paste list or upload a file, set your targeting preferences. Press "Get Search Volume"
Click on the "Keyword Ideas" tab, download
Hope that's what you're looking for!
Cheers,
Oleg
Rankings can fluctuate on a daily basis (around 2-3 spots) and analyzing it daily is futile. I like to take the average ranking position over a time period and analyze changes there.
Big things to track: top 3 positions (since movement here has HUGE impact on visitors), moving off first page, 5+ position changes (going from #4 to #9 is usually indicative of something bigger than fluctuations).
Going to have to use the keywords from GWT. Hopefully they develop out their API more.
This used to work, now its a waste of time that will most likely get you penalized.
You are better off using those time and resources to develop a strong piece of content and link building to it from authoritative sites.
Cheers,
Oleg
If the site is of good quality, I'd approve the trackback and display it on the site. The link is nofollow and it add credibility to your article (people see that it was sourced/mentioned on other popular blogs). It's also nice to share the love and the other blog may be more open to sourcing your stuff in the future.
I wouldn't auto-approve them all because there is a technique called trackback (or pingback) spamming. Its not as effective as it once was but it's still around.
Your options are pretty limited. If over-blog won't work with you to set up 301 redirects, you may need to take down the content, upload it to its new destination, and replace the old pages with blurbs + links to the new articles.
You cannot put a rel=canonical tag anywhere but the header. So if you can't edit that, you're out of luck =/
Only other tool I know that is similar to the Link Detox tool (which is only $40 per run) is remove'em which is $250 per site.
Site code looks fine and I see tick marks in the appropriate categories. Maybe they fixed it since posting or you misread the grader.
2 ways
Increase the total number of visitors (unique and/or repeat)
Increase the number of page views per visitor
To accomplish #1 - Make your site addictive to use. Make sure people who stumble upon the site want to sign up and use it. Give current users a reason to come back and view the site again. Think about why people use social networks and give users an experience they can't get anywhere else.
For #2 - increase site features/options, increase funnel pages (while keeping UX in mind and tracking CR). The more things there are to do on the site, the more views it will receive.
If you want something that will just look good on paper but not change anything on the site, have people's profile auto-refresh every minute or two. That'll increase pageviews without any additional work.
Upon further research, you are correct. A noindexed page is still crawled and indexed, just not in SERPs. So any links will still be followed and the page is still a part of the website. With this in mind, I think you should 404 the page and redirect via meta refresh after some time. Reach out to the webmaster's of the good links and ask them to change the new URL.
I still don't think a 302 is the way to go in this scenario. Ideally, you'd experiment with different options and see which produces the best results.
So his goal is the have users redirect to the new page without having Google pass the link authority to the new URL.
If you noindex the page, G won't be able to access it and it will lose all its authority. But any user that visits the page will still be redirected to the new url. There is no such thing as a 404 redirect.
Meta refresh is another way to redirect users to a new page without passing authority. As long as the time is greater than 0 (meta refresh of time=0 is treated similar to a 301), it shouldn't pass authority. So same deal, noindex the page and set up a redirect for users, not bots.
Looks like its showing up in part due to the Google+ profile being linked to the .org site - https://plus.google.com/109921895799199207966/about?gl=US&hl=en-US
Change that to the .co.uk
Be sure to use the Change of Address tool in GWT and follow the steps recommended by Google for moving your site.
302 by definition is "Temporary Redirect", which is not applicable here. According to this 302 experiment, 302's did actually pass some authority down (which may or may not hurt you). I do see the UX advantage to having the old URL redirect to the new page though.
Another alternative is to block the page via robots and set up a redirect or noindex the page and set a timed meta refresh redirect to the new page.
We can help you answer your question better with a link to your site.
My guess is that the links are either nofollow or your robots.txt is blocking the crawler from going anywhere.
Can't vouch for any but here is a short list I found via G
http://www.ukfast.co.uk/linux-server.html
If your rankings are being hurt by these links, I would move them to a new URL and 404 the old page. I would then go through the link profile for the old URLs. Find all the high quality links and contact the webmasters asking to change it to the new URLs.
Depends. If the people who would use the Facebook pages have different needs depending on the location, it may be better to have a separate page for each location. However, if all the pages would pretty much be the same (you would post the same updates to each and the questions from customers for each store are pretty much the same), I would stick with 1 brand page. Its easier to manage and it is more authoritative than having 12 separate pages.
My guess is Penguin - specifically because it 1) a single page that was effected and 2) the anchor profile for that page. You built a lot of links to that specific page with the same anchor text. In fact, you have more links to that page/anchor text than branded to your homepage. I would build more links to your homepage with your brand/URL as well as more diversified links to your /what-should-i-read-next/ page.
Cheers,
Oleg
You shouldn't worry about it. Honestly doesn't even seem like you have a lot of links on those pages.
In fact, I'm pretty sure you get that message on the your blog because you link to each post 6 times (title, image, read about text, read more, comment count x2). Sitemap will naturally have many links.
The "too many links" would only really affect your rankings if you have a lot of irrelevant external links or you link to every page on your site from every page. Either of these would siphon you link authority away from the pages you want to rank.
Having many links on just two pages on your site is no big deal and nothing to worry about.
Have a client in the exact same situation. Check to see if you are currently getting traffic for terms that would be specific to having separate pages (e.g. "50 blue bic pens" versus a more general "bic blue pens"). If you don't, then you should canonical to one page. If you do, I'd keep it as is and work on diversifying the product pages more.
User-agent: *
Disallow: /blog-links/
Will prevent spiders from crawling/indexing content that is located within that specific subfolder. If your articles are not located within that folder, then they should not be blocked. Maybe check for for meta noindex tags on the actual articles? You should also keep an eye on the "Blocked URLs" page in GWT to see if there are pages being blocked that shouldn't be.
I would link the brand name instead of the keyword anchor text and optimize your actual page to rank for the "live chat" keyword. If you link the "money" anchor text, you risk the chance of over optimization (especially if its sitewide).
"Google is pretty good a catching things like this. If you are doing "white hat" SEO and marketing, you probably don't need to worry about it."
You will be in for a rude awakening when the site triggers an algo penalty. I would be proactive and disavow the links. GWT lists links by date so routinely keep an eye on the recent links you get and disavow them. Also, pingback/comment links are generally nofollow - if that's the case, then it shouldn't trigger penalties.
How does it appear when you pop it into http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets
I know that G doesn't always show all the snippets and can choose which they show/don't. If that tool shows both, maybe post on the G webmaster forums. If not, maybe you messed up your code somewhere.
On http://www.peterrudlingtravel.co.uk/contact-peter-rudling-travel.php
add this to the tag:
http://www.peterrudlingtravel.co.uk/contact-peter-rudling-travel.php" />
That should fix your duplicate content issue.
In addition, you should force your site to redirect to the www. version of the page to consolidate the two URLs.
When you create a listing from G+ local biz page, it asks you for a phone number and tries to look it up in their current places pages. If it does exist, they try to merge them. Looks like you have both showing up, personally, I'd keep them both as is.
G local is very buggy in terms of updating and merging listings and at this point, not sure how you would proceed if you wanted to merge them. Perhaps someone else can jump in.
"Toshiba MODEL Laptop". I would like to them with the most descriptive & searched terms. I don't think its due to your internal linking structure unless its something really sketchy. You can PM me the link of the landing page and I can check it out if you like.
Don't think so =/ You need some sort of text for search engines to use so they can better distinguish and understand the images. Alt text and a small caption for each would be a min.
You can also look into getting user generated content via comments/ratings. This would give you relevant content for images and more user engagement at no additional expense.
Algorithmic penalty - duplicate content (page is copy of another page)
Algorithmic penalty - over optimization (too many backlinks with overoptimized anchor text)
Blocked robots - googlebot blocked via meta tag or robots.txt
Manually removed - URL was removed from index via GWT
Leave them as index/follow. You'd only use nofollow for links for irrelevant, non-reviewed links (i.e. blog comments, forum sigs). If you are linking to a useful page that's relevant to your users, keep the link ecology flowing!
1 day to never.
Depends on the number of editors, submissions for the category you submit a link to and quality of the website submitted.
Check out this guide for tips on how to get a DMOZ link.
Previously you would wait until the next Panda refresh to see if your website was unflagged from the algo penalty. A few months ago, they made Panda a rolling algorithm so you should see whether your site is fixed after its next crawl/reindex.
No need for a reconsideration request but a singing telegram would probably get Cutt's attention if your site doesn't rebound in a week or so 
Cheers, Oleg
Panda = on page content.
They problem lies with your pages' content. Take for example - http://www.audiobooksonline.com/Lucas-Davenport-Silken-Prey-John-Sandford.html - the synopsis/description is copy/pasted and appears on many other sites. G see's this and devalues your website.
The other site may be hurting your rankings but I wouldn't disavow it if you first saw your traffic drop after panda. Fix the on page content first.
I would replace Nike, Amazon, etc. with competitors in your industry that are ranking for the keywords you want to. Different industries have different definitions of "natural" and seeing link profiles for sites who rank for your keywords would give you a better idea of what you should shoot for.
Why do you believe that the second page is indexed? What was your search query?
Yep. If you had links to that page from other authority pages, the pagerank/authority would transfer over, even with the indexing issue.
It has crawled and indexed the page - check out the cached copy.
If you view the source, you can see that there is some HTML code but it seems to get cut off prematurely (perhaps due to a coding error). But that HTML code was enough to get the page indexed, but I would be suprised to see if it ranks for any terms. i.e. a search for the pages title does not return the correct url - "Shure SLX24/SM58 | Wireless Microphone System - CCI Solutions"
So G recognizes a page is there but see's think's it is blank - which is why it is indexed but won't rank for anything.
Long as you have the canonical tag set up, you should be fine. If they link to the url with the feedburner variables attached, it is the equivalent of linking straight to your actual post page.
Hmm, good point. I would like to think that they would have something in place to recognize that. e.g. when a crawler from CA crawls and the keywords change to CA, G would recognize that the listings are generated based on geoip (which should be a considered a good thing for relevance). In addition, you said it was a small portion of the page's content so it probably wouldn't affect rankings much.
In G's own words, focus on the user instead of the search engine. In this scenario, your users and you have a lot more to gain from having much more targeted listings show up on your site.
Cheers,
Oleg
I would not worry about it unless it is the main reason for your current rankings. If advertorials isn't part of your link building strategy, then having 1 most likely won't boost your rankings by a lot and won't get you penalized by G.
If you are really worried, you can just ask to have the link nofollowed.
If you can do a 1-to-1 page canonicalization (each page on .co.uk is canonicaled to the equivalent page on the .com) then I would do that.
Otherwise, I would noindex the backup site.
Not sure what you are talking about - what filters? Can you provide an example filter?
I think its a great idea and should help with conversions. I don't see any negative SEO consequences of doing that.