Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Great. Just audit it, fix problems, audit again, write more great content and give it time. Even if you fix the problem (assuming it was an onsite problem) it may take some time for Google to show the love agian.

Ok so. If a bit of content resides at /bikes/mountain-bikes/ and the menulink I use is /bikes/mountain-bikes/ I'll get a status code 200. There is no added delay, no page rank lost, 200 == OK. The menu link points directly to the destination content.

Now lets say you've decided to change the location of that content to /bikes/mountain-bikes/index.html.

You do the 301 redirects on from the old url to the new one, THEN you need to update your links to reflect the new location so you're not just pointing at 301 redirects.

Did you change them. The scan I just did doesn't show them.... Maybe your host was getting funky or something lol.

Get this and click the links on your site. You want to link to status code 200, not 301

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/server-status-code-inspec/bmngiaijlojlejaiijgedgejgcdnjnpk

I wouldn't de-index them, I havent found a legitimate reason to de-index anything since 2005, but im a programmer and normally don't need to patch things. You could probably quickly fix them just by adding some content/images.

im going to private msg you another spreadsheet. this should show you source+destination of your 404's and 301's.

btw, the spider im using is Screaming Frog, its the best I've found.

private messaged you a google doc of the crawl. Looks like pages that no longer exist, they need 301's.

My crawl finished. You also have a bunch of status 418 "I'm a teapot" status codes. IDK what this is so I looked it up.

Per wikipedia:

418 I'm a teapot (RFC 2324)This code was defined in 1998 as one of the traditional IETF April Fools' jokes, in RFC 2324, Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol, and is not expected to be implemented by actual HTTP servers.

http://www.webpagetest.org/result/130404_DN_168R/

You'd think so, but 1) we cant fully trust everything Google says and 2) it could have been something that the algorithm progressively finds and penalizes.

Its possible that this is not related to links or content.

Take care of your RCS and make it awesome (real company shtuff)

About us (under construction content, not good)

Contact us (weak and thin, include social

FAQ

Terms and Conditions (404 error on your site!). I once broke all my footer links on a blog that was getting 5k/day and it slammed me down to 600/day nearly instantaneously. Ive seen other sites with 404 errors survive and even Cutts has downplayed the issue of 404 errors, but I believe any 404 can be indicative of a bad user experience. Scan your site for 404s and fix them all.

Also, many of your internal links appear to be pointing to 301 redirects. Update your links to point to the status 200 status code (directly to the destination, not through 301)

In just a quick overview, the above are my notes. This isnt a detailed audit, but you should scan your site for 404 errors and fix them, get your RCS stuff in order and conduct a full site review looking for anything that may be frowned upon by google.

Check your analytics

• Is it a specific group of keywords?
• Is it organic traffic at all?
• Is it traffic to specific page or pages?

Check your website.

• Are your link canonicals setup CORRECTLY?
• Do you have content that is hidden via css/javascript and has no mechanism for unhiding?
• Have you changed alot of links recently and not performed 301 redirects?
• Do you have good content, title tags and meta descriptions?
• Did you remove content

Check your links

• Have you been buying links? Check your backlink profile using opensite explorer. Is there any unusual activity here?
• Is your anchor text varied?

Have you gotten a notice in Google Webmasters tools?

Im not positive, but ill always default to what is best (or less clicks) for the user and visible to google.

This may help you make the embed responsive. I tested this and I still can't really interact with it successfully on my phone.
http://niklausgerber.com/blog/responsive-google-or-bing-maps/

Here is what I know. The embedded map is very useful to me on a desktop. A link to google maps is more useful to me on mobile. Although it is not the elegant solution we would prefer, I believe it'd be optimal to deliver the embedded version to desktop users and the best responsive, useful-to-a-user version to mobile.

It is highly likely that because the embedded map is more useful for a user, that it may be considered better for search rankings. I personally believe embedded maps to be an essential part of local seo or seo for anybody with a location for the very fact that it ties an address to your webpage.

Additionally, Google may be recording metrics regarding the interaction users may have with your embedded map.

While Google is a black box, I believe it is probably easier, safer, and better for users to embed maps rather than provide an image which may be completely useless or frustrating for users. I personally suck with maps and need to get the directions (using the embedded map). The embedded map is more accessible to me.

"Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." && "#1: Focus on the user and all else will follow." - Google's "About" page.