Welcome to the Q&A Forum

When deciding to index/noindex a page I always ask myself: "does this page contains any unique content, content that can't be found anywhere else on the website?"
For tags pages the answer is always NO. On a WordPress site Tag pages contain either automatic excerpts and this content is also available on the actual posts pages or in category pages, either manual excerpts and this content is also available in the category pages. So I decide to noindex tags.

In your case, where the tags pages bring less then 1% search traffic I would noindex them without worrying.

Probably you will not like my answer and you will give me the thumb down but:

Your main concern should be your visitors. You are displaying on your website content that, as you personally say, "at times" is dangerous to your visitors. Studies show the percentage of internet users that don't have any antivirus software or use outdated/expired software is somewhere around 50-60%. You should care more about your visitors and stop putting them in danger.

I don't know what content you are iframing on your website, but you should find a more trusted source that doesn't get infected at all.

I believe you are playing with fire here... to me this looks like you are trying to manipulate search engines.

If you read the article About rel="canonical" on Google Webmasters Support, you will see they say rel="canonical" link element is seen as a hint and not an absolute directive

Also in the same article they specify that rel="canonical" should be used on pages with identical content. Are you sure in your case the pages have identical content (per total) or just identical articles?

Two websites with the same content is not web spam... I don't think this approach will work.
Maybe the content is not really the same - what we see as "the content" may not be the same for Google. Maybe the older website ranks because it has authority and the newer one, even if it has the same products and descriptions maybe it has a lot of client reviews that makes Google not consider it duplicate since the reviews add value and original content...

You risk getting penalized for duplicate content with this strategy.

You publish on PRWeb and that article is indexed. Then you publish on your site - when the content is crawled it will be seen as copied from the PRWeb, no matter if it is crawled the same day you publish it on your site or a week later.

You should use different content if you publish on multiple sites other way it is useless. You may get some boost for a week or two when these links are indexed, but later, when they are flagged as coming from pages with duplicate content they will be worthless.

As for your own website - don't do this mistake, you will attract a Panda penalty on it and it is a nightmare recovering from it.

Also, at the bottom of the page "Crawl Diagnosis" there is a button "Download CSV" - in that file there is the complete crawl report. Download it and use filtering in Excel or Google Docs and you will be able to identify all the issues on your website.

You can send a webspam report to Google at the following address: https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/spamreport 

Your unjustified enthusiasm for being included in a directory with such a poor design make me think that maybe you created this directory yourself and are just trying to promote it here... because I find it had to believe that Amazon, Google, Paypal payed money to be included there.

But I hope that is not the case and my answer to your question is: my small company chooses to list its contact details on the website and other places where it can be easily found by our clients, not by telemarketers like EGOL correctly pointed out.

Every page you have graded also has a detailed Report Card, where all the factors are underlined and explained.

On the "On-page" section of your campaign, scroll down, under the overview of your grades and you will see the keywords associated with urls from your website. Click on those urls and you will see the detailed report.

It doesn't work because you are not doing it correctly

The Redirect command has 3 parameters:
1. The redirect type (in your case 301)
2. The location of the file/directory you want redirected relative to the root of your site
3. the full URL of the location you want that request sent to

You are mistaken the third parameter, because you are not putting there the full path. You should put something like this:

Redirect 301 /analyseverktoy/ http://www.yoursite.com/webanalyse
Redirect 301 /index.php/ledige-stillinger/ http://www.yoursite.com/
Redirect 301 /?page_id=352/ http://www.yoursite.com/

If they are WordPress experts like you say, they shouldn't stop at only installing Wordpress SEO by Yoast plugin - there are security plugins, backup plugins, analytics plugins, cache plugins, social involvement plugins that are on the "essential plugins list"  of every WordPress expert and when they care about their work they will add them without doubt.

Also, installing some premium Themes require more work then simply uploading the files to the server and hitting the "Activate" button.

WordPress install alone is a 5 sec job as we all know, but a robust installation of needed plugins and theme settings can take longer.

Even so, 40 hours looks a little too much in my opinion. You should ask for details.

The rel="canonical" was introduced to avoid duplicate content issues. It has nothing to do with links, internal or external.
 You use rel="canonical" to tell search engines which version of a page you prefer to be indexed.

If you prefer to tell nothing, or if there is no way a page may get indexed with a different URL then you don't need to use rel="canonical".

You are saying that your page has no external links pointing to it - but how can you control that? I may find your page, like it and link to it! This is how backlinks are supposed to work.

As you probably know each url can we written in different ways and still point to the same content. What if you prefer your page to be indexed as http://www.yourdomain.com/yourpage and I instead link to http://www.yourdomain.com/yourpage/ (note the ending /)? In these cases using rel="canonical" may help not losing any link juice.

I hope this helps.

Since on both these pages the canonical URL is set to http://www.laddersfree.co.uk/ chances are that the pages are not seen as duplicate content. But the rel="canonical" is just a suggestion not a directive for bots, so there is a chance they may ignore it.  To play safe, since this is a matter you can easily solve, you shouldn't rely only on the rel="canonical".

You don't need to 404 the .index.php page, you need to make a 301 redirect from it to http://www.laddersfree.co.uk. This way most of the link juice from .index.php will be passed to http://www.laddersfree.co.uk.

In order to do that, you can add to the .htaccess file located in the root folder of your website the following lines of code:

RewriteEngine on
Options +FollowSymLinks
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^./index.php
RewriteRule ^(.)index.php$ http://www.laddersfree.co.uk/$1 [R=301,L]

I understand what you want, but if you present the situation like this you will provide incorrect Information.

It is not a domain that ranks for a keyword, it is a page (URL) that ranks. 
Take a look here at the Ranking Factors and you will see there are page level factors and domain level factors. Both combined result in rankings. If you provide to your clients a list with only the domain names that information is incomplete.

Yes and no.

Yes you can add websites that you don't own to your SEOmoz campaigns.

No, you can't see those keywords because they are taken from Google Analytics, and if you don't own the website you probably won't be able to link the Analytics account with your SEOMoz campaign.

But if you want you can try this free tool to see some of the keywords a website is rankings for: rankpanel.com - it shows keywords even for websites that you don't own.

In this video from Google Webmasters about content, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8s6Y4mx9Vw around 0:57 it is advised to "archive any content that is no longer relevant".

My question is how do you exactly do that? By adding noindex to those pages, by removing all internal links to that page, by completely removing those from the website?

How do you technically archive content?

watch?v=y8s6Y4mx9Vw

Do you have separate pages for the services?

If you do I would optimize like this: 
abcwidgets.com/industries/durable-goods - for "durable goods" (industry name)
abcwidgets.com/industries/durable-goods/service1 - for "service1" (service)

But if you don't think optimizing for industry name is worth, then yes, I would optimize for primary service + industry name. The order depends. I decide that based on keyword research. Most of the times it is best with this exact order, "primary service industry name"

Since only your organic traffic dropped and the reported time frame corresponds to some Google algorithm updates an explanation for this may be that your website lost some rankings for keywords that were bringing you good amount of traffic.
After changes to Google algorithm settled you probably regain the rankings.
I repeat, this is my presumptions in case only your organic traffic dropped.

If all your traffic dropped it may be because you have some website downtime...

Or it may be that your traffic didn't drop, just your tracking tool had difficulties (maybe someone  in your team accidentally uninstalled tracking code from some of the pages)

The Moz data is not erroneous.
But Moz can't know if your rel canonical setting are OK or not, because these settings depend on your own website particularities.

You shouldn't ignore these notices, what you should do is check them, and when the rel canonical URL doesn't match the actual URL of the page verify that the setting is correct, that you don't want the actual URL to rank but instead you want the canonical URL to rank because the actual page is duplicate content of the canonical page.

In those articles the backlinks to your website are the only ones?

If there are also other backlinks maybe the one posting the article put those links to your site without any intention to cause you harm, maybe he just wanted to add other backlinks too, to make the article look more natural.

I'm not a big fan of the Disavow Links Tool. In the official release Google said this tool should be used just in case you receive the Unnatural links warning. My advice is to always think twice before using this tool.

Bruce, you are not disagreeing with me...
I said good design alone will not get many links if it doesn't come with good content.
You are saying you are not linking to good content if it resides on a website with bad design. 
Your affirmation doesn't oppose yo mine.

And I agree that maybe the term of Page Rank was probably not clear, that's why when I noticed nobody was pointing out crystal clear the fact that PR comes from links I added my comment.

For example I liked a lot Keri Morgret's witty answer, but I felt like it was not totally "newbie friendly".

I looked at the html code and saw the big amount of text content that was not visible on the page.

In some cases Google rewrites the title of web pages in its search results pages. Here is the exact answer from a Google Employee about this issue:

In general, when we run across titles that appear to be sub-optimal, we may choose to rewrite them in the search results. This could happen when the titles are particularly short, shared across large parts of your site or appear to be mostly a collection of keywords. One thing you can do to help prevent this is to make sure that your titles and descriptions are relevant, unique and compelling, without being "stuffed" with too much boilerplate text across your site.

(source: http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/webmasters/GxPvar_uSwE/ARAsgZ5Rt0kJ)

In your case I believe Google decided that your page is also relevant for the keyword "CCTV Cameras" and added that to the page title.

If you link an Analytics Account to GWT, some data from Google Webmaster Tool will be available in Google Analytics for all users of that Google Analytics profile, but they can't access the website's Google Webmaster Tools account from Analytics.

So just some data is shared, not access to GWT.

Link building is not only about branded and generic anchor texts, of course you should try to get some links with keyword rich anchor text. There are a lot of useful resources on the MOZ blog about this, here is a recent one: http://moz.com/blog/how-to-build-links-to-your-blog-a-case-study

Also you should make sure you have good on-page optimization for each of the pages on your website, after doing good keyword research.

Hi William,

From what I see this in not really a SEO problem, is a CMS problem. Have you tried contacting SiteFinity support or related forums?

As for duplicate content issues, you need to find a way to use rel=canonical on the site, take a look here to see if this helps: http://www.sitefinitywatch.com/blog/09-03-11/Specifying_a_Preferred_URL_the_Google_way.aspx

That's right Dan, you will still need access to GWT.

With the help of a designer. The slides in the example you pointed are images. You need someone creative with decedent skills in a graphics editing program like Photoshop and after the images are made you use any slideshow creation software to transform them into a presentation.

Are you sure it is negative SEO or is your site actually containing these keywords? 
Your website may contain that keywords if you were hacked.

Go to Google Webmaster Tools and check if there, under Optimization -> Content Keywords these strange keywords appear. If they do, check your website'c source code, someone may have injected strange text/links in your code.

As for Negative SEO use opensiteexplorer.org to find those bad links and use the Disavowal Tool to block them.

Your construction is not correct because the second parameter in your redirect, the url you are redirecting to, needs to be the full url, like this: http://www.yourdomain.com/public-affairs-job-archive.php

If you need to redirect any URLs matching a phrase you can use RedirectMatch -it performs a regular expression redirect.

In your case the redirect will look like this:

RedirectMatch 301 /archive_details.php?id=(.*) http://www.yourdomain.com/public-affairs-job-archive.php

As I previously said, since this content is not on your website I don't think it will cause you problems. But since I assume you are using this strategy to get backlinks, I don't think is really effective. I repeat: You may get some boost for a week or two when these links are indexed, but later, when they are flagged as coming from pages with duplicate content they will be worthless.

I'm not sure if this is really what you need, but you can try with siteliner.com (free service from Copyscape). Their reports show page averages - size in Kb and number of words - and also details for each of the pages checked.

Unfortunately this service is limited to 500 pages per site and I found no way to export reports.
But if no one comes up with a better suggestion maybe this can help.

From what I saw Google makes efforts in identifying sneaky domain redirection techniques, so I believe when you do a legit one like you described above there are no risks.

As for domain redirects/301 redirects - these aren't different redirect types, just different way of saying it. What a consider a "domain redirect" must be a 301 redirect in order to pass link juice. If you have doubts about how these work, contact your hosting provider to make sure what they call "domain redirect" is actually a 301 http responce status code that the server sends out for that domain.

I sometimes put noindex on category pages too, because I have the manual excerpts also present on the blog index pages (the pages that list all blog posts in chronological order).

But is really a decision I make based on the type of website. There are websites where category pages present much interest then the chronological post listing. On these I don't use noindex, but I also do something to prevent duplicate content - I add some static text to the category pages so that they don't contain only the post excerpts.

For websites that have their content not publicly available there is a solution from Google to index it, is called "First Click Free" and consists on providing to the visitors that arrived to your site via Google search the entire piece of content ranked in the search  results for free.

In Google Support they explain it better and in more detail, so you should read this: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=74536 and also the technical requirements.

Rel canonical is used to avoid duplicate content issues, on pages that display the same content under different URLs.

In your case the use of rel canonical is not appropriate.

Best practice, if you want all content to be assigned to the main URL, is to actually put all content on this page. You should get rid of these product/main-page/specs, product/main-page/resources, etc pages and post all the content on product/main-page using divs.