As per the comment below, is it possible to create a rule that would rewrite the URLs to match the new ones, following perhaps the same rules that you're using to cut down on the URLs?
So a formulaic rewrite rather than doing them all manually.
Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
As per the comment below, is it possible to create a rule that would rewrite the URLs to match the new ones, following perhaps the same rules that you're using to cut down on the URLs?
So a formulaic rewrite rather than doing them all manually.
Do you mean IIS? (again I'm unsure, you might mean exactly what you say :D)
If you're on a windows server IIS is the equivilent of .htaccess on a Linux server, so you'd have to apply the rules using that, but same principle.
I'm going to hijack your question a little bit, sorry, but I was wondering what sort of people are getting traffic through Bing to make it worthwhile?
I've been first in Bing and some local Yahoo sites and still get negligible traffic versus being anywhere on page 1 in Google.
Actually, scratch that. I guess US facing companies where Bing has a bigger share as opposed to my Europe facing operations
Anybody got the latest figures on search engine share by territory?
So, it's the same domain but new site structure/underlying CMS which has different URLs? I don't quite understand how you have multiple sites, vs multiple pages, but that's because I'm reasonably unfamiliar with DNN. Or am I wrong and you've consolidated multiple domains under a new URL?
Assuming 1 to 1 mapping of redirects is out, are there any opportunities to map folders? As in anything under site/folder/pages is mapped to the new site/new-folder? It's not ideal but gets them one step closer.
Alternatively you should make a very good 404 page explaining why they've ended up there, give them suggestions for top pages and a search function to find what they want. Bounce rate will still probably be quite high.
You can request removal of URLs through WMT or also tell them about a change of domain, but I'm a little unclear as to what you've actually done.
Meh, kind of. It's frustrating when I don't make money from my efforts, but there's always something else to try and something else to chase. I have to believe I'll strike it rich one day
Will still require a manual check before hand but 'Right Click > Properties' will give you a link relationship.
For FF you'll need - https://addons.mozilla.org/af/firefox/addon/element-properties/
Alternatively you can get a nofollow highlight plugin
FF - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/nodofollow/
Chrome - http://floridaventureblog.com/2009/03/highlight-nofollow-links-chrome-plugin.html - (Not tested)
Then you can see at a glance if a page comment does give followed or unfollowed links, though you still have to visit the page first.
Your internal linking strategy should be to help identify important pages. Assuming that they are important pages (since you're building links to them) then yes, you should link where relevent from other pages.
The links should be naturally editorial in nature and remember that only the first link counts - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/results-of-google-experimentation-only-the-first-anchor-text-counts - so no need to put links to the same page over and over within the content.
I generally put up to 3 links (sometimes one, sometimes none!) in a single page of content and even if my navigation already links to the page I'll still put it in (as a caveat to the first link only rule).
Some things to think about when linking though.
If a user clicks this link now am I more or less likely to convert them? (whatever your conversion metric may be)
Is a link here useful to a reader or am I simply putting it in because the keyword matches?
Am I linking the most important pages through this content? If there are 10 keywords you could link to other pages from this content, which would be the best 3 to link to. (3 links isn't a hard rule, but less is more in this case)
Can I use a different variant of achor text on this page? For less important (linking from) pages, the link itself helps bots and users through the site. Using the same anchor text exclusively to link to pages on your site, while not a problem, isn't maximising your internal link potential. Variations of keywords internally can be good.
I'll leave you with something I noticed yesterday to do with internal linking.
On one of my sites I started a blog back in October. I linked to the blog from the main navigation, but from within the posts I started linking to a specific page about once or twice a week (3 pieces of content a week on average). Without any other influences (that I can think of) it has steadily increased from ranked 70th to 16th now (the page has been live for about 3 years, though hadn't moved much apart from the last 6 months).
The domain hasn't picked up much extra authority (though I appreciate the page is probably relying on DA) so, as far as I can tell, internal linking to show that this page is important has pushed it up the rankings.
To get into the top 3 I'll need to start building links to it specifically, but with a good domain, correct internal linking definitely works.
It's not a protected forum, anybody can sign up for a SEOmoz account and PM members.
However, there have been lots and lots of these.
Been a while since I signed up, maybe the account confirmation procedures could be tightened up and the PM box be given a 'report spam' function?
Correct. Getting into the public consciousness will be a much harder task than simply getting people to target the right territories in WMT.
I imagine this'll be more like .asia which is just a bit too generic to have really stuck with anyone.
.co.uk for example is well ingrained into the UK public's mind, but for just a .co ... I just don't see it happening. .xxx on the other hand.
This has always been the case to a degree.
If you put the tilde in before a keyword Google will show you other words it thinks mean the same thing by highlighting them in the SERPs.
For example, searching for '~poker' also highlights "POKE", "card games" and "hold 'em" as synonyms on the first page.
You can use Google Sets - http://labs.google.com/sets - to also find related keywords that you are targeting.
Again for example, putting in poker, casino, gambling and horse racing also gives: bingo, blackjack, roulette, bet, football, craps, baccarat, keno, video poker and more!
Finally searching for a keyword and scrolling to the bottom of the SERPs gives you a "Searches related to KEYWORD" section, which you can also use to see what you may rank for.
As for how to use this info, well...
Firstly you can start by adding a few of the related keywords into your copy (I like to do this at the start of writing copy, but no reason you can't edit it later). You don't want to get rid of all instances of your primary keyword, but once it's on the page 3 or 4 times already there's no harm in substituting synonyms where appropriate.
Secondly you can use these related keywords to build new content. This has advantages of allowing potentially a second listing, a higher listing for the synonym and by interlinking the pages improving your main keyword's importance with onpage SEO.
I'll have a think if there's anything else that could be significantly improved by having this info, but it should be enough to get you going
You can see the SEOmoz opinon on microsites in this whiteboard friday - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-friday-the-microsite-mistake
Unless you're looking to take up SERP real estate on exact match "Furnace Filters Canada" I would put the blog on /news (or /blog, /updates, etc) and you can still install a copy of the WP software (I assume you've gone the self host route?) in just that folder.
If you are looking to take up real estate I would still have the blog in a subfolder, and use the .info to either give info on furnace filters or info about your company.
While .info domains have traditionally been seen as spammy (due to their low cost) I don't believe they are treated significantly differently to any other gTLD if you provide a quality site.
Then I shall eat my words and go back to finishing that article
Oh, I've seen it being marketed as such, I just don't think it will ever get the traction required to be treated as a gTLD by search engines.
It's all just marketing spiel - http://www.cointernet.co/frequently-asked-questions/general-co-faqs#q5
I'll do a search but I don't think I'm wrong (though have been proven otherwise before :D).
Yeah, I refuse to believe .co is going to become a gTLD rather than a ccTLD. Do people still try and sell .ws as dot website?
I bought one as well to use as a URL shortener
Depends if you're targeting Columbia or not (.co is the Columbian TLD, which I think is a bit tricky considering all the .co.CC domains out there, though I guess you get .com.CC addresses too).
If you're not targeting Columbia specifically then I'd definitely go with a .com address over a .co TLD.
That's a pretty big ask. Are you just wanting to check a specific word or you looking for general examples?
Best thing I could think to come up with would be to put it into Google translate under detect language and translate into another language. 'moz' seems to be German for example.
I think Google can understand more words than they have in their translate databases though, but very difficult to come up with a test for this. Instant and suggest would both be as bad as each other.
Ideally, if you do have any contact with the webmaster you'd be better off asking them to change it. If you don't, starting to network with people already willing to link to you is a great way to get more links anyway.
If you really don't want to try and speak with them (and again, you really should) then I have done something similar with affiliates; when they send a visitor I send them to a co-branded page based on the referral header, and haven't seen anything bad happen.
Although Google is getting better at reading javascript it still doesn't seem to follow links run in real time. As you're not intending to deceive the bot your use of it is fairly legit, but I couldn't tell you how it'd be interpreted once the datacentres have a look at it.
Here's the guidelines - http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=66355 - up to you if you think you're breaking them
Do you mean that you'll be paying for sponsored listings, that these directories require payment for submission or that these directories require payment for review of the site?
If a sponsored listing, I'm pretty sure they should be nofollowed as it's technically an ad.
If they require payment for submission (ie, no cleverly worded terms of acceptance) then you shouldn't really be buying them.
If payment for review of your site, technically that's fine (though in reality very few sites will ever reject a paying site).
Ultimately, unless you're on some very shady directories, Google's not going to be able to tell what you've paid for and what you haven't.
Are you sure any of these directories actually get any sort of traffic anyway? I know as SEOs we all use them, but as a web user I've not looked at a directory since 1990.
Ha ha, maybe
I think it's something infinitely less planned out and they simply rushed this change out the door without understanding fully what it would do to the SERPs.
Although I do think you're right that in a few months (in what will be claimed to be a second Panda sweep) that things will go back and only the very worst offenders will stay penalised.
As EGOL said, there are some paid for directories that are accepted (even authoritative) by Google.
Yahoo business directory, BOTW, Business[dot]com and JoeAnt to name a few.
That said I almost never use any of them now, the value isn't there to be in a page 12 levels down with no links in.
You know, you have brought up an interesting area of keyword 'research', that of predicting trends and future niches.
I read a lot of tech and science blogs for this very reason and with several years worth of journals you can try and spot what's going to make it down into the mainstream marketplace. The fringe science of today is the gadget of tomorrow!
Buying up things like quantumcomputerreviews[dot]com or (even more outlandishly) robotinjurylawyers could put you in good stead for later in life
I'm sitting on several hundred PLR articles that, with a bit of editing, would fit well into on of my sites.
This site otherwise produces new unique content every week, including videos, news and articles.
These PLR articles are very popular, copyscape shows at least 30 other sites are using some or all of the pieces, but the articles themselves are the sort of information pieces that don't really get old or change over time.
Never having gone for the direct use of PLR articles (have spun quite a few unique pieces in my time though), I'm wondering if there could be a negative effect to using them?
We're not in Google News or anything so don't have to worry about that, just wondering if it would diminish the effect of my unique pieces at all?
No.
It's what you do with it that counts! Way-hey!
WARNING: You're going to be taking this on the chin, as I didn't like it. I'll try to be as constructive as possible.
I'm not a video expert, but what the hey
I will semi-live post my experience:
Hmm, what's going on here, why's there no sound?
6 minutes?! I'm never going to get this time back
Oh sound. Hmm, Symphony no.5. We'll see.
Ugh, is all the font Arial?
So you guys renovate houses or provide storage for redoing houses. Pretty cool examples.
Wait a minute, I don't believe these are actual examples ಠ_ಠ
Bored now.
Super bored now.
Skip, skip.
You really don't know what I'm thinking.
I still have no idea what you're trying to sell me.
Okay. Products. Let's see.
Flashing by too quickly.
EPILIPTIC FIT
Topical Charlie Sheen reference. I'll give you that.
1 minute of credits?!
I'm not a big fan.
Firstly, I'm not going to watch a 6 minute advert. Realistically you've got 20 seconds to pitch me your product or hook to get me to continue watching. If you hook me I'll watch for up to 2 minutes if it's consistantly entertaining. Not having sound at the very start has immediately got me looking elsewhere or thinking about clicking back.
As for having to convince people it's safe to buy online, if you're pitching to that market they're not going to be persuaded by a video with a talking dog. Identify who you're targeting and maybe split the video up into different parts tailored to each.
Apart from the Charlie Sheen reference I didn't find it entertaining enough to carry me through the first 90 seconds, let alone the remaining four and a half minutes. You'll need something a little more wild to tap into the psyche of a frequent web user like myself and your secure message and charity message lost my attention even more.
Change the font, it's boring.
Make sure your logo's are proportioned correctly and not squashed.
Less of the dog, MUCH less text, less assuming you know what I'm thinking.
The save the Earth thing didn't work for me as you never went into any green credentials or how you're 'doing your bit'. I'm left with the impression that was just some nonsense you threw in there.
You need to focus a lot more on what you sell as it's unclear.
Ultimately I'd go back to the drawing board and come up with a (or several) shorter video(s).
Show the problems your products fix or why they're cool, couple it with something 'zany' and then get it in front of people who need to know about it and hope they share.
I'm pretty sure you won't get in with just aggregated news, but can have some (though I'm thinking far less than half).
This - http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/news/thread?tid=73066884b4c853e1&hl=en - suggests to only submit original content.
Alternatively - http://googlenewsblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/credit-where-credit-is-due.html - says you can add the source or canonical tag to give credit back to the originating site (and likely look far more trustworthy when someone checks.
I had a dig around for when I last got a site into Google News but couldn't find actual content guidelines.
Here's the guidelines I could find about when making a submission:
Provide a good historical background of the site
Show awards the site received
Give stats on the site
Tell them about your editors and authors (I think you need 3 editors :s)
Tell them about who links to your site
Make sure you are news related or mostly news related.
Make sure your site complies with the technical requirements, and show them that is does.
Having author bio pages I believe is also a plus.
You can always submit it and see what feedback you are given.
News sitemaps only look at the last 3 days worth of stuff, however you will probably get a real person have a look to see if you qualify so could be worth moving them if it just looks like you're simply rehashing material.
You'll also probably get rejected the first time you submit, so always double check you conform to the guidelines and submit again (it's really a way to weed out people that know they shouldn't be in there).
What about using another TLD but exact match and the 'Use Facebook as my website' feature? Depends what you're testing for really.
I'm pretty sure that when I registered a new domain and set up a FB page on the same day the FB page outranked it, but after a few days the site was on top so if there's any links between the site and the social pages (and back again) I presume Google can actually figure it out.
PM me your email and I'll invite you
Definitely host it on the company website, unless you're doing something risqué with the blog.
Your blog is going to be collecting links, you will probably want to be using it as a hub for other social activity and it's much easier to convert people by directing them around the site than it is to get them to go there in the first place.
Using Blogger or WordPress.com limits a lot of what you can do, plus you're then accumulating links into a domain you don't control.
As for using the blog to point links to your main site, well that's not usually the best strategy either - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-friday-the-microsite-mistake
If your set up absolutely prevents you from doing it on the site then go for a self-hosted blog.
Can't you make your own private index in Copyscape and compare content against just that?
If you're comparing a lot of pages 1to1 though, I guess that would be tedious.
Compare and merge feature in Word? Not really going to work how I suspect you want though.
Yeah, private copyscape index if it's only a few pieces.
How long has it been like that? Do you track daily and the trend has been up/down or is this just a spot check?
I've not seen such dramatic swings before, but it does happen. Can you add the opposite phrase in the title somewhere?
"Location keyword - Get keyword in Location"
or something similar (recommended keyword in location, buy keyword in location) without it looking out of place?
That should bring it back more in line.
Has somebody linked to you with "location keyword" anchor text to push that version up?
Or have competitors been working on "keyword location" and not the other way round?
Hard to tell really and I'm not sure how to test it
Ah, the wonderful world of gambling SEO
Unfortunately not going to give you all my secrets on here but I'll give you a few pointers (I'm nice that way).
Get more social. Brand signals and getting people to talk about you is a moderate indicator that you're not completely rogue.
Off the back of that I'd make some more, non-promo led content. Looking at your site (y mi español no es muy buena) all your content seems to be promo driven. Get some content up people want to share and link to.
As an affiliate, you really need to offer 'more' to your user base. Give them tools to track their play or have exclusive offers or set up something like a shop they can earn points for based on their play. Ultimately there are 1000 affiliate sites they could use why are they going to recommend yours (and by recommend I mean talk about and link to).
Gambling SEO requires a creativity based almost entirely on what you can do to get people talking as (as you've discovered) people consider all links you try and acquire or share yourself as spam. You need people's friends or other people they trust (influencers) to be talking about your site.
Do you mean that there is a single page for both these terms?
So Page A was in position 50 for "keyword + location" & "location + keyword".
"keyword + location" now returns Page A in position 80
"location + keyword" now returns Page A in position 20
If the page is not already listed as a multiple entry for your domain then removing it from the sitelinks will not make it appear there.
The page has to be strong enough on it's own to give you a multiple SERP listing and would appear there even if it did appear in your sitelinks.
Blocking it from the sitelinks would not stop it showing up independantly, but removing it will also do nothing.
Theoretically should work; you can quickly try it to see and change it back if it doesn't work
Doing it your way I've had sites fall over a few times (white page of death), but changing it back fixes things in no time.
Probably the simplest way is to put this in your .htaccess file
RewriteEngine On Options +FollowSymLinks
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example.com
RewriteRule (.*) http://www.example.com/$1 [R=301,L]
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^.*/index.html
RewriteRule ^(.*)index.html$ http://www.example.com/$1 [R=301,L]
For reference the .htaccess file goes in the root of your domain via whatever file transfer program you use and of course replace example.com with your domain
This also makes sure the non-www redirects to the www.
If you get stuck, let me know
Having multiple
Also
Your
Your titles should definitely be different across all of your pages as the <title>tag is still a strong ranking factor. Having multiple pages with the same <title> is not advised.</p></title>
While the license agreement for these themes usually stipulates that you cannot remove the links in the footer, I'd say 90% of people who grab the theme would immediately remove them given the chance.
To counter this coders obfuscate the code in the footer making it uneditable. It's also possible to hide nasty code in there at the same time (though that's probably more rare these days).
It's not too difficult to get around though - http://wordpress.org/support/topic/decoding-a-theme-footer?replies=38 - depending how it's done.
I personally would never use a theme that had obfuscated code, even after decoding it to make sure it wasn't dodgy. I just seems scummy from the outset.
I get 73 by putting it into http://www.yellowpipe.com/yis/tools/lynx/lynx_viewer.php
This attempts to replicate what search engines see when they visit your page.
I get 85 on a manual count (add this links etc) and there's probably a few others that are actually duplicated within the same section (titles and image both clicking to the same place for example).
And I get bang on 100 if count the number of href's in your code (include style sheets etc).
So I would assume the SEOmoz tool is pretty much right in what it's telling you.
However, don't worry too much about having a little over 100 as it's not a hard and fast rule. Check this video out from Matt Cutts - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6g5hoBYlf0
Hi krishrun, I would say not really.
a) Your link will be in the footer
b) Your link will be on lots of non-relevant sites
c) Chances are the developer with use base64 encoding to obfuscate the links in the footer and even if you trust them other might not, either removing the obfuscated section (as it's possible to hide malicious code) or otherwise not using it
It did work quite well for a while, but I wouldn't go out of my way to do it now.
302's won't be passing link juice the same way as a 301 does (or really at all).
Links to mydomain .com won't be counted as a link to en.mydomain .com, however, depending on your set up you may still be getting some of the domain authority to it (as in the search engines can see it's obviously the same domain). I wouldn't be relying on this however.
Do you want the English language version to be more popular than the Spanish? I assume it's too late to make the subdomain the es. version?
I would say Hootsuite might be better for that sort of number than Tweetdeck.
I do like Tweetdeck, but not as much as Hootsuite for multiple accounts.
Genius!
That's my weekend sorted getting internet PHDs and becoming a doctor in useless stuff to get links on edus.
I may or may not be joking <- poker face
According to your example, external links drain page rank.
Every link, whether internal or external gets the same juice to it.
Theoretically
EDIT: Better show my working since it didn't save last time
Whiteboard Friday - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-friday-the-juice-is-loose
No Follow advice (but has nice diagrams to help you understand) - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/google-maybe-changes-how-the-pagerank-algorithm-handles-nofollow
Bonus thoughts - http://www.seomoz.org/blog/pagerank-link-patterns-the-new-flow-of-link-juice
Almost definitely agency work, medium sized team, probably with a paid link strategy and some degree of automation.
For the sort of sites you're saying they have, it'd probably run you about £80-90k for the 6 months, at a conservative guess (probably top end it at £150k depending on what industry you're in).
There would have been a lot of hard work put into it, but almost certainly some paid stuff in there. Hard to compete as a solitary in house SEO.
Sounds like the guys know what they're doing, would be good to find out who they are
No.
The sites in question would have to be in very bad standing to penalise sites they linked too and as these are just directories (or similar) they would have to actually be a recognised link farm to do this.
At worst they're going to be passing no value but can still count as a unique domain link for things like domain authority etc.
I would leave them unless you know they're actually harming you (and if they require monthly payment or similar then you could always just let them die off).
EDIT: On the other hand if you were going to be engaging in 'aggressive' link building and having these would push you over the edge (not that anyone knows where that is) in terms of having a really spammy backlink profile, then maybe.
If you're doing quality link building and getting more natural links, then I'd still leave them
HTML sitemaps are good for users; having 100,000 links on a page though, not so much.
If you can (and certainly with a site this large) if you can do video and image sitemaps you'll help Google get around your site.
Is there any way i can see pages that have not been indexed?
Not that I can tell and using site: isn't going to be feasible on a large site I guess.
Is it more beneficial to include various site maps or just the one?
Well, the max files size is 50,000 or 10MB uncompressed (you can gzip them), so if you've more than 50,000 URLs you'll have to.
How big we talking?
Probably best grabbing something server side if your CMS can't do it. Check out - http://code.google.com/p/sitemap-generators/wiki/SitemapGenerators - I know Google says they've not tested any (and neither have I) but they must have looked at them at some point.
Secondly you'll need to know how to submit multiple sitemap parts and how to break them up.
Looking at it Amazon seem to cap theirs at 50,000 and Ebay at 40,000, so I think you should be fine with numbers around there.
Here's how to set up multiple sitemaps in the same directory - http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2006/10/multiple-sitemaps-in-same-directory.html
Once you've submitted your sitemaps Webmaster Tools will tell you how many URLs you've submitted vs. how many they've indexed.
I saw some German special interest videos once, don't remember much sports happening though
Besides we are producing numerous content (news, pictures, videos), which are supposed to rank well and to be found on Google News
Have you been approved by Google News? If not, you're not going to be found in there.
Here's info on what you need to do to get in (if you're not already) - http://www.google.com/support/news_pub/?hl=en - Basically create a news sitemap and submit your site for approval. If you get stuck, just ask
As for the ranking issue, well...
So. Much. Code! It gives me a headache to look at for a start, but that shouldn't be your problem A lot of links on there too (340 for the ranking page, 400 on the main page :s)
Anyway, it's hard to tell you exactly (especially as all the SEOmoz tools are down just now) but for the first example I'm going to give you a few gut feeling suggestions.
There's very little content on the main page and what is there doesn't seem to be unique to that page. I always like a static section, even at the bottom of the page, of unique content targeting my keywords.
The code to content is probably making crawling your site more difficult than needs be. I'm not saying your site is uncrawlable, but I can't look at it and know what's going on.
There is a LOT of links from the main page with 'ski wm 2011' in it. Linking out with the keyword you're targeting in the anchor isn't advisable as it suggests to search engines it's not a destination page, but a hub. Not always the case and not a strong factor, but the sheer volume here probably doesn't help.
Your keyword is the first words of the title on both those pages (among others). Not a problem on it's own, but if Google's having to choose 1 or 2 pages to display about that keyword then you're saying that all of these pages are about 'ski wm 2011' so it has to choose.
If the event is current then some of the results may have a Query Deserves Freshness (QDF) factor, resulting in a boost to your newer articles (this is probably the case for your second example).
Your main page for this event has very little authority and is buried 3+ levels deep. Effectively either page seems reasonable to Google as with not many links going to each, so it has to judge more on On Page factors (going back to lack of content and no unique content).
So, how to rememdy this.
Build external links. Get links with the anchor text 'ski wm 2011' going to the page you want to rank.
Build internal links. Make your important page immediately accessible from your home page.
Add unique content to the page. Instead of just a collection of other stories with links to them, add a few hundred words explaining what the event is.
If I get a chance later I'll look into running some of the SEOmoz tools against the pages (since they're currently down) and see if I can come up with some more specifics. In the meantime I need to do some work Hope this helps your thinking process.