Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Here's a great post for hreflang and canonicals:

https://hreflang.org/use-hreflang-canonical-together/

With this image explaning it well:

https://hreflang.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/mobile-hreflang-canonical.png

PA and DA are a third party metric. Meaning that it has no impact whatsoever on Google rankings.

They have the ability to, if it's actually being used with live data that i'm not sure. I posted a link to a few interesting articles on a forum i'm on: http://forums.seochat.com/seo-help-general-chat-16/google-understanding-images-482771.html

Screaming Frog is a great tool that has a free version. 500 url limit (suitable for most small sites).

If it's relevant to the main article then yes it would be fine. They're usually all nofollow links now. What it does do though is offer engagement in the comment section, may get you noticed and added to the main article if you bring up a good enough point.

Hi Ben,

Having both running I think is the worst outcome. If you do a site:https://domain.com query what pages show up? If you've got the https pages showing, then you're already indexed. I would personally look at moving fully over to https as long as all of the canonicals etc are all working properly.

Now is the best time to do the migration, due to http->https pages not losing pagerank (or apparently redirects not losing pagerank either)

Tom

Hi GoMentor,

Rand did a whiteboard friday on this topic: https://moz.com/blog/wrong-page-ranks-for-keywords-whiteboard-friday

Hope it helps,

Tom

Hi Joseph,

This is what you're looking for: https://support.google.com/mapmaker/answer/6296952?hl=en

Hope it helps, Tom

If you want a permanent redirect - 301, if it's temporary - 302.

Is there any reason why you want to redirect the 2016 version? You could also add a banner at the top of the blog post saying "View our 2017 Version Here"

Lets see if tweeting Roger awakens him/her/it! https://twitter.com/thomasharvey_me/status/783958116316643328

Yeah it's possible, for example this: http://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/property/kirkdale/daisy-street/

(nowhere near me, just thought to search what may be a street name!)

They are still running too, I had an email last night about claiming my moz shirt for getting 500 moz points. No tweet from Roger though

There are other metrics at play. There are over 200 ranking factors. There are also links that Moz hasn't seen that Google does. Unfortunately, you've got to not focus on your competitors, what is there that you can do to provide more value to that page, can you get more links to the page from people in the industry.

Social media links, upload a sitemap, fetch as google. You done all of those?

If it's easy for you to get them to change them, then yes I would, however I wouldn't spend more than a quick email on getting it done.

This is a useful post for you: https://hreflang.org/use-hreflang-canonical-together/

It's something I've already mentioned previously. A couple of us having been seeing the same: https://moz.com/community/q/moz-having-a-few-issues-with-their-site 

Honestly i've been a bit inactive at the minute, however from what I can see the mozpoints is working fine. I do only see the staff badge when i'm logged in.

Completely understand the problem!

Another thing I would look at is this: https://i.gyazo.com/f00555df1f7dcc374785d29c8ed4d9cb.png

You can see on that page there are three out of stock products. I would (if you can) push these down the results. As in the top 6 (above the fold) I can see one out of stock. You're missing an opportuntity here to sell that product.

Had a quick look through your shop, found this page: https://www.glassesonspec.co.uk/cheap-prescription-sunglasses/mens-sunglasses/wayfarer-style-cd1038/

I would look into the styling of your page, it's not utilising the width as well as I would think you could. I would personally make the content below the list "included with every pair" use the full width (image/description)

They used to be used quite heavily. Nowadays majority of the major search engines don't use them at all. The only one I believe still does is Yandex, of which it's a minor signal then.

Letsencrypt is a great way of offering SSL. It's backed by a LOT of big organisations: https://letsencrypt.org/sponsors/

"using a free certificate would have the same effect as a paid one? I would rather pay for one than be punished for using a free one, but free would be good too."
I am confident that as long as the site is secure, the level of encryption does not matter. As then SEO would become "pay to win" which I don't think is the case.

Alright, well I've just told you that I have had an issue loading the site, so your preloader isn't fully functional.

The only software which matters is Google. You're obviously not doing enough and when you say "I've done everything right" well you clearly haven't.

My advice, and what I think pixus is also referring to is to build quality content and not rate it based on what online tools are saying.

Just to add to this, there is nothing inherently wrong with Google crawling more pages of your site. The only time I would modify the crawl rate is when the extra crawling is actually slowing your server down.

This may help: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/separate-urls#annotations-for-desktop-and-mobile-urls

I wouldn't be concerned at all, have you got one section that expands into a load of other links? It could be that Google hasn't crawled properly for a while and then finds a section they haven't seen before and just goes mad.

Alternatively, have you crawled with screamingfrog or similar tool? Incase there's an issue you weren't aware of.

I've just loaded your home page, I can't even see anything. Your preloader is so slow it took me 30 seconds before I got berod and did a force refresh.

You're missing 18 h1 tags, you've got 9 redirects.

http://www.pokudesign.com/services/ for example is actually a really poor quality page.

I can only see 33 pages of actual content, that doesn't seem to be that many for what you could potentially have (case studies would be phenomenal for you)

I don't believe that having the mobile urls in the sitemap is causing any issue. Due to the fact that these urls presumably can be crawled anyway on the mobile subdomain. I can't see any negative for having these urls on a sitemap.

Rand kind of touched upon this with number 3 on here: https://moz.com/blog/weird-crazy-myths-about-link-building-in-seo-you-should-probably-ignore-whiteboard-friday

Are you able to copy out your whole htaccess?

I've got to admit, i'm not the best with it but I'll try and help you figure this out

I've had the same as Gaston, no problem at all ranking websites from the same server.

"if you have 2 or even 3 redirects mobile users wait for 5 seconds before see anything. Hint - that's why i won't click on most bit.ly, ow.ly, goo.gl links in Twitter, Facebook, G+ when i'm on mobile. Because they first pass via t.co redirect then redirect that i can see and sometime even 3rd redirect."

Just adding a bit of weight to what you said, here's a test of a t.co link through bit.ly:  https://i.gyazo.com/ca87c486a903914c2b058612cc93f3f0.png on 3g, it's 4.27s to even start loading Google. Without t.co: https://i.gyazo.com/f22c18a0879f76ecf653662153e17c43.png which is 2.35s.

Pagespeed score means nothing unfortunately. http/2 puts a spanner in the works for a lot of it.

https://blog.newrelic.com/2016/02/09/http2-best-practices-web-performance/

Being this section:

• Concatenating JavaScript and CSS files: Combining smaller files into a larger file to reduce the total number of requests.
• **Image spriting: **Combining multiple small images into one larger image.
• Domain sharding: Spreading requests for static assets across several domains to increase the total number of open TCP connections allowed by the browser.
• Inlining assets: Bundling assets with the HTML document source, including base-64 encoding images or writing JavaScript code directly inside

I would say it's actually the quality of your domain as a whole not really matching up to theirs. Your competitors seem to do quite well with internal linking. High quality content on a variety of different pages. Whereas you have Lyft on your homepage and another page with very little other than that.

Hi Luke,

"Avg. Page Load Time (sec) [Google recommends 200ms]:" That's actually for the server response time.

Personally, the only thing that matters is that the overall page load time is quick. I aim if possible for sub 2 seconds for any page.

Tom

Content below the fold is still read, however less value is placed on it. So it is still worth having content that is produced for below the fold as it will still help that page rank.

Show the user what they want to see when they land on the page, majority of the time in doing this you will actually show Google what they need to rank you.

I've seemed to have a load of issues as of late. Just small graphical things but still enough to make me concerned.

1. https://moz.com/community/users/4207879 being noindex (however it seems to other users an external tools work) (image proof: https://i.gyazo.com/2e77c94ffd068718e9e149e8afef1e44.png )

2. No mozpoints: https://gyazo.com/9e0777af3ebbdb6ad58a395bafe28a52

3. I'm a staff member? https://i.gyazo.com/5d7b156c13fa1d0bb6c2e0af3467423f.png

4. Trying to respond when logged out: https://i.gyazo.com/9f5fe8efd372920391a9a54178561e0b.png (not really a bug, however could be a better experience)

These have all been sent via support, just wondered if it was just me having issues?

Seems i'm staff on this one too: https://i.gyazo.com/6f1bc6372180f4f9f1cb1c7d6f6d941c.png

Yes that looks correct, I would add an x-default for the rest of the world. this is a good article: https://hreflang.org/use-hreflang-canonical-together/

http://www.myseosolution.de/downloads/mobile-hreflang-canonical-fixed.png Is a great image to explain things.

I honestly think it's not required anymore. There may be a benefit to a small site but I think it would be negligble.

https://moz.com/community/q/redirecting-index-html-to-the-root

StreamlineMetrics:

If you want to redirect all index.html(s) to their roots, then try this code -

RewriteEngine On
RewriteRule ^index.html$ / [R=301,L]
RewriteRule ^(.*)/index.html$ /$1/ [R=301,L]

And yes, Google will treat them as 301 redirects so your juice will be transferred and consolidated.

Obviously, change index.html to index.htm

The biggest benefit would be redirecting old pages to new. If not just redirecting all of the old pages to the new homepage would be ok.

Just make sure that these are the kind of links that you want to have on your domain.

Honestly I wouldn't be able to tell you. As the article brought up cloaking I'm going to guess yes, however I haven't got any source or test for it.

If they do really want to know, they could just copy the text into a standard content box. It'll tell you for that content if it's good/bad etc.

This may be of help to you: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2011/11/get-post-and-safely-surfacing-more-of.html

If you've made the suggested changes on Bing and you're having the page break, then I would unfortunately sacrifice Bing. Alternatively I'm sure there are developers out there who could fix this and bypass your issues. You'll just have to weigh up if the "mobile friendly" on bing is worth it.

Hi Ikkie,

The original post says that Markele is already logged in:

"it takes me to the Moz home page which I'm already logged in to "

I just posted this for a user on a forum I am a moderator on so unfortunately I can't answer that question.

This was his reply to your post:

"Hi, Thomas I think the lady who replied last to your thread in Moz had hit the spot. backlink from Washington post must have bump up the DA ( Even though the change is too high ). I wonder why this link didn't show up in web master tools. Google mustn't have indexed this link thus far. and Moz not showing the link is also a question. "

Just to add to this, I have downloaded the plugin to see if I could replicate/help on this. It logged me in straight away. However I logged out through the toolbar and it kept me logged in. So I seem to have the complete opposite of your issue.

Sitemaps can go up to 50,000 urls, so 4500 isn't an issue for Google to handle.

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/183668?hl=en

Just to add on to Bernadette's post, this section "If your website's CMS can't do that, then I would recommend crawling the website yourself and updating the sitemap file. However, keep in mind that if you do it manually then you'll need to update it whenever you add or remove a page on the website." You can use something like Screaming Frog for this if you were wondering what software to use. It's a very common tool for an SEO to use, so hopefully you'll have it to save purchasing a license to something else.

This is where hreflang tags come in.

Here's a great diagram I found: https://hreflang.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/mobile-hreflang-canonical.png on this site: https://hreflang.org/use-hreflang-canonical-together/