Welcome to the Q&A Forum

_Could we see the site?  _

www.optimalfoods.org/

How long ago did you post the nav element?

The nav bar at top of page has been there since the site went live about two weeks ago. My GWT show only 7 internal links to my home page, but there are 15 pages published

To be clear, I believe it is good SEO practice to ensure that every page of a website contains a link to the Home Page (and other key landing pages as befits the site).

Putting a link to the home page WITHIN a nav tag in HTML5 does not accomplish this goal.

"I presume your issue is you have external links inside a

<nav>container?"

No - that is not my issue. I have 5 "landing pages" (Home and 2nd tier pages) included in the main nav bar include below my site logo on every page.

I had assumed (incorrectly) that those pages would be internally linked to every page of the website - but they are NOT (at least as far as the internal links shown on GWT)

</nav>

In checking my internal links with GWT, it is apparent that links within the nav tag in HTML5 are discounted by Google as "internal links"

This could have major repercussions for designing your internal link structure for SEO purposes.

I was surprised to see this result, as I have never seen it discussed.

Anyone else notice this, or have any alternative views?

Hi Scott

My advice is contrary to some of the other responses here.

Based upon my recent (post-Penguin) experience I advise you to AVOID ARTICLE SYNDICATION LIKE THE PLAGUE.

Before Penguin, article syndication (submitting an article with a backlink for wide distribution was really a great way to rise quickly in the SERPs for Google.

However, as part of their effort to rid the web of duplicate pages, there is now a heavy penalty for doing that.

The standard advice used to be, "publish article 1st on your own blog/site, make sure it is indexed, and then let 'er rip".

Today, that will get you to page 400 in Google SERP.

Cutt advise to only syndicate with care, if you can ensure a direct backlink to your original indexed post (which you cannot do once the post is "turned loose").

Stay away from article distribution.

Nakul -

Re: "other then seeing those links in GWT, are there any other red flags that you are seeing in terms of not ranking, any penalty messages, unnatural links warning on the new?"

No - no red flags.  My "new" site has only been live for about a week and is already reached page 2 or 3 of google serp for my main keywords.

But since I know those backlinks cause my old site to go from #2-3 of page 1 to past page 20, I freaked when I saw them following me.

or was there any messages on the old domain when you got penalized ?

No - I crashed on April 24 and never recovered, even though I removed all the pages that had been syndicated and asked Google for reconsideration, they said there was no manual penalty.

Thanks Marie - I will try your suggestion.

I did a search using the regular operators to see if my old site was still indexed and Google returned a "we can't find it on this server-that's all we know" Sergent Shultz response, but knowing Google that does not necessarily mean pages are not still in their index.

I had an old URL and the link profile of this URL wasn't good - I had been using article syndication and Penguin threw me to the wolves.

I decided to start over with a new URL and build a new natural link profile. I specifically did NOT do a  301 redirect to the new URL and did not make any request to Google to transfer domain as I didn't want old site being associated to the new one. To redirect our old users, I put a link on the old URL index page (nofollowed) that say that we have moved.

I was very surprised to find that in GWT all the links of the old URL have now been associated to the new URL....why is that?  I started over to have a clean natural profile and follow Google guidelines.Has anyone heard of this before?  All I can guess is that Google itself "decided" to do its own pseudo-301, since the site was the same, page for page.This has Major implications for anyone attempting a "clean start" to recover from Penguin.

I am really disappointed with the "return on investment" I am getting from being a Pro member and using Open Site Explorer to analyze and remedy my inbound links post-penguin.

My site has been crawled for over 4 months now by seomoz and OSE reprots that I have "external links" from just 25 or so domains  -  whereas Google webmaster tools has accurately identified well over 270 domains that link back to my site.

How can do any sort of link removal strategy using open site explorer?  I am paying $100/mo for  SEomoz, and nothing for Google.

What is the problem?

I just did a quick review and would note the following.

Google search is now VERY precise.  A search for "personal trainers in Philadelphia" (without quotes) returns the results you quoted.

But a search for  "personal trainers in Philadelphia AND SOUTH JERSEY)" - which is the 1st text encountered in your main content containing your keyword phrase) - puts you in #1 position in SERP.

It is possible you are diluting your effectiveness by adding the south Jersey part.

I would try removing that and putting this phrase  "personal trainers in Philadelphia" - period - in the 1st sentence of your main content and see if the results change.

Your competitor seems to have done that, and even without a strong link profile it is easy for Google to see clearly and unambiguously what their site is about.

Yes - they show up in Google Webmaster

Why is it that OSE does not display my strongest backlinks, including those from Wikipedia, a legitamite .edu, Squidoo, etc.?

Some of those links have been live for a long time, and some (not all) are "dofollow".

Impossible to do a thorough backlink analysis in this situation.

If you are thinking of trying to fool Google into thinking you have published a "scholarly article" I wouldn't try it. It could backfire big time.

Legit publications of that type are usually verifiable by any number of widely used sources such as Science Citation Index, etc. Google is going to look at who has links to your article title, and if it is not from a recognized source you could get slammed by the Goog.

I realize the major search engines use different criteria but I don't see how - for the same home page keyword - my site could rank #3 on page 1 for a Bing search and be off the charts (Page 15+)? on Google.

Has Google gone so far off the charts with their new Penguins and Pandas so as to be in a different universe?  Seems Google is now extremely over-weighting big sites like Wikipedia, WebMD, eHow, etc. and in doing so vastly reducing the diversity of results shown.

I am commonly seeing different pages of the same website appear multiple times in the first 2-3 pages of Google results.  What's the point?

Hi all

I did a complete site-wide 310 redirect about 3 weeks ago for a site that had consistently been in Pos 1-5 for my targeted keyword ("low glycemic foods").

I changed the domain from low-glycemic-foods-org to low-glycemic-diet.com because I thought that was a more appropriate title and thru my readings I believed that if I carefully followed the recommended procedures I would quickly regain my SERP.

Webmaster tools is showing that I have over 800 inbound links - many from very trustworthy sources including .edu, etc BUT my home page is nowhere to be found for the keyword search "low glycemic diet".

My Seomoz onpage SEO score is an "A"

Any enlightenment would be much appreciated.

I know that it is best to diversify your inbound link profile, but I would like to know the best practices for a domain as a whole as opposed to the domains component pages.

If I have a good link source (say  for example Squidoo)  that can provide links to a website's home page AND a few of its lower tier pages, are all these links of more or less equal value (for seo purposes) to each of the link targets,  or does Google simply use a "one source domain, one counted link" approach?

Thanks

Bill