Welcome to the Q&A Forum

These are directives for the crawlers, so I assume it will still work.

OSE is not an end all be all for links. They only gather a certain number links and data.

You're already using screaming frog to get this data, so that should be accurate. You can also check Google Webmaster Tools, which has a section called "Internal Links".

Won't make a difference unless its within the body (my opinion).

I would also take note that the testimonials on your work/project page shouldn't be the bulk of the content on those pages. If they are just in a fixed location, that should be fine. Plus if they only appear the testimonial and work/project page, I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Google's fairly well at understanding pagination. You can either rel=canonical, rel next/prev or just simply leave them alone.

As for categories, i'd leave them as is, since you would typically want your categories to rank for the category keyword.

I thought Roger was a male.

Keywords can be tied to a URL by either if it ranks or is the best matching URL for that keyword.

Noindexed pages should not appear in your "Index Status". I could be wrong but it doesn't make sense to appear there if the page is noindexed.

Doing a site:www.nyc-officespace-leader.com, I get 849 results. Seems normal to me. Again you would probably have to scrutinize your sitemap instead, sitemaps don't always pull all the URLs depending how on you get them.

Based on Screaming Frog, you got about 860 pages and ~200 noindexed pages. Your index status may update eventually.

Its working as is anyway, http://www.nyc-officespace-leader.com/blog/tag/manhattan-office-space

Does not show up in SERPs. I wouldn't use Index Status as definitive but more as directional.

Index status is how many pages Google has indexed of your site.

Sitemap is different, incase your site has pages that are too deep for Google to find, sitemaps are created as a way to direct Googlebot to crawl pages that they won't necessarily find.

In your case Google indexed more pages than the amount of pages in your sitemap, which is absolutely normal.

A vanity URL is nothing extravagant. It is simply a URL that looks more appealing for marketing and user appeal. In your example, a vanity URL could simply be created by the website owner that wants to track the effectiveness of a TV campaign. The vanity URL can be a landing page or it can redirect to a "uglier" URL.

Vanity URL is more of a purpose based tactic and nothing special. You can make http://domain.com/vanity-name/ your URL and consider it a "vanity URL" or it can even be http://domain.com/a-witty-punchline-that-is-memorable/

To track it, just simply use an Analytics tool like Google Analytics or use a redirect.

Page Title is correct in all ways.

Browser Title is for the people that don't live/work in your industry.

Thats how I choose.

There isn't a major negative effect when using canonicals even when they are not needed. Some CMS use sitewide canonicals to easier tackle duplicate URLs. So if a base URL is using parameters, the CMS might have been setup to follow back to the canonical URL.

A quick example would be: view-source:http://www.expedia.com/

Its true they are a strong hint but when the domains are not the same, the canonical tag will not work as well as you would think.

I've attempted this personally and it didn't work that well.

The canonical tags as mentioned by Kingof5 is directional. Google can still do whatever it wants.

Preferably you should canonical the duplicate pages to the original but that may cause one to not be indexed. That still may help as the authority from the other site will be forwarded (theoretically) to your canonical page.

But yes, it is a dream.

Theres no easy and cheap way to find out what your visitors are viewing on other sites.

Some methods could be enabling Age and Interests categories in Google Analytics, which can show you topical categories some of your visitors tend to follow.

Another would be to use social listening and social analytic tools that can view what type of visitors follow you or like your brand. That may paint a good picture of what your followers post and like.

I wouldn't worry too much about it. Google can tell what a sitemap looks like. If it bothers you, you can remove it from WMT. I don't believe you can put meta data that Google follows in an XML file.

Yes, you will gradually start ranking better assuming you continue to optimize. Unless you are one of the authority sites in your space, it will take time to rank.

Depends what kind of DNS manager you are using. A redirect via DNS can still be possible.

In my experience DNS managing software can redirect users with 301 or 302 headers depending on what settings you have. If your DNS manager has a security protocol along with redirect rules, it could be causing the issue.

Examples of DNS redirects:

https://dnsimple.com/url-forwarding-301-redirect

https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/200172286-How-do-I-do-url-forwarding-with-CloudFlare-

I would not be surprised if this was done by your DNS. If you use a DNS manager, they could possibly redirect certain users or IPs based on patterns of visits.

I suggest finding out more about any server configurations from the admin and seeing who they use as a DNS provider or manager.

Yes, this would be different URLs. As Rishi mentioned if it returns a 200 status it is a different URL.

It may be worth looking at those values and adding canonical tags or making sure your URLs are always filling in properly. i.e. value1 is always before value2.

You should be fine. As long as the other site took it down, you will be ok.

So I'm trying to figure out exactly what type redirect or hyperlinking Yahoo! is using on their article pages.

For example:
https://shopping.yahoo.com/blogs/fashionate/spring-clean-your-beauty-routine--10-tips-on-looking-fresh-this-season-000058218.html

Hover over an external link, it shows you the ending URL.

Right or left click it, it gives you a 302 redirect.

When you actually left click it, it adds and "id" attribute, I assume for tracking. However, when you left click the the hyperlink, it no longer shows as a 302.

I have limited working knowledge of web development techniques, so anyone with advance knowledge or have actually done this, it'd be helpful to understand this more.

Referring pages is the amount of pages (URLS) pointing to your site.

Total backlinks is the total amount of links you have to your site.

Example: 10 pages have 2 links to your site.
Referring Pages: 10
Total Backlinks: 20

Finally got a chance to look at the Moz algorithm update and it seems Penguin 2.0 was just around that time. So it could be that you were affected by your backlinks and if you've disavowed them, the original value those links carried...no longer carry any weight.

I always look at the algorithm updates first and then look at the site structure. Assuming that your graph is a filter of all organic visits, that looks like you got hit by an algorithm update or something changed on your site you were not aware of.

Thats the case for most graphs that look like that. I mean...what else could it be.

Your canonicals are good. You should not worry about that URL and those duplicate pages in specific.

For clarification: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2013/04/5-common-mistakes-with-relcanonical.html

Also you can try to search the caonicalized URL and see if its indexed, in this case it is not.'

For example search:http://www.plasticplace.com/business/trash-bags-for-rollaway-cans?gallon_capacity=368

And your original URL will apepar in SERPs.

If you have duplicate content, the best practices are typically 301 redirects or canonicals. This would really depend what type of pages they are, whether they are campaigns, parameters, pagination(could use prev/next).

If you have an example we should be able to tell what you should do for that example.

I'm not 100% but perhaps Moz doesn't crawl duplicate pages and their code. It could be more about title tags, meta data etc.

As long as your canonical tags are in place and pointing to the original source, you should be fine.

This can happen if your landing page is being viewed more than once. In the event a user goes to http://example.com/ordercomplete?id=5555 , which was completed for $200 is visited twice, it would show $400 in eCommerce metrics in Analytics.

This is assuming your discrepancies are that Analytics is reporting more than your admin. One solution would be preventing users from getting to that page again, whether it is making a redirect to a different URL or a click through to view confirmation type page. There are many solutions, its dependent on your web developer or CMS you are using.

Assuming that you are saying you have both of these as a subdomain for MOZ you would need to change your account settings to root domain.

And if you need this for Google, you can simply link to it or fetch as Googlebot in webmaster tools.

301 redirects usually would suffice. Also I know Bing WMT has moving site function, which can help as well. And for Google WMT, I think you can make the same changes as well in there.

I guess they don't show the post that it was clicked from, or it was clicked from the news feed section.

What are the page metrics? Bounce rate, exit, visit duration etc. If you are not actively promoting on Facebook and or active users/readers mentioning your brand, it would be extremely odd that you would get that much from Facebook.

It could be purchased traffic, have you hired someone to do this for you? I know there are ways to spoof traffic to look like its coming from a source.

301 Redirects will pass almost all of the authority. I suggest as the other commenter stated to use a static URL.

Should be immediate on your site.

Moz crawler would take a few crawls probably. Googlebot you can fetch as Google from Webmaster Tools to make sure they crawl it right away.

If you just make the changes and nothing else, you will just be waiting on Google to update it. I'd suggest fetching as Google via WMT and submited all URLs(theres an option there) when fetching.

There is a difference between referral source and referral path. I think the bigger question is what the referral path is. You should be able to view where the hit is coming from Facebook.

And as Alberto stated, it could be a rewrite, which is how Analytics classifies a URL path.

Here are some general things you can do to get rid of duplicate content. Albeit it is slightly more complicated in implementation and when to use them.

rel=canonicals - similar content pages
rel=prev, rel=next - pagination
noindex - pages that are irrelevant or useless. empty pages that are very similar could be a time to use this. or pages that you do not want or believe can be an asset from a user. like shopping cart.
301 redirect - to pages that are pretty much the same

There are many ways to approach duplicate content and depending on your site it will vary. Whether it is a straight forward issue like tags and categories, or if its slightly more complicated in unique parameters that filters a category in a faceted concept.

From your post it seems you have an issue with tags and normally I'd say to noindex tags or canonical them to the proper category. From what I remember /tags/ being indexed is not a good practice.

At times it could be best to just keep dates out of the URL but that is little signal to Google. You can always use structured data to signal to Google the page is new or updated.

Another thing you could do is do a 301 redirect from the old page to the new page, thus pushing all the link juice to the new URL.

Thanks for the additional content. I'm working on a study to give a very solid strong case for improving structured data on one of our sites. With semantic search being more prominent than ever, I think its extremely important for every site to have mark up whether or Google chooses to show this.

Social media functions and other future applications could very well use this data to classify content of a page(see ogp.me). Perhaps even bucketing links via structured data and using it to gauge relativity of linking pages etc.

Not sure if you are using the correct tool, it seems you are in AdWords.

Use this:https://adwords.google.com/ko/KeywordPlanner/Home

I see 201,000 for "anderson cooper".

I'm looking to do some study in impact across the board on structured data and would like to know if anyone has any good studies on CTR, possibly rankings and overall performance.

Any awesome links would be helpful

I agree. .com will always be king and I don't see any overtaking it. I personally think TLD have a very small factor in rankings between one TLD or another.

Yes, there is a possibility. If there are links the disconnecting branch, it can impact the juice flow throughout your site. And 301 redirecting to another site will point all the juice over there as well.

Depending on the amount of links and internal linking structure of your site, it can possibly hurt your overall rankings but it depends(as always).

If they must, I suggest linking back to the original company's site just to be sure they are still connected in a way.

I received a forbidden error instead. I would not be surprised if this was spam or either a sub site on college boards.

I've seen in the past where universities that allow students to create subdomains and I've even seen people cloak Google on these subdomains!

Depending on the referral traffic behavior and what your own site's content is, we can't really tell you why you might be getting referral traffic from them.

You are referring to PMD(partial) and EMD(exact). They are still ranking factors in these and although Google is not punishing these domains they are devaluing the ranking factor to these type of domains.

This is not necessarily going against PMD & EMD, its just means there are many other factors that come into play before PMD & EMD.

One thing you can refer to is: http://mozcast.com/metrics

There will be a chart for EMD and PMD to show you the change in rankings of EMD and PMDs.

Do you have feedback on my answer? I do believe it answers this question.

I think you are confused with local/business results and G+ pages appearing on the right rail.

I agree with Mike and like to add that its only black hat if your sites are not related.

The right hand side of the SERPs don't show company information immediately. Some sites that I've worked with that has had over 10 million visits a month and 60DA didn't get it until recently.

Also note that Google has stated they would not show rich snippets for sites that are new or have thin content. This was in the recent months and I think the number they stated was 15% less rich snippets to show up.

To get there you would need to be really active and have interactions with G+ users with your G+ page. The more interactions you have on G+ overall, the more likely your page would appear on the right rail.

Honestly, OSE can't really crawl all the pages on the web. Moz itself is not a provider of backlinks alone but a package service, tracking, crawling, monitoring.

For more accurate backlinks, I'd suggest using AHREFs, or Majestic. You will get much more accurate and updated data. I prefer to use AHREFS but to each his own.

I don't see a huge issue here if its changing. Cloaking would be providing something different then what an user is looking for.

I have a site that is extremely dynamic with new content being published all the time and purely white hat. This would not be considered cloaking. However, maybe it could have an indirect affect where bounce rates go up because the searcher didn't get what they were looking for.

To fix this as Lesley mentioned, you can easily just put a default meta description and it will never appear in the SERPs again...unless someone somehow specifically looks for those donation names/amounts.

I see, so you mean.

Title tag: SEO Tools @ Moz.com
Description Tag: SEO tools are awesome at Moz.com
SERP URL(Where the result actually points to): Moz.com/Tools

Nowadays Google includes your brand name automatically to the end of your title tag(if theres enough space), so it doesn't make any sense to include your URL in the title tag or description.

From an user POV it makes no sense to make a description or title not related to the actual URL. You want everything to relate to THAT URL, so Google ranks and prioritizes the correct one.

There is probably a better way, but I do know that BuzzStream has a search feature that gathers a bunch of sites for you and allows you to contact all of them with contact information. Of course you will have to filter them to get a higher response rate but that is one way to gather a bunch of sites quick.

A free method would be to search Google for .edu sites only with financial aid pages.

PR campaigns would be good as well.

I don't think your question is clear. How would a URL point to another page when they click through from the meta description? The description doesn't allow hyperlinks, so I don't see how putting a URL in there would result in any clicking through.

Also Penguin 2.1 and Penguin in general are link spamming tactics, what you mentioned seems to be about on page optimization, more likely Panda than Penguin.