Search Results

Search found 4080 results on 164 pages for '2stroke seo'.

Page 49/164 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

• Weird entry for robots.txt on a Naked Domain in Google Webmaster Tools

  - by Metalshark

  We own a .co.uk address and use an Internet hosting company that has made mistakes around DNS in the past. Our main site is hosted on www. and their reluctance to allow editing of AAAA records on-line means our naked domain does not resolve. Currently when we attempt to reach the naked version there is no entry for the browser to go to and it displays an unreachable page (nslookup just says Name: name of domain with no further entries such as an IP or Canonical Name). We recently added the relevant TXT records to verify us to view both the www. version and the naked version of the domain in Google Webmaster Tools (in anticipation of the requests to our Internet host coming to fruition). Imagine our shock when double checking the Site configuration Crawler access and finding a (admittedly failing) robots.txt with a dynamically generated HTML page (full of crude pop-up JavaScript) with references to 3 of our most prominent competitors. What could cause this to happen? As we are in the UK I am assuming some DNS server is serving Google bad information. We are going to contact the Internet hosting company to fix our A and AAAA records once and for all, then check that they work in the US (using something like OpenDNS). Should we be doing more though, for instance informing Google (through Webmaster Tools) that we are now aware there is something currently wrong with our naked domain? UPDATE: We have fixed our A records (not AAAA) and that has resolved the issue. But if there are further actions we should take for effectively having a parking page hosted on our active visitor-heavy, SEO-rich domain that advertised our competitors to US visitors, what would they be?

  Read the article

• Multiple stores for the same niche

  - by pandronic

  I started developing a new niche of products in my country about 3 years ago. That's when I opened my first store. Everything went fine, until a year ago, when someone I thought was a friend secretly stole my idea and made his own competing store. I was pretty upset when I caught him and decided to make it as difficult as possible for him, so I made another 4 stores, trying to get him as low as possible in the search results. The new sites have similar products (although not 100% identical), slightly different titles, images and prices. They look different and are built on different e-commerce platforms. They are all hosted on the same server, have roughly the same backlinks, use the same Google account for Analytics, have the same support phone numbers etc etc. I wasn't thinking that I'm doing something fishy, so I didn't try to hide anything. Trouble is that those sites, after doing fine for a few months, dropped like bricks in search results, almost to the point that they can't be found at all. At the moment, the only site that ranks relatively well is the original one and a couple of secondary pages with no importance from one of the other sites. How did this happen? Does Google have something against this practice? Did they take action by themselves when they realized that I was trying to monopolize this niche, or did my competitor report me for some kind of webspam? And more importantly, what do I do now? Do I shutdown all but my original site and 301 redirect users to it from the others? Can I report my competitor for engaging in the same practice? (He fought back and now he has 3-4 sites, some of which still rank kind of OKish, also he has no idea about web development, SEO or marketing, he just crudely copies what I do and is slowly but surely starting to do better than me).

  Read the article

• How do you find all the links to disavow for a Google reconsideration request? [duplicate]

  - by QF_Developer

  This question already has an answer here: How to identify spammy domains giving backlinks to my site (to submit in disavow links in WMT) 2 answers A few months ago I received the following notification on Google Webmaster for a website I look after. Unnatural links to your site—impacts links Google has detected a pattern of unnatural artificial, deceptive, or manipulative links pointing to pages on this site. Some links may be outside of the webmaster’s control, so for this incident we are taking targeted action on the unnatural links instead of on the site’s ranking as a whole. Learn more. The question here is, should we actively attempt to disavow these links given that the action is seemingly targeted to just a bunch of keywords? I've downloaded the inbound links sample from Google Webmaster and so far I've been through the disavow and reconsideration requests process 6 times, each taking 2-3 weeks only to be supplied just 2 more links that Google don't approve of. At this rate it will take me the rest of my natural life to cleanup all these spammy links! It seems disavowing is futile as they haven't implemented broad actions against the website as a whole and (from what I can gather) have already nullified the value of those offending links. Under the quoted statement above however is a reconsideration request button that seems to imply I should be actively doing something here? UPDATE 14th October -- I have since created a small .NET application that you can feed the CSV sample links file into from Google Webmaster. What this tool does is crawl all the links and looks for specific linking patterns as per some configurable match strings. I realised that many of the links that Google are taking issue with were created by a rogue SEO firm we hired several years ago. All the links are appended with 1 of 5 different descriptions. The application I built uses some regexes to isolate any link sources with these matching appendages and automatically builds the disavow txt file. In the end it had to come down to an algorithm as manually disavowing links on this scale would take weeks! I will post the app here once I've cleaned it up.

  Read the article

• Average SPA weight [on hold]

  - by Emmanuel Istace

  First, sorry my noobs questions, but I'm mainly Windows Developer and not Web Developer :) I'm developing a single page application with a lot of css & javascript. For now the page is 1.3Mo composed by 5 section. Here are the rounded stats : Document : 10kb Style : 60kb Images : 450 kb (already compressed, include a big gallery thumbnails) Javascript : 700kb - 600kb of "framework" (jquery, jquery-ui, boostrap, modernizer, waypoint, ...) and 100kb of custom js. Fonts : 125kb And the site is not finished yet. (Will include gmap api, and some others...) My questions are : Do you have any statistics about the average weight of an SPA ? As this is the whole website, do you think it's acceptable ? Is lazy load (for images) a solution ? What will be impact for SEO ? Is the "200kb rule" of google still relevant ? Do you know great tools to detect which javascript code is not used during the the exection of a page and then the availability to optimize these 700kb of framework js stuffs ? Can a caching strategy be an answer ? Thank you in advance for you help ! Best regards

  Read the article

• Can prefixing a dash reduce the search engine rating?

  - by LeoMaheo

  Hi anyone! If I prefix a dash to GUIDs in my URLs on my Web site, in this manner: example.com/some/folders/-35x2ne5r579n32/page-name Will my SEO rating be affected? Background: On my site, people can look up pages by GUID, and by path. For example, both example.com/forum/-3v32nirn32/eat-animals-without-friends and example.com/forum/eat-animals-without-friends could map to the same page. To indicate that 3v32nirn32 is a GUID and not a page name, I thought I could prefix a - and then my webapp would understand. But I wouldn't want my search engine rating to drop. And prefixing a dash in this manner seems weird, so perhaps Googlebot lowers my rating. Hence my question: Do you know if my search engine rating might drop? (Today or in the future?) (I could also e.g. prefix id-, so the URL becomes example.com/forum/id-3v32nirn32, but then people cannot create pages that start with the word "id".) (I think I don't want URLs like this one: example.com/id/some-guid.) Kind regards, Magnus

  Read the article

• How to get search engines to properly index an ajax driven search page

  - by Redtopia

  I have an ajax-driven search page that will allow users to search through a large collection of records. Each search result points to index.php?id=xyz (where xyz is the id of the record). The initial view does not have any records listed, and there is no interface that allows you to browse through all records. You can only conduct a search. How do I build the page so that spiders can crawl each record? Or is there another way (outside of this specific search page) that will allow me to point spiders to a list of all records. FYI, the collection is rather large, so dumping links to every record in a single request is not a workable solution. Outputting the records must be done in multiple requests. Each record can be viewed via a single page (eg "record.php?id=xyz"). I would like all the records indexed without anything indexed from the sitemap that shows where the records exist, for example: <a href="/result.php?id=record1">Record 1</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record2">Record 2</a> <a href="/result.php?id=record3">Record 3</a> <a href="/seo.php?page=2">next</a> Assuming this is the correct approach, I have these questions: How would the search engines find the crawl page? Is it possible to prevent the search engines from indexing the words "Record 1", etc. and "next"? Can I output only the links? Or maybe something like:  

  Read the article

• WordPress page title repeated in SOME pages

  - by cmykrgbb

  I have created a Wordpress site and titles were working just fine. Then, some time and plugins installed later, I noticed that in SOME pages I get the title repeated 2 times. Example of wrong page title: Contact - NAME | NAME Example of normal title: Our Services | NAME Now, if I go to General Settings and change title it will change both, no improvement. SEO by Yoast has the option to reset page titles, but that just removes all titles leaving the current URL as page title, so no good either. Here is the code I originally had: <title><?php wp_title(''); ?><?php if(wp_title('', false)) { echo ' | '; } ?><?php bloginfo('name'); ?></title> Here is the code I am using now: <title><?php wp_title('|'); ?></title> To sum up, I think somewhere in the database there's a wp_title repeated: once using '-' as separator, another one (the current one) using '|'. Any help will be most appreciated, thanks!

  Read the article

• .htaccess URL rewriting friendly URL with 2 parameters, the second parameter is optional

  - by letsworktogether

  I'm kind of stuck at this part and was hoping that I'd get some assistance. I'm building a highscores page in PHP, that's going great, it works. However, I dislike the idea of index.php?skill=name and therefore wanted a bit of SEO in this. I have successfully replaced the url with a more friendly version: highscores/skill/name And this is where the problem starts, I have added pagination to the highscores and the page is read from the HTTP_GET page variable ($_GET['page']). I dislike the idea of highscores/skill/name&page=2 and was hoping if you guys could assist me to make the url like the following: Page 1, so accessing the file without declaring the page number: DOMAIN.TLD/highscores/skill/name Page 1 so now the page variable is needed: DOMAIN.TLD/highscores/skill/name/2 As you can tell the "2" will define page 2 and load the correct data for page 2. However, I'm having much trouble in my .htaccess file to configure it this way. RewriteRule ^highscores\/skill\/(.*?)(\/(.*?)*)$ highscores/skills.php?skill=$1&page=$2 [L] # Skills page That is my latest attempt in order to get it to work, unfortunately it does not work, it makes the page look horrible (CSS doesn't work) and it doesn't go to the page specified on the URL.

  Read the article

• Merging multiple top-level domains into a single domain

  - by user23089

  My client had multiple top-level-domains. Each one represented an insurance program within a specific vertical. For all the sites at these alternate domains, there was a 30/70 mix of duplicate vs. original content. Some of the alternate domains ranked very well for their target keyphrase groups, where others were absent in results pages. We advised the client to merge multiple domains into their existing main domain, for usability and SEO reasons. We recently ran the merger. Here was our process: On the main domain, transfer the content such that it matches 1-for-1 content on the various alternate domains Setup Google Webmaster Tools on the main domain Push the new content on the main domain live and submit a corresponding sitemap to Google Establish 301 redirects on the alternate domains, such that each alternate domain URL points to its respective page on the main domain We did this 12 days ago, and pages (previously on the alternate domains) that had ranked well on Google have now plummeted or are entirely non-existent. Did we do the right thing by merging multiple top-level domains into a single domain? Is this initial dip in rankings normal? How soon should we expect to see it return to its normal rankings?

  Read the article

• Do any CDN services offer multiple urls (or aliases) for your files?

  - by Jakobud

  Lets say a company has multiple commercial web properties that happen to use a lot of the same images on each site. For SEO reasons, the sites must not appear to be related to eachother in any way. This means that the sites can't all link to the same image, even though they all use the same one. Therefore, an image is uploaded to each site and served from each site separately. In order to improve maintainability and latency, lets say the company wanted to use a CDN service. What I'm wondering is, if you upload a file, like an image or something, to a CDN, is there basically one single URL that you access that image at? Or do some (or all) CDN services offer alias URLs so that you can access the same resource from multiple URLs? Example of undesirable situation: Both sites link to the same file URL Site ABC links to <img src="http://123.cdnservice.com/some-path/myimage.jpg"/> Site XYZ links to <img src="http://123.cdnservice.com/some-path/myimage.jpg"/> Example of DESIRABLE situation: Both sites link to the same file via different URLs Site ABC links to <img src="http://123.cdnservice.com/some-path/myimage.jpg"/> Site XYZ links to <img src="http://123.cdnservice.com/some-alias-path/myimage.jpg"/> So in the end, there is only one single file, myimage.jpg on the CDN server, but it is accessible from multiple URLs. Is this possible with CDN services? I know this would make browsers cache the same image twice, but at least it would be better for maintainability. Only one file would ever have to be uploaded.

  Read the article

• Webmaster Tools, www and no-www, duplicate content and subdomains

  - by Jay

  I have not come to any conclusive answers on the following after many hours of research on many websites to the specific issue that I am trying to figure out. My company has two websites a main one at www.example.com and one at subdomain.example.com which is a subdomain of the first and is our self hosted blog. The way Google sees these with the www or no-www (called naked for now on) is that each of these actually are different when the www or naked version is used/not used in the front of the domain. I completely understand this. It is also advised that both should be set up in the Google Webmaster Tools, which I have done. Correct me if I am wrong on that in regard to having both set up. Now the way it appears is that we can set a preferred domain up in Webmaster Tools only at the root domain level. The subdomain can not have this and actually says the following "Restricted to root level domains only". So it appears that the domain should follow what the root domain says which on our preferred one says to display the www.example.com. and not the naked version. That is one issue I have in that one displays one way and the other displays another. Is it that we have the wrong redirects in place for the subdomain? Another question is does this have any affect on SEO in regards to duplicate content on the web in how we have set this up?

  Read the article

• Duplicate content appearing for multi lingual sites

  - by Rocky Singh

  I have a site which has a default url say "http://www.blahblah.com/" (which is default in english language). In my site there is support for multi languages. I am having few links at my home page say "English" "French" "Spanish" etc. and on clicking these links user is redirected to these links: http://www.blahblah.com/en-us/ (English) http://www.blahblah.com/fr-ca/ (French) http://www.blahblah.com/spanish-culture/ (Spanish) and based on culture in the url I am showing the content accordingly to end users in their desired language. Now, this was how my site is. The issue I am getting is with SEO. I noticed Google is considering (I checked via Google web masters) my site pages as duplicate like: 1. http://www.blahblah.com/documents/ and http://www.blahblah.com/en-us/documents/ 2. http://www.blahblah.com/news/ and http://www.blahblah.com/en-us/news and similarly all the pages are considered as a duplicate content in Google webmasters tools. I am worried of this, since I think my site is getting penalized in ranking because of this. Could you drop some idea how to overcome this situation?

  Read the article

• Quick Question, robots.txt Disallow: /*/ does what exactly?

  - by Exit

  A SEO firm suggested changing the robots.txt to: User-agent: * Disallow: /*/ Allow: /ims/ I'm not sure what that would do, but my guess is that is would tell all robots to index nothing but the ims folder. I understand the wildcard, but I'm confused by the slashes and don't know how they would play out in conjunction with the wildcard. * Update * I didn't mention that there is a sitemap listed in the robots.txt file, but according to one tech blogger, he realized that sitemaps trump robots exclusions. So, even though this says in Google Webmaster Tools that everything with a trailing slash will not be indexed, the sitemap contains the important links. I did notice that the link count on Google went from 360 to 336, and the sitemap links under the URL scaled back to 3 from 6. I'm not sure the cause or what links were removed, though. Perhaps it cleaned out garbage. I'm still clueless why they would add in 'Allow: /ims/', that seems pointless. And a quick list of what would index according to the robots rules above (withouth the sitemap) using /*/: domain.com Indexed domain.com/page.html Indexed domain.com/folder/ Not Indexed domain.com/folder/page.html Not Indexed

  Read the article

• Creating country specific twitter/facebook accounts

  - by user359650

  I see many companies that have an international presence trying to localize their social media presence by creating country or language specific accounts. However some seemed to have done so without following a consistent pattern, one example being the World Wildlife Fund when you look at their Twitter accounts: World_Wildlife : verified account with 200K followers WWF : main account with 800K followers www_uk : lower case with underscore between WWF and country indicator WWFCanada : upper case with country indicator attached to WWF ... I am planning to build a website which hopefully will grow global and would like to avoid this sort of inconsistencies. Also, I was comparing what Twitter and Facebook allow in their username and found out that they don't allow the same characters to be used (e.g. for instance that the former doesn't allow . whereas the latter does) making difficult to ensure consistency across social networks. Hence my questions: Are there known naming schemes for creating localized Twitter and Facebook accounts while maintaining a certain consistency between them (best effort)? Are there any researches out there that have proven whether some schemes were better than others in terms of readability and/or SEO?

  Read the article

• Implications on automatically "open" third party domain aliasing to one of my subdomains

  - by Giovanni

  I have a domain, let's call it www.mydomain.com where I have a portal with an active community of users. In this portal users cooperate in a wiki way to build some "kind of software". These software applications can then be run by accessing "public.mydomain.com/softwarename" I then want to let my users run these applications from their own subdomains. I know I can do that by automatically modifying the.htaccess file. This is not a problem. I want to let these users create dns aliases to let them access one specific subdomain. So if a user "pippo" that owns "www.pippo.com" wants to run software HelloWorld from his own subdomains he has to: Register to my site Create his own subdomain on his own site, run.pippo.com From his DNS control panel, he creates a CNAME record "run.pippo.com" pointing to "public.mydomain.com" He types in a browser http://run.pippo.com/HelloWorld When the software(that is physically run on my server) is called, first it checks that the originating domain is a trusted one. I don't do any other kind of check that restricts software execution. From a SEO perspective, I care about Google indexing of www.mydomain.com but I don't care about indexing of public.mydomain.com What are the possible security implications of doing this for my site? Is there a better way to do this or software that already does this that I can use?

  Read the article

• Page Spamming via locations

  - by codemonkey

  Hi guys I am new here so please be gentle :) I have created a web page for a small mail order business. The page asks the reader if they are in need of a supplier for products in their "area" and if they have ever been let down by a supplier in that "area" etc. It also lists all the local villages and hamlets around the [area] where they can also supply too. This page is dynamically created and the [area] changes and so do the small towns that are local to the town. The page also contains information on the products so the word count vs town names is not stupid. An example of one of the URL would be www.website.com/1014/Halesowen/ It basically covers the whole of the UK so around 800 main towns with 28,000 local villages. The URL changes, so does the title and h1 tags, also each page is Geo coded for that town. My question really is this a good or bad idea? Is it a black hat technique ? I have been told if I have to ask the question then it probably is but the site does supply to all these areas just as any mail order company does and would like to get listed higher in each town for the products. I have seen this done on a few sites but only with a few targeted towns and not the whole of the UK so I would be really interested in your guys thoughts on this. I would post the URL to the site but as I am new here I am a bit unsure of the rules regarding posting links. The whole site needs a lot of other onsite SEO work doing and I will be doing that over the next few weeks. I look forward to your views on this. p.s. If I am allowed to post the URL without getting into trouble so you can see it someone let me know? Thanks in advance

  Read the article

• .htaccess url rewriting problem

  - by letsworktogether

  I'm kind of stuck at this part and was hoping that I'd get some assistance. I'm building a highscores page in PHP, that's going great, it works. however, I dislike the idea of "index.php?skill=name" and therefore wanted a bit of SEO in this. I have successfully replaced the url with a more friendly version: "highscores/skill/name" And this is where the problem starts, I have added pagination to the highscores and the page is read from the HTTP_GET page variable ($_GET['page']). I dislike the idea of "highscores/skill/name&page=2" and was hoping if you guys could assist me to make the url like the following: Page 1, so accessing the file without declaring the page number: DOMAIN.TLD/highscores/skill/name Page 1 so now the page variable is needed:DOMAIN.TLD/highscores/skill/name/2 As you can tell the "2" will define page 2 and load the correct data for page 2. However, I'm having much trouble in my .htaccess file to configure it this way. RewriteRule ^highscores\/skill\/(.*?)(\/(.*?)*)$ highscores/skills.php?skill=$1&page=$2 [L] # Skills page That is my latest attempt in order to get it to work, unfortunately it does not work, it makes the page look horrible (CSS doesn't work) and it doesn't go to the page specified on the URL. I hope you understand my issue, thank you!

  Read the article

• Google affecting my SERP Rank?

  - by Asad Moeen

  The following are some of my website's details. Home-page: [thebluewaffles].[com] Keywords: Blue Waffles- Rest of the keywords are post/subject specific. Site Description: Health Articles Blog Site Age: 1.5 years A short history: When I started my website, the few things in my mind when posting content were at-least 500 words on each page and writing of all the articles with to the point information. I didn't go really fast with it which is why I only have about 15 articles in 1.5 years. The SEO strategy was more simple. I shared links through Social Marketing websites and some Article Sharing websites after which I could see my website's rankings in top 5 SERP results. I ranked good enough for about 8 months continuously but didn't keep updating content due to which there were some 3 rough months when no content was posted due to some personal work. The SERPS dropped to 2nd page in April and almost started disappearing in May. I asked a lot of people about it and most came up with the reason of "no updates to site" so I started updating my site again since the day, November has almost started and I see no signs of my website's ranking. Another important point is that when I post a new article, and do a title search in Google, I see it ranks good enough for the first 10 hours and then disappears. What could be wrong here?

  Read the article

• Tackling thin content on an images gallery

  - by Ted Wilmont

  We run an images gallery as part of our site, however we have over 8,000 images and every image has a separate HTML page of its own to display the image caption, related image and comments from users of the site. This seems to be a problem especially with the Google Panda update because these pages are technically "thin content". What would be the best way to tackle this? We'd love some feedback and advice regarding this scenario. We have a few options we thought of already but can't decide: We could noindex the separate image pages and loose any image search listings we have for the image in favour of removing these thin pages from the index. We could 301 all of the individual image pages back to the image category listing and anchor each image (e.g. #img2122) and include all of the comments and description on the category listing page itself. If we was to simply list all of the images and content on the category pages themself; what's the best method? We could add all of the content in the anchor tags and use jQuery to display them in a box when a user clicks on the image or we could use Ajax to retrieve the information. However, what's the best Ajax method for SEO? Any ideas, suggestions, tips or advice is greatly appreciated and thank you in advance for any given.

  Read the article

• Why does Bing webmaster tools complain about multiple H1 tags?

  - by Mathew Foscarini

  I used the Bing webmaster tool's SEO analyzer on my website, and it reported There are multiple <H1> tags on the page. It recommends that there should only be one <h1> tag on the page. The page is a listing of blog posts for a category. So each blog entry is structured like this. <article> <head><h1><a>...</a></h1></head> <p>summary...</p> </article> <article> <head><h1><a>...</a></h1></head> <p>summary...</p> </article> <article> <head><h1><a>...</a></h1></head> <p>summary...</p> </article> <article> <head><h1><a>...</a></h1></head> <p>summary...</p> </article> How is this invalid? I thought this was the correct way to describe a post in HTML5.

  Read the article

• Multilingual website without language component in the URL

  - by user359650

  I'm working on a website for Canada which will have French and English versions. For SEO purposes, I would like to avoid using any language tag in URLs because I believe it will have more impact (e.g. example.ca/products better than en.example.ca/products or example.ca/en/products). I believe this is technically possible because the2 languages are sufficiently different that the URLs won't be conflicting with one another (e.g. if you want a "product" page, it will be /products in English, and /produits in French so you know which language the URL is about). Since Google (and most likely others) doesn't rely on the URL (nor HTML tags) to determine the content language I don't see any problems with search engines. To make this possible I've thought about using a cookie distinct from the session cookie (e.g. example.org_language) with long term expiry (e.g. N years) that will memorize the language chosen by the user. That way when people visit the website with a new browser session, they get served the proper language. I have already given up on users being able to switch one page from English to French: when people will chose English or French from the menu they will be redirected to the corresponding version of the home page. Do you foresee any problems with not using a language component in the URL (whether domain or path)? (as long as one makes sure URLS don't conflict).

  Read the article

• Can I use a 302 redirect to serve up static content from a url with escaped_fragment?

  - by Starfs

  We would like to serve up seo-friendly ajax-driven content. We are following this documentation. Has anyone ever tried to write a 302 redirect into the htaccess file, that takes the '?_escaped_fragment=' string and send that to a static page? For example /snapshot/yourfilename/ How will Google react to this? I've gone through the documentation and it's not very clear. The below quote is from Google's documentation this is what I find. I'm not sure if they are saying that you can redirect the _escaped_fragment_ url to a different static page, or if this is to redirect the hashtag URL to static content? Thoughts? From Google's site: Question: Can I use redirects to point the crawler at my static content? Redirects are okay to use, as long as they eventually get you to a page that's equivalent to what the user would see on the #! version of the page. This may be more convenient for some webmasters than serving up the content directly. If you choose this approach, please keep the following in mind: Compared to serving the content directly, using redirects will result in extra traffic because the crawler has to follow redirects to get the content. This will result in a somewhat higher number of fetches/second in crawl activity. Note that if you use a permanent (301) redirect, the url shown in our search results will typically be the target of the redirect, whereas if a temporary (302) redirect is used, we'll typically show the #! url in search results. Depending on how your site is set up, showing #! may produce a better user experience, because the user will be taken straight into the AJAX experience from the Google search results page. Clicking on a static page will take them to the static content, and they may experience avoidable extra page load time if the site later wants to switch them to the AJAX experience.

  Read the article

• Poor backlink profile - search rankings not updated for 2+ months

  - by fistameeny

  I am carrying out some work on a website that is a PR2 with a few good quality, relevant backlinks (PR4-6). It has a presence on Twitter that is updated regularly, a Google Places listing, and listings on some decent directories (Qype etc). The site was rebuilt into Drupal 7 two months ago, with all the basics done - URL rewriting, XML Sitemap submitted to Google, and most importantly, good quality, structured content. I've noticed that Google is still showing "old" URL's from the previous version of the site that was ditched 8 weeks ago. I think the site may be penalised under the Penguin update, as a previous SEO company created many low quality links from link farms/directories. My question is what the correct way to deal with this is. Bing Webmaster Tools can "disavow" links, and I guess I can attempt to contact the link farms to have them removed. I've already submitted a request to Google to request that we have the penalty removed as we're trying to tidy up a bad history. We submit updated sitemaps to Google and Bing daily, and have built some further decent quality, relevant links. Is there anything further I can do?

  Read the article

• Moving from a static site to a CMS with new URLs and meta-data for pages

  - by Chris J

  Hi I am in the process of rebuilding a site from static pages to a CMS which will be using mod_rewrite to generate new page URLs. In this process our marketing people and myself have decided to tidy up the descriptions, keywords and titles. Eg: a page which who's URL is currently "website-name/about_us.html" and has a title of "website-name - something not quite page specific" will change to "website-name/about-us/" and title: "about us - website-name" and may have a few keywords and the description changed. Our goal with updating the meta data is to improve our page rankings and try to keep in line with some best practices for SEO. Though our current page rankings are quite good in many aspects, there is room for improvement. All of the pages will also have content changes (like rearranging heading tags, new menu on all pages, new content in footer, extra pieces of dynamic content relating to other pages). In this new site process I plan to use 301 redirects for all the old URLs pointing to the new URLs. My question is what can I expect to happen to the page rankings in Google, in the sort term and long term? Will this be like kicking off a new site which will have to build up trust over time or will the original page rankings have affect?

  Read the article

• Multiple URL's going to same page - Kosher for Google?

  - by Ashoka15

  I hear conflicting answers from people about this, and I'm a developer by trade, and my SEO knowledge is not what it should be. Here's my situation: I run a website that lists hotels, restaurants, bars, shops, etc for a small Asian beach town. Lots of establishments here are hotels with a restaurant and bar, as well as restaurants that are also bars. As en example, a Mexican restaurant that also functions as a full cocktail bar. I first set it up so each establishment has one page, but can create multiple pages based on their other areas of business. This forces people to create TWO listings under the same name, and most just add the exact same information onto each page, making things redundant. I am re-arranging the database so that a establishment has only ONE listing (one unique page referenced by the unique code '12345ABCDEF') that is accessible from browsing under "Restaurants" and "Bars", and has the URL structures: site.com/dining/mexican/12345ABCDEF/business-name.html site.com/bars/cocktail_bars/12345ABCDEF/business-name.html I could easily simplify the URL to just the unique code and name: site.com/12345ABCDEF/business-name.html But, I found that Google has parsed by URL structure and lists like this on their SERP: Home > Dining > Mexican With each pointing to the default page for homepage, restaurants and Mexican restaurants. If I simplify the URL structure, will I lose these associations? Could Google also be picking up this structure from my breadcrumb trail at the top of the page? What is the best way to set up URL's on these pages so I am not penalized by Google for having identical information on two URL's, while still being able to have places show up as they did with the old system?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >