Search Results

Search found 4781 results on 192 pages for 'seo audit'.

Page 88/192 | < Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95  | Next Page >

  • How to create a good sitemap for dynamic website

    - by Saif Bechan
    I have a website with dynamic content and different kind of pages. I have some pages that rarely change, and I have pages like blogs that change often. The blog pages also have links for sorting, for example sorting on date, asc, desc. On some of the pages I also have links to different tabbed content, and links that are just anchor links. Now when I use a xml sitemap generator then all the links are thrown into the site, and so I don't think all the links are really relevant. The blogposts up until now are also taken into the sitemap. Is this really necessary? I think the links to the blogposts can be indexed just fine. Is the best way to make a sitemap just to manually assign the main menu links to the sitemap, or is indexing everything really recommended?

    Read the article

  • Worth changing the URL structure to incorporate keywords?

    - by Dejan Pelzel
    I am migrating my blog from PHP to ASP.NET and while recoding the whole website, I figured I might as well improve the URL structure. This is how an url looks like now: example.com/blog/post/755/hakurei-reimu-cosplay-from-touhou-by-kishigami-hana and this is hould it will look after the change (cosplay being the dynamic main keyword of the post): example.com/blog/cosplay/hakurei-reimu-cosplay-from-touhou-by-kishigami-hana-755/ The website is a bit more than a half year old and receives around 650k page views a month, mainly from search traffic. Of course everything would be redirected with 301 redirects. Do you think it is worth changing to a new URL structure, or will it harm the ranking in the long run?

    Read the article

  • Forum vs Q&A system

    - by danie7L T
    I would like to know what are the parameters that I have to take into consideration before deciding whether I should incorporate to a website a "Q&A system" or a full forum ? I think forums allow better search capabilities (you can easily dig out old posts) over the "Q&A system", but the latter offer simpler / faster interaction between the users and the site owners. I should add that only a few people (site owners + authorized people) could answer the questions, the user will be on a read-only basis. Anyone can help me decide between the two solutions ? Thank you in advance NB: There is also the impact on the SEOs, are they the same for forums and Q&A systems?

    Read the article

  • Does Google rate the webpage by amount of visits?

    - by petiar
    Hi there, there is quite extensive discussion about this topic on another website and I am really losing my confidence. The thing is that I claim that the amount (count) of visits is NOT a criteria for increasing the PR of the particular web because: a) Google just doesn't know about every single visit on a webpage (in case it's not using GA) b) Google just would not rate by something what Google actually affects Thanks for your opinions. Peter.

    Read the article

  • What does the impression and ctr means in google webmaster

    - by KoolKabin
    I am checking google webmaster tools. I entered the search queries section. There i found alot keywords and their impression and ctr etc. I clicked on one of the query keyword there it shows the keyword and position in search result, but when i go to google.com and type the specified keyword it shows no impressions too... how do i measure find my site's impression on google.com my site: http://www.trekkingandtoursnepal.com keyword: trekking nepal

    Read the article

  • Googlebot visit but no cache update - why?

    - by Mick
    I have made a new plain vanilla HTML website. I have been making regular modifications to it on an almost daily basis. The site is hosted by hostmonster and as part of their service they offer "awstats" to let you know assorted details of visitors to the site. One thing is puzzling me. According to awstats, a "robot/spider" calling itself "Googlebot" visited my site as recently as today (28th June 2011), but when I find my site on google (e.g. by searching for "full reserve banking") the cache is dated only the 5th June. I always thought that a visit from the google robot was synonymous with a cache update. Am I wrong? Or have I accidentally put something in the site telling google that nothing has been updated? EDIT: It seems a moderator has removed the name of my website, so there is now no chance that anyone could check out if I had made some error on my site :-( ... but anyway, in answer to paulmorriss' question, here is what aw stats was telling me:

    Read the article

  • Rankings dropping after small URL-change WITH 301-redirect

    - by David
    Two weeks ago, we attempted to make the URLs of ca. 12 pages more search-engine friendly. We changed three things. 1. Make URLs more SEF from: /????-????/brandname.html (meaning: /aircon-price/daikin.html to: /????-brandnameinenglish-brandnameinthai.html We set up 301-redirects from the old to the new URLs. You can find an example and the link to our page here: http://bit.ly/XRoTOK There are no direct external links to the old URLs. 2. Added text to img-links from homepage to brand-pages Before those changes, we only linked to those brands with a picture, so we added some text under the picture. You can see that here, in the left submenu: http://bit.ly/XRpfoF 3. Minor changes to Title, h1-Tags, Meta Description, etc. Only minor changes, to better match the on-site optimization with targeted keywords. For example, before we used full brand names, after we used what was really searched for: from: Mitsubishi Electric Mr. Slim to: ???? Mitsubishi (means: Aircon Mitsubishi) Three days after these changes, we noticed a heavy drop (80% loss in non-paid search traffic) in rankings and traffic for those pages, and also for all pages which are sub-categorized. Rankings for all keywords not affected by the changes stayed the same. Any ideas, what happened, and how we can regain our old rankings? What we already did, was submitting a new sitemap. Help much appreciated. Best regards, David

    Read the article

  • I want to consolidate two sites into a third. Will my search engine rankings be penalized if I rewrite and redirect pages one by one?

    - by Patrick Kenny
    I have two Drupal sites with different content-- let's call them Apple and Orange. I recently developed a much more sophisticated third Drupal site-- let's call it Tree. For a large number of reasons, the content on Apple and Orange is useful for the users of Tree, so I want to move the content to Tree. However, much of the content is out of date. (This whole process took about five years.) To update the content, I will rewrite it one article at a time myself. Now here's my question: if I move the articles one by one (as I rewrite them) and then redirect the old articles (using a 301 redirect) on Apple/Orange to the new site on Tree, will this have a huge negative effect on my search engine rankings? Is there a good way to redirect among sites when they merge like this, or would I be better off keeping the old articles on Apple/Orange and simply linking them to the new, rewritten articles on Tree?

    Read the article

  • Title of the page in search results and title of google's cached version are different. Why?

    - by Azmorf
    Check this: http://www.google.com/search?q=site:gunlawsbystate.com+kansas+gun+laws The title of the first result is "Kansas Gun Laws - Gun Laws By State". Although, on the page google has cached the title is different: <title>Kansas Gun Laws - Kansas Gun Law - Reciprocity Guide</title> Google shows the title that has been on the site 2-3 months ago. Google bot has visited the website a lot of times since that, and as you see it even cached it (the latest version is of 15th Sept), however for some reason it doesn't change the title to the new one in the search results. We use hash-bang URL structure on this website. It completely meets google's requirements for AJAX websites (_escaped_fragment_ stuff). The issue I explained is happening with almost all hash-bang pages that got indexed. Questions: Why does it keep old page title in the search results? Can it be connected to the fact that I'm using hash-bang URLs? There are lots of pages on the site that have the same issue, all of them have hash-bang URLs. Another thing I noticed is that Google's "Preview" feature doesn't work for any hash-bang URLs on the site. Did I do anything wrong? It has got cached versions of the pages, why wouldn't it generate a preview? Thanks (and sorry for my English) PS. Here's a weird thing I also noticed: this search query https://www.google.com/search?q=Kansas+Gun+Laws+-+Reciprocity+Guide shows the correct title for the same page as in the example above. Why does google show different titles for the same page when you run different queries?

    Read the article

  • Routing in ASP.Net 4.0 Web Forms

    - by nikolaosk
    In this blog post I would like to talk about a new ASP.Net 4.0 feature, URL Routing . I know this issue has been explained from various people on the web but I will give my own example. We could implement routing since ASP.Net 3.5 SP1 but it was there primarily to support ASP.Net MVC . Even in that release you could implement rounting in web forms but it was a quite difficult thing to do. However in ASP.Net 4.0 there is an integrated support for routing. It becomes easy to map requests in your site...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Single page not appearing in Google Search

    - by Dan
    Description I have a static franchise website which has various sub pages each dedicated to an individual franchisee. For each franchisee the page, the only thing slightly similar between all of them are the page titles, they follow this structure: <title> Welcome to THE_COMPANY - PRODUCT_DESCRIPTION Services, THE_LOCATION </title> THE_COMPANY and PRODUCT_DESCRIPTION are the same across all franchisees, however THE_LOCATION changes depeding on where they are located in the UK. Each franchisee page has the following <meta /> tags: <meta name="DC.creator" content="user"/> <meta name="DC.format" content="text/html"/> <meta name="DC.language" content="en"/> <meta name="DC.date.modified" content="2014-01-23T11:22:31+00:00"/> <meta name="DC.date.created" content="2014-01-23T11:22:09+00:00"/> <meta name="DC.type" content="Page"/> <meta name="DC.distribution" content="Global"/> <meta name="robots" content="ALL"/> <meta name="distribution" content="Global"/> The main content on each franchisee page is completely different. The Problem There is one particular franchisee page, located in Area A.. Which will not appear in Google Search results at all. However every single other franchisee (if you Google Search for "THE_COMPANY, THE_LOCATION" is number 1). And if I do the same search on Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo, the Area A franchisee is the first result on all of them. Has Google for some reason black listed one page on the site? What I Have Tried Ensuring the page is referenced in my sitemap.xml file 'Fetching as Google Bot' the link www.the_company.co.uk/areaa When that came back as OK I would submit to index Resubmitting the sitemap.xml file in Webmaster Tools Linking to the Area A page from another pages content For this I also waited about 3 weeks before checking again to give Google time to re-index Making a change to the page content and waiting another 2 / 3 weeks Removing the page completely and recreating it with an alternative URL The closest thing I have found to this issue is this StackOverflow question but this particular franchisee has existed for almost a year, it used to appear on Google searches however no longer does. I'm guessing the Panda update wasn't too happy with something on the page, but it hasn't effected anything else on the site and I am at a loss for things to try. I would greatly appreciate any information or thoughts as to what could have caused this Thanks. Update In line with Daniel Fukudas answer below, I have followed some of his steps but everything seems to check out alright: HTTP Headers HTTP/1.1 200 OK => Date => Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:31:29 GMT Server => Zope/(2.12.16, python 2.6.6, linux2) ZServer/1.1 Content-Length => 40078 Expires => Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT Content-Type => text/html;charset=utf-8 Content-Language => en Vary => Accept-Encoding Connection => close Robots <meta /> tag: <meta name="robots" content="ALL"/> I have updated this <meta /> tag to read content="INDEX" instead now. robots.txt: User-agent: * Disallow: User-Agent: Googlebot Disallow: /*sendto_form$ Disallow: /*folder_factories$ Using site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk: Searching for 'AREA A site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk' does not return the page, but regardless of that searching just for site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk will not necessarily return every indexed page, or so I understand... Update It appears Google likes to drop pages every now and then from the index, despite my steps above, I left the site alone and the page appeared back in the SERPs by itself.

    Read the article

  • SEO With a Linkwheel

    You will be amazed to know that more than 68 % of internet users do not go farther than first page on search results. That means you have to be among the top page ranks to have any business online. If you are not among those listed on the first page of search results, you are missing out on most of the users searching for products, information and content on Google and other search engines. Linkwheel is a wonderful strategy for search engine optimization (SEO). If done well, your search engine rankings will skyrocket in a very short time.

    Read the article

  • Is this a link scheme? If so, what to do? what problems can i face?

    - by guisasso
    I was asked to remodel a website, and decided to check its rank on alexa. Surprisingly, there are many, many different websites linking to it, none relevant. One particular thing about it is that none of these urls work, and they all display the exact same error when accessed, which to me is a very good indication that this is some sort of linking scheme. (besides the somewhat obvious names, it even says scheme in one of the urls !?) If so, how should i proceed about this website? What can i do if this is in fact a scheme, how can this hurt the website, what types of problems can i face, and what can i do about it? addurlnow . info dirlist15.addurlnow . info/Business___Economy/Services/page-12.html linkdirectory101 . info dirlist16.linkdirectory101 . info/Business___Economy/Services/page-15.html seonetblog . info dirlist52.seonetblog . info/Business___Economy/Affiliate_Schemes addurls . us dirlist21.addurls . us/Business___Economy/Services/page-10.html webdirectoriessite . info dirlist20.webdirectoriessite . info/Business___Economy/Services/page-6.html addurlstore . info dirlist10.addurlstore . info/business___economy/services/page-14.html ukwebdirectorys . info dirlist21.ukwebdirectorys . info/Business___Economy/Services/page-13.html

    Read the article

  • How to Fix this specific Google "Fetch as Googlebot" error appearing on my Webmaster Tools?

    - by UXdesigner
    Good day, I'm currently finding out why I have lost all of my website's rank in google. I don't even appear in google results by the domain. But other sites do link me and they appear in the google results. I think it's all about leaving my site two months alone and finding out I had 20k in comment spam, which I completely deleted and fixed with filters and adding a new Disqus comment service. Thing is, I added my site to Google Webmaster Tools and I'm finding out several awful things. For example, when I click in Google Fetch As GoogleBot. I receive this error message below in response to my request. And I don't even know what's the real problem and how to fix it. I simply don't get it. This is what appears: Date: Wednesday, July 20, 2011 9:43:35 AM PDT Googlebot Type: Web Download Time (in milliseconds): 55 HTTP/1.1 403 Forbidden Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:43:36 GMT Server: Apache Vary: Accept-Encoding Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Length: 248 Keep-Alive: timeout=2, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 403 Forbidden Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Additionally, a 403 Forbidden error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. Do you guys know anything about this problem ? I need to have Google crawl my site again. I used to have a really nice google result in the past three years. Now, there's nothing. thanks,

    Read the article

  • Google Analytics showing more unique visitors than there are pages on an intranet site

    - by DDEX
    I take care of a company intranet and measure the traffic with GA. I am absolutely sure that there are no more than 5000 URLs in our company and it is impossible to check the intranet from outside the company network. Yet when I check the number of Unique Visitors (UV) in the last year GA says there were 36.500 of them. How is that possible? I thought UV should measure each URL only once in the given time period. Could anybody explain how this actually works? Can it be that the cookie trackers expire after some time and are counted more then once?

    Read the article

  • Is it needed to have your blog title and description in H1 and H2

    - by Saif Bechan
    I have read an article that states that it is not necessary to have your blog title and description on your website at all. Just have the titles of the posts in h1, on the index and the post page. And on the post page have your different sections started with h2. Widget headers start with h3. Title and description are most of the time in the logo image. I have looked at the source of my favorite blog, http://net.tutsplus.com, and I see they do the same. Is this recommended?

    Read the article

  • Avoiding Duplicate Content Penalties on a Corporate/Franchise website

    - by heath
    My question is really an extension of a previous question that was ported from stackoverflow and closed so I cannot edit it. The basic gist is a regional franchise company has decided to force all independent stores into one website look; they currently all have their own domains and completely different websites. After reading the helpful answers and looking over some links provided, I think my solution is to put a 301 on each franchise store site (acme-store1.com, acme-store2.com, etc) back to the main corporate site (acme.com). All of the company history, product info, etc (about 90% of the entire site) applies to all stores. However, each store should have some exclusive content such as staff, location pictures, exclusive events and promotions, etc. I originally thought that I would simply do something like acme.com/store1/staff, acme.com/store2/staff, etc for the store exclusive content and then acme.com/our-company, for example, would cover all stores. However, I now see two issues that I don't know how to solve. They want to see site stats based on what store site they came from. If a user comes from acme-store1.com, is redirected to acme.com and hits several pages, don't I need to somehow keep that original site in the new url to track each page in that user's session and show they originally came from acme-store1.com? Each store is still independently owned and is essentially still in competition with the other stores, albeit, in less competition than they are with other brands. This is important because each store would like THEIR contact info, links to their social media pages, their mailing list sign-up and customer requests on EVERY page. So if a user originally goes to acme-store1.com and is redirected to acme.com, it still should look to the user that it's all about store 1, even though 90% of the content will be exactly the same as it is in the store 2, store 3 and corporate site. For example, acme.com/our-company would have the same company history, same header/footer/navigation, BUT depending on the original site the user came from, it would display contact and links to THAT store. If someone came directly to the corporate site, it would display their contact and links (they have their own as well). I was considering that all redirects would be to store1.acme.com, store2.acme.com, etc (or acme.com/store1) and then I can dynamically add the contact info and appropriate links based on the subdomain or subfolder. But, then I have to worry about duplicate content penalties because, again, about 90% of the text in these "subdomains" are all the same. For reference, this is a PHP5 site. I've already written a compact framework utilizing templates and mod-rewrite that I've used for other sites. Is this an easy fix that I'm just not grasping? Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • 302 Moved Temporarily or 301?

    - by user11221
    I have a question on redirects. HTTP status code checker tool shows "HTTP/1.1 302 Moved Temporarily" for the home page url http://someurl.com (just a namesake url). Also, this url opens up http://www.someurl.com/general/index. As you can see, a non-www url to a www url redirect is happening. My questions are: Is a 302 redirect acceptable for the home page? Will this affect the site showing up in search results in anyway? Isnt redirection to /general/index a bad practice?

    Read the article

  • REL ME tag - trying to figure it out

    - by nekdo
    Regarding http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1229920 to scrolled down section ''Examples'' to the point ''1.'' to the second code line which is: <a rel="me" href="https://plus.google.com/105240469625818678725/"> <img src="//www.google.com/images/icons/ui/gprofile_button-16.png"></a> On the page says that I have to add this line to the Contact Me page of own website in order to get Google Profile button. Exact code which one should be copy and pasted I am able to get here: http://www.google.com/webmasters/profilebutton/ Questions: 1). As you can see on the second URL, to make Google Profile button I need to use "author" tag and not "me" tag. But the first URL which I showed (the line in this message above) shows that I have to use "me" tag and even without this: width="32" height="32". I am already aware that I have to type (second URL) my own Google Profile URL. So do I just MANUALLY ( ! ) change this: <a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/109412257237874861202"> <img src="http://www.google.com/images/icons/ui/gprofile_button-32.png" width="32" height="32"></a> to this (note: two changes done): <a rel="me" href="https://profiles.google.com/109412257237874861202"> <img src="http://www.google.com/images/icons/ui/gprofile_button-32.png"></a> Is this correct? I assume that plus.google.com is the same as profiles.google.com (both is URL of Google Profile). 2). If I was wrong with my first question then the second answer probably won't be even useful but still: Where exactly should I paste the code: <a rel="me" href="https://profiles.google.com/109412257237874861202"> <img src="http://www.google.com/images/icons/ui/gprofile_button-32.png"></a> inside Author Page of own website? I think it doesn't matter where. Also: will this icon be for sure enough or do I also have to make such anchor text with rel me in a ''shape'' of text (for word sentence such as ''Look At My Google Profile'')? Or is just icon really enough? 3). In the same section (''1.'') of the same page (link [first one] provided above) it says that I need to use first author tag to link to Author/Contact Me page of own website in order to later use Me tag. But I think in the explanation is little mistake. Shouldn't be instead of: <a rel="author" href="http://www.cnet.com/profile/iamjaygreene/">Jay Greene</a> this: <a rel="author" href="http://www.cnet.com/profile/iamjaygreene.html">Jay Greene</a> ?

    Read the article

  • Removing 301 redirect from site root

    - by Jon Clements
    I'm having a look at a friends website (a fairly old PHP based one) which they've been advised needs re-structuring. The key points being: URLs should be lower case and more "friendly". The root of the domain should be not be re-directed. The first point I'm happy with (and the URLs needed tidying up anyway) and have a draft plan of action, however the second is baffling me as to not only the best way to do it, but also whether it should be done. Currently http://www.example.com/ is redirected to http://www.example.com/some-link-with-keywords/ using the follow index.php in the root of the Apache2 instance. <?php $nextpage = "some-link-with-keywords/"; header( "HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently" ); header( "Status: 301 Moved Permanently" ); header("Location: $nextpage"); exit(0); // This is Optional but suggested, to avoid any accidental output ?> As far as I'm aware, this has been the case for around three years -- and I'm sorely tempted to advise to not worry about it. It would appear taking off the 301 could: Potentially affect page ranking (as the 'homepage' would disappear - although it couldn't disappear because of the next point...) Introduce maintainance issues as existing users would still have the re-directed page in their cache Following the above, introduce duplicate content Confuse Google/other SE's as to what the homepage actually is now I may be over-analysing this but I have a feeling it's not as simple as removing the 301 from the root, and 301'ing the previous target to the root... Any suggestions (including it's not worth it) are sincerely appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What dangers await if I block non-standard, non-major-usa search engine bots from my USA only website?

    - by Ryan
    I noticed tons of bandwidth being used by non-USA search engine bots, so I began blocking them in an effort to save bandwidth and cpu cycles for actual users and the search engines they come from (Google, Bing, Yahoo, Ask, etc.). Other than potentially losing some international traffic (which isn't really important to us since all of our content is very USA-centric), what additional dangers should I be concerned about? I'm using a modified version of Jeff Starr's User Agent Blocklist

    Read the article

  • GA and Unique visitors again

    - by DDEX
    I take care of a company intranet and measure the traffic with GA. I am absolutely sure that there are no more than 5000 URLs in our company and it is impossible to check the intranet from outside the company network. Yet when I check the number of Unique Visitors (UV) in the last year GA says there were 36.500 of them...How is that possible? I thought UV should measure each URL only once in the given time period. Could anybody explain how this actually works? Can it be that the cookie trackers expire after some time and are counted more then once?

    Read the article

  • Multiple domain links on Google from one WordPress site

    - by user557318
    At present when I Google the domain name of the WordPress sites I have worked on, I receive at least three listings (often the top three). The first listing is the only one I am interested in seeing, others appear from individual pages from that WordPress site i.e.: 1st hit - www.domain.com 2nd hit - www.domain.com/about 3rd hit - www.domain.com/designers Does anybody know if its possible to remove all the links but the absolute www.domain.com?

    Read the article

  • Punch Line Marketing

    - by jackman
    There are so many "punch line" websites like: http://www.thatswhyyoufail.com www.canrailsscale.com/ www.nooooooooooooooo.com/ but it's a mystery how they ever get so popular. I have an idea for a punch line website too, but I want to make it BIG! Does anyone have any tips for marketing these kinds of sites? p.s. and no, I do not own any of these sites, and am not disguising it as a question to market them lol.

    Read the article

  • International search: how to show different domains in Google+ Local?

    - by Baumr
    Background A site has multiple ccTLDs: example.com for people in the US, example.co.uk for UK users, example.de for Germany, example.fr for France, etc. Searching for certain city keywords will return a list of Google+ Local (formerly Places): Each links to the corresponding company website that is visible. Problem When searching on www.google.de, the domain of the site intended for US users (example.com) appears instead of the corresponding ccTLD (example.de) aimed at German users. This applies to all languages. In my opinion and for the purposes of this business, it's not good user experience: searchers would most likely prefer to book on a site localized for them (e.g. in their language and currency). Question Is it possible to return different ccTLDs in these local search listings for users across the globe? Currently, Google+ Local seems to only support supports adding a single "Website" field. Solutions I have considered Creating duplicate Google Places listings for each URL would be spammy (and not viable when there's 100s of locations, each needing a listing in 8 languages). I don't see the hreflang annotation helping either, and GWMT geotargeting is already set.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95  | Next Page >