Welcome to the Q&A Forum

That helps, thanks!

I understand the issue, however, you are going to create a lot more issues that will need more help by going this route. It's much harder to go back and try to fix things after the fact, especially since just managing a site introduces a whole separate set of issues that will require your resources and costs. I inherited a situation like this and it's probably cost us more in lost opportunities than it would have to build it correctly. Off soap box now. The no index is a good start, and focus on the main pages you really need to care about to get visibility for and make sure you follow best practices for those.

It's best practice to have your business name in the page title, after the primary keyword (and secondary if using one) . Including the location of your business at the end will also help that particular page rank higher for when a user performs a search with the location in their query. Google will only display 70 characters of the page title in the search results but the robots will still read on past 70 characters. As long as the page title does not contain repeated keywords or keyword stuffed then you shouldn't worry about going over the recommended 70 if it's your business name and location at the end of the title tag. It's only my opinion but I wouldn't recommend going over 85.

We have around 12,000 pages, our CMS dynamically generates titles for our deeper level pages which resulted in 8,000 duplicate title errors for our FAQ pages... After eliminating 4000 we have seen no statistically relevant differences in traffic. Its obviously not beneficial to have any duplicate title pages, but we haven't experienced any penalties..yet. The closer your pages are to your root domain the bigger the issue.

Google is pretty good and identifying the original source of content; however, it isn't perfect. I suggest pursuing the options to have the content removed from the scraper/spam sites whenever possible.

This is not a problem. The issue with duplicate content is that you lose control over the copy that appears in the search results. Google will only show one page from your site if it thinks they are the same content. If Google sees each of your pages as unique then you can manipulate the positioning of the pages in the results. So duplicate content is not an issue on the same page. You do however need to be wary of keyword stuffing i.e. putting in the keywords an unnatural amount of times.

And the answer of Matt Cutts : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MswMYk05tk&feature=em-uploademail-new

Hi John Sorry for my late response ;-( Thank you very much for your help. I added a rel=alternate for the Thai version as well. So far it looks good - no duplicated content. Regards, Menelik

Thanks for the response guys. I think I will stick with the current URL and just work hard on all the right SEO stuff and try and experiment with my title tags and meta descriptions to help CTR. John

Thanks for the answers and suggestions. Yes my friend did answer "widgets" I have printed it and and read on paper rather than screen and now it does make f or some bad reading so changes are to be made. Reading the link from eyepaq help me decide not to split the page into two as then the content would have been too thin. So once again many thanks

SEOMOZ is a popular community and frequently updated website too, so it will have the fast crawl rates, that is the reason it appears fast on the Google.

Thanks for the info! I will check out the guide.

I'm actually not sure if the algorithm considers all the content on the domain when assessing the relevance of a particular page. But it sounds like you WILL have a lot of topically relevant pages, no? Your site is about widgets; you have a couple of pages that are optimized for big terms like "buy widgets," "women's widgets," etc.; then you have lots of other pages that will still mention widgets in some capacity, right? It's not like you have a travel booking website and now you're trying to optimize one page for viagra?

This is happening to me too! Any idea?

I understand the redirect is wrong, but I didn't set up a redirect. I'm not sure why a shopping cart list would be a redirect from a product listing.

In my understanding  - Google is a machine that wants us to think that it is acting as a human being In general - there is some human influence on their 'algos' but it's important to understand -  it is still a machine! And most important is to clearly lied down - it is machine that constantly keeps upgraded and tweaked by humans. I see where and why Joseph coming from and I see why he still is not satisfied with the answer. You know why? Because question is wrong for this community Everyone here wants to do good for you Joseph! And that is why you are not getting direct answer regarding correct keyword density percentage. The truth is - this number is keeping changing constantly and whatever  'density' will you apply to your article it is - DANGEROUS! There is no exact magical number but there is a safe side that works for present moment. And to answer you directly - do not cross 1.5 - 2.0 percentage at the moment. Think about this like that - If you will apply wrong keyword density to your article you will get fired from your job. So, how to apply correct keyword density you are asking! -  you see, you asking to guarantee you something that only Google can guarantee as there is no insight - what Google will implement next and how that will affect everyone here. One golden rule applies for this though - keep constantly updating and changing your content! As far it is the best of the best of all ranking advices what I can give you because as far as it goes now - Whenever new content is published Google clearly and immediately recognizes, responds and communicates with you via changes of you ranking positions via what!? - via keyword density,placement,decoration,website structure, credibility,visibility and all this blah,blah,blah stuff You see - keywords are still there! So, sorry, but there is no magical and precise pill for this! That is why question was a bit wrong. all the best, Jungles