Welcome to the Q&A Forum

This is a great answer. PA and DA are relativistic measures, meaning they are relative to other sites in the index. If Facebook went out and doubled their links relative to everyone else, your DA might go down, but in reality your site is still just as strong as ever. As Tim describes, you should be most concerned about your scores relative to your competitors. As long as you are keeping pace or gaining, you should be fine.

Hello Anirban, The main reason large-scale websites like Indeed feature so prominently on SERP's is that there are more ranking factors at work than just content. While Panda has been created to avoid duplicate content issues and it is widely known that duplicate content can lead to penalties and reduced ranking potential, duplicate content can be over-shadowed by other ranking factors, like a website's link profile and it's Authority relative to websites in its niche. For example, Wikipedia is widely cited by webmasters around the world, but it features a lot of repetition and is an internal linking nightmare where crawling and indexing are concerned. That being said, it is normal to find a Wikipedia page every time a "What Is" query is made. Youtube is in a similar situation. There are duplicated videos and content galore on that domain, but it is linked to so frequently that it simply cannot be beaten when it comes to domain authority and relevance. While Indeed is probably being impacted by duplicate content, this pales in comparison to its link profile and the relevance it has in its industry. Hope this helps! Let me know if I can help with anything else. Best regards, Rob

Hello, Olga. If you want to simply remove it (or at least tell Google bots that it's removed), use "410 Gone" status, not 404. For user experience, I'd redirected those subdomains to index page of domain, or, if you have time and resources, create a landing page, saying something like "Sorry for inconvenience, the content is not there anymore, use search to find whatever you need ", add a search bar of main domain content, viola! Hope this helps.

I'm back about a month later to report that it finally appears to have worked. Google is now pulling up my metatitle for a variety of queries. Now I want to get Google to show local landing pages in the SERPS instead of the home page so that the location shows in the title and appears to be more relevant. Always a challenge.  I know the standard tactics, but specific ideas are welcome. Building a silo of local pages around estate planning is hard as the topic is not really local.

Kashif, This is the common problem in E-Commerce world. I'm sure Christy will give you the best solution for this. I'd suggest is, if the products are low in number, it's better to replace the content with fresh copy or at least provide some user-gernaterd content on the pages to stand out. Hope this helps! Umar

Agreed - the keyword usage guideline is just a guideline - if it's leading to a high ratio of thin-to-unique content, I'd probably not worry about. In other words, I'd drop some of the thin content. As others said, it's more of a ratio situation and a bit gray - the more unique content you can get in that second paragraph that adds value, the better. As it stands, these pages are certainly looking a little thin.

Thanks for the responses. It was my opinion that technically it should not affect anything but with the current direction of SEO and the potential affects of Engagement as ranking factors I thought it might be interesting to discuss. Appreciate your comments....thanks

I would be more concerned about the user journey than anything! If I were a user on your site and it took me 6 clicks to get to a web page I originally wanted I would get bored of the site and its content very quickly. And if you think that the content on the pages is similar chances are so will Google and it will penalise you for having duplicate content. I would keep it simple, make it easy for customer to find what they want. Having lots of content on one page is good if its written correctly and you'll see better SEO benefits from a good website structure that users can navigate around with ease.

Excellent news - glad it has all returned -Andy

Hi, Internal linking can be a fantastic way to build internal page authority and to give more emphasis to particular pages. In a simple way, here is how it works... -- Create amazing article related to the page you are trying to rank for -- High up in the copy, create a target anchor text that leads to the page you are trying to boost. Make the anchor text the same / very similar to your desired phrase - but make sure it makes sense. Have a read of this article over at eConsultancy. This goes through it in a lot more detail and will show you exactly what you need to be doing. I personally have had some astounding successes with this. The article you create should be better than the norm though. You want something that will get shared socially and hopefully, result in some backlinks too. -Andy

I don't see a big deal on length from an H2 point of view. I often have that many H2s and many H3s. The bigger deal is whether the copy is adding any value to the page. Don't fret about the <h?>markup outside of the core H1 of the page.</h?> I'd be more concerned if formatting is ugly or confusing, or inconsistent. You can also edit the CSS and HTML to turn Subtitle goes here into Subtitle goes here and retain visual formatting identical to how it looks currently. This is the proper way to separate formatting from the semantic markup of the page (headings, in this situation).

David, I can see the frustration. It would appear to a searcher on Google that the page for this class hasn't been updated since 2013 because Google is using the Schema markup you have around the review, which is: A quick fix that could help until you get this figured out would be to change the published date on the review to a more recent date in 2015. I do see that you have placed the "datePublished" markup within the Schema.org/review container, but Google seems to be interpreting it not just that way, but also as if it was on it's own to describe the entire page. In other words, it seems to be treated like this: https://schema.org/datePublished . I see that you have itemtypes for an offer, dates, reviews... but not one for the page itself. Perhaps just below the HTML header of that page you could define the web page's publish date using this itemtype: https://schema.org/WebPage. It would would begin with: itemscopeitemtype="http://schema.org/WebPage"> And would contain: <meta< span="">itemprop="datePublished"content="2015-01-01"> (or whatever the real publish date is)</meta<> And would cover the entire page down to: Another option could be to go with JSON-LD instead.

I agree totally with Chris and according to Matt Cutts: "So if it’s a link from one page on your site to another page on your site, you want that featuring to flow, you want Googlebot to be able to find that page," Cutts continued. "So almost every link within your site, that is a link going from one page on your site to another page on your site, I would make sure the PageRank does flow which would mean leaving off the nofollow." So, just use no-follow for links to websites you don't trust.

In general, H-tags are intended for headlines. That's why they've typically been seen as (at this point somewhat weak) ranking signals—the headline of a page is a decent indication of what the page is about, which helps the search engines determine what to serve that page in response to particular searches. I honestly can't see a reason to use H-tags is a widget title like "Most Viewed." It does nothing to communicate what the page is about, and if you're also using an H-tag for the page headline, the second one may "confuse" crawlers. There are other ways to format those widget titles. I really like Wesley Smits's analogy from this Q&A thread: What i would like to add to his answer is that you should look at H1, H2, H3, H4, H5 and H6 tags as if the webpage is a book. In a book the chapter-title is a H1 tag. All the subchapters have an H2 tag. If these subchapters have another sub-area then this would be marked up with an H3 tag and so on. Having a clear hierarchy in your heading tags will make it more user friendly. Search engines might also understand better which parts of the content are connected to each other and which are separate because of this. I really can't speak to why Wordpress themes would be using H-tags in widget/sidebar titles. It's certainly not what I'd recommend.

Just disallow in Robots. No need to do anything else. -Andy

Hello Steve, It is difficult to say how long it will take because Google handles different sites at different speeds depending on things like domain-level trust metrics, how often the pages get updated, how easy the site is to crawl, etc... Generally speaking, bouncing back after a complete site migration takes a couple of months, which can be shortened by following best practices, most of which it sounds like you've already done. I would submit a new XML sitemap (replace the old one) and then fetch these new pages as Googlebot. Then if you want to write a useful blog post that links to those pages it would help get them crawled and indexed, while also building some internal pagerank for them. Good luck.

Thanks a lot Cyto for the quick and helpful answer!

Thanks for the help!

Hello Matt. Thank you very much! Maksim

It is my opinion that this kind of "duplicated content" is not hurting you. There is no need to put this kind of content into an image. Duplicated content like this is largely ignored. There are bigger fish to fry. If you are looking for things to do, work on ensuring your product content is 100% unique, engaging and do some conversion testing. It's a much better use of time.