Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Just use subdomains redirection from cPanel right? By the way what do you mean by.. "Hi, I am assuming that coriate.com is the web designer, if so they should have blocked search engine/public access to the site via something like Htpasswd.". Block search engine to access Coriate folder on cPanel -> File Manager? What for? Oh, I get it. I need to block coriate[dot]com/japracool[dot]com right?

If you got the "successfully uploaded" message then this means that your disavow file was in the right format and Google is able to read it. "if a site is linking to me on multiple pages on their site do i have to disavow each link or just the domain is enough." If you've disavowed on the domain level (i.e. domain:example.com) then that's all you need to do.  You should be disavowing on the domain level for each site too.  It's rare that I'll just disavow one url. One other thing I'd like to point out is that your disavowed links will still remain in Webmaster Tools. A lot of people think that they disappear once they're disavowed but they don't.

You are correct. We discovered the pattern across many products not just SteriPEN. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

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.

Hi Mike, this is awesome but strangely, the only page on Wikipedia that gets returned for the following query, "inurl:digitalization site:wikipedia.org" in Google is <cite class="_Zd">ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digitalization</cite> that too in Arabic language. So they do not have the exact match definition in English at this point in time as I write this. You can confirm this with the following query: "inurl:digitalization site:en.wikipedia.org" Out of the first 10 results in Google for the query, "inurl:digitalization", I tried to run the following query for each of these top 10 websites: "inurl:digitalization site:<each 10="" of="" the="" top="" domain="" names="">",</each> Only Gartner.com has 26 URLs (with "digitalization" in the URL) with only one exception, digitalization.nl which can be ruled out as the domain name itself contains, "digitalization". This case can be dug much,much deeper but let me stop here. Without having dug deeper in to this case, at this point, the only thing I believe would replace Gartner's definition with the definition from Wikipedia is, if they come up with a page that contains the term, "digitalization" in the URL and in the title. Best regards, Devanur Rafi

Hi There I'm honestly not versatile in the intricacies of how window.location works - but I can tell you how to check if this is OK for search engines. You can try a few things to see how Google "sees" the content; Do a fetch as Googlebot in Webmaster Tools Check the cache of the page if it has already been indexed (try text-only cache) Try running it through a header checker like URI Valet (set to Googlebot as user agent) In all cases, you will get a "search engine view" of the page content. If it's what you want engines to see, then you are all set! As far as the details of how to implement everything, I'd have to lean on a developer for that. But that's how you would check and verify it.

1. 'Will this get me into trouble creating duplicate content with the main category page? Should I only have  the main category indexed and "no-index, follow" all the product attribute pages? ' I don't feel that you have anything to worry about here, however having an extra element of descriptive text would help on the sub category pages ie. on chainsofgold.co.uk/earrings/studs/   etc.. 2. 'Can I link to those product attribute pages without the risk of getting accused of creating duplicate content?' Linking is fine however to ensure the search engines do not consider those extra parameters you should filter them via robots.txt ie Disallow: /?filter_gold-type OR Disallow: /?filter_* (if all your filters begin with '?filter_') You should also link your sitemap from your robots.txt file

It might be that Moz's crawler is not picking up the description because of the way that you have it written. The standard way to write a meta description is like this. name="description" content="Buy the robust and reliable Canon imageRUNNER 2525 from Copyfaxes. Learn more about the Canon 2525 before you buy." /> You have yours written like this. http-equiv="description" content="Buy the robust and reliable Canon imageRUNNER 2525 from Copyfaxes. Learn more about the Canon 2525 before you buy." /> Using http-equiv actually tries to simulate meta information through a response header. Which is incorrect. You should rewrite your descriptions to be like the first type. Search engines might be able to decipher it, even though it is semantically wrong, but I would not risk it.

No its not. one should redirect to the other. but I think your problem is that you have links within your site that point to both, this is why the auto sitemap generation generates both. find the internal links and fix them.

Yes put back the meta tags, and wait. but I am not convinced that your drop in visits was cased by this.

Awesome - thanks for all the extra info David! Just to clarify, do you mean 301 the author archives to the homepage? Yoast does this when you check "disable author archives".

Apologies Keri! New around here so wasn't too sure. Would appreciate if someone can let me know where to post an ad to find a good SEO part timer

Just a friendly reminder. Please don't delete your question after it's been answered. It's very likely that someone in the future could have the same question and they would have been able to find the answer if you hadn't deleted the question.

Site A Root /services/ /about/ /contact/ /blog/ /post1/ /post2/ /post3/ Site B Root /services/ /about/ /contact/ /blog/ /post1/ /post2/ /post3/ Do you think Google potentially would treat these two sites differently in anyway?

I looked at SEO-browser, and saw the same result. We have done a lot of ecom sites over the years, and it's always wise to fill in any space you have in the cart system with product info that sets the pages apart from one another. We put together a page a while back, that includes a similar page checker. This lets you see on a percentage scale how "similar" pages are to one another, and explains the definition of what "duplicate content" really is, and how it can hurt your site.

I have not had any issues with my clients. We send the product through with hashes like http://neat42.com/tshirts/1-faded-short-sleeve-tshirts.html#/color-blue and canonical all of the pages without the hash. If you can control the quantty through a url string you will not have any issues.

Edit: I apologize, because I was not nearly clear enough here. The Star Hotels site will have 5 pages dedicated to The Michelangelo Hotel. The content will sit solely on that server as those 5 pages. Those 5 pages will each be indexed as 2 URLs. www.michelangelohotel.com <-> www.starhotels.com/en/michelangelo/ www.michelangelohotel.com/accommodations <-> www.starhotels.com/en/michelangelo/accommodations And so on.

Jane, You have been awesome!  I almost done going through all of the bad items that Moz generated and am getting ready to run the crawl again!  Then once I am done with that I will submit to Google again.  First time in years I have some confidence I can make a difference. Nick

Recently I used 301s to redirect all my 404 errors on google web master and ended up with visibility zero on google search. I do not recommend 301. Not tested 302 but I think indexing the new link is much better than redirection in any way just to make sure you got juice passed thru.

As to your question I think it is very well answered in this Q&A http://moz.com/community/q/webmaster-tools-indexed-pages-vs-sitemap However you can check for some problems using these links http://blog.kissmetrics.com/beginners-guide-to-google-webmaster-tools/ http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2326164/Index-Your-Content-Faster-With-the-Fetch-as-Google-Tool Check your website using Moz for crawl errors as well as take a look at it through Google's eyes using http://www.feedthebot.com/ & http://www.feedthebot.com/tools/ A friend of mine found an interesting problem with robots.txt and JQuery being blocked on word press I noticed from your URL that you are using. By adding Google's JQuery plug-in it enabled navigation and other major things that were being blocked on mobile devices to be seen. Take a look at the way the site was being viewed by Google when using Google Fetch as a Google bot before and after. https://www.authoritydev.com/dont-block-jquery-from-googlebot/ Moz has some of the best tools on the planet if you run a campaign and the on page section will most likely find your errors. However if you need to dig deep into your site the Pro version of screaming frog is worth it http://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/seo-spider/ Sincerely, Thomas