Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Ivor, i think i counted correctly: above the content main section right next to your own ad (which Google also counts as Ad) Mid content in between the audi's (the page i looked) at the bottom of the left side bar. So you actually have 5 ad blocks on your site. Then again, the first ad block should not be that high on the page. Delete the above the content one, and the bottom left sidebar one and add some content before using the block next to your own ads. That might work for you. But at this moment you are violating Google's policy on using ads (IMHO) I would defiantly add more content, more text less ads. Maybe 1 or 2 ad blocks on at least a 1000 words ? I never measured a ratio that works. Maybe a good idea to do that sometime. As for the errors, can you give a few examples of the pages that are duplicate, I will look into it a bit further. Regards Jarno

Ya, a 15% non-indexed rate is not bad. There was a Q&A here earlier that was looking at similar things: http://moz.com/community/q/some-urls-in-the-sitemap-not-indexed. That should help ease your mind! DA isn't a function of how many pages your site has, but how many other credible sites link to your site: http://moz.com/learn/seo/domain-authority.  Cheers!

I'm with keszi on this, redirect all pages anyway as they still had some value. Think of Google as a user for a second, it was aware of all these pages and suddenly they are gone. Those pages were valuable to Google, and if not redirected that value disappears.

If you are not changing the IP address you don't need to change the DNS, if you change the IP address, in addition to updating the DNS records you also need to properly redirect traffic from old urls to new urls. With IIS the best option is using url rewrite, which is very flexible but a little tricky to set up if it's the first time you do so: http://www.iis.net/learn/extensions/url-rewrite-module/creating-rewrite-rules-for-the-url-rewrite-module Url rewrite does operate at web server level, its powerful and does the job, but you may consider doing redirects at application level, depending on the technology you use, php/dotnet/aspx/mvc you have different tools. The advantage of doing it at application level is you can redirect dynamically, in other words use an algo to translate the old urls to the new ones using whatever information is stored in the application cache, database, and so on. While using IIS url rewrite you either statically redirect each old url to a the new url or you use regular expressions or wildcards to dynamically do so. In other words using url rewrite you have a little less flexibility.

Those are very good points. Thanks Lewis!

These extensions look like they are attachments. Go into GWT, click on the 404 link, then a box with pop up, click on the  "Linked From" tab.. Go to the page and Ctrl U to see the source code. Do a CTRL F and search for the broken link. When you find it in your source code you should be able to figure out what's triggering that response. If you can't find the URLs in your source code, mark them as fixed and it should take care of the problem. Especially if they are older. It looks like it could be a shipment status, a product out of stock message, and a PDF of train schedules. I would check the linked from pages and make sure that there isn't some erroneous code that is creating a page when it doesn't need to.

Hi, Thanks but also if I have loads of pages millions of pages that might effect Google indexation for example Google will not shows all my indexed pages in search results so that why I am thinking about resubmitting site maps with just important stuff also I cannot prevent pages if i want disallow from robbots I have loads of pages I do not want to focus on so any body can tell whether this right

Then 404 is the correct way to handle it. You should also be sure that you clean up any internal links to these pages after they are gone. Search engines can understand other sites linking to pages that are no longer available but they do frown on your own site sending users to missing pages.

Hi, Google has confirmed that there hasn't been a Panda/ Penguin update in the last few weeks. They have made some 'tweaks' which could be adversely affected your sites. http://searchengineland.com/google-confirms-making-tweaks-search-results-says-no-update-announce-214401 Is traffic dropping from all of your channels or just organic? Have you changed anything on your site recently? Is there a specific page that is losing your traffic or is it a percentage drop site-wide? This tool is available (analytics required) which would give you a rough idea of if you've been impacted by Google algorithm change. http://www.barracuda-digital.co.uk/panguin-tool/

Just caught this a bit late and probably to late to add something but my two pence is test it in Webmaster Tools, via Crawl -> Robot.txt tester - if you've not used this before simply add the url you want to test and Google highlights the directive that allows or disallows it.

Hi Karen. Yes there was a recent update, please read about it here: http://moz.com/products/api/updates (that's the home of API update news btw).  And here's the Q&A post discussing the specifics as to why link numbers fluctuated: http://moz.com/community/q/have-questions-about-the-jan-27th-mozscape-index-update-get-answers-here. Enjoy!

I see. There's a pretty thorough discussion on a very similar situation here: http://moz.com/community/q/can-i-use-nofollow-tag-on-product-page-duplicated-content.  Everett endorsed Monica's answer with, "... you might consider putting a Robots Noindex,Follow meta tag on the product pages. You'll need to rely on category pages for rankings in that case, which makes sense for a site like this."  Monica's long term solution was to also work on getting specific user-generated content on as many product pages as possible. Cheers!

Hi Theo, We encountered something similar when we migrated a site. We properly redirected all the old url's to the new one, however, in the weeks after the migration, we saw a huge increase of 404 in the webmastertools. When we took a closer look to these url's, we noticed that these where using an url structure we had abandoned several years ago. On the "old" site, these were redirected, but we didn't implement these old redirections after migration as we assumed that these very old url's wouldn't be in the index anymore. We proved wrong. We could delete them manually from the index using webmaster tools, because they used folders we are not using any longer, this is not probably not possible in your case. While it is a bit annoying, I don't think that having these "phantom" url's in the index is doing you any harm in terms of SEO. They will probably never pop-up for normal search queries, only when you do in-depth queries, limiting the results to only your site. rgds, Dirk

Agree with Ryan Purkey's recommendation. Domain names are treated differently than most text probably because of space constraints. You don't need to worry about separating words. You want  to keep your domain name short and memorable. As Ryan says, having to say "Gray DASH or Hyphen Digital) is not memorable. Go with graydigital if it's available.

I too use Yoast plugin for most of my wp site and i do notice the same issues. Ryan has  answered it already regarding the Meta titles. However, i would still suggest you to  manually check the meta title of your page with view source code and see if the page has the same title that you used. And regarding what google has to show in the SERP, i think you should not really worry about that.

After an hour or so of messing around with it, I found a Solution! So you have to have two rules. First one is Cell is Empty, set the background color to white (not sure why this is needed, but it is crucial for it to work) Second rule is Custom Formula is =len(B2)>150, set background color to red (this will set it to red if the their is over 150 characters. This test spreadsheet really helped me out. (gotta make a copy to mess with it) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ScDqtZvhsmf2iByAuxHBu0-ESpX_TE5pdtBvAxOJ99E/edit#gid=1620525099 Your welcome, Chris U7rW8SV

If the transfer from HTTP to HTTPS is done well with 301 redirects, updating the various webmaster tool locations, maybe a little press around the change (new links, social, etc.) then it should transition well.

I would say you should do whichever is better for the user. Whatever will make their experience on your site a good one. I am a fan of getting as much information on one page as I can, however, there are some users who might want the highlights with the freedom to dig deeper if they need or want. Content heavy pages are always a good thing, but the UX is ultimately the most important thing.

I haven't experienced a home page outranking a product page for anything other than a branded search. Most often a home page is not optimized for a particular key term. It is optimized as an outline for the site and to display promotions or other important things about the site.

Came here to say what Ray already said.