Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I'm afraid it is the obvious. Ensure the rich snippets are relevant to the content of the page, ensure that your page is ranking for relevant queries to raise the chance of the rich snippet being shown.

Seems like these results are consistent with each other, 3.66s and 3.52s are very close, if you repeat the test few time and all results are around those times you should consider around 3.5s as the realistic loading time for your users. Have you checked your analytics account for the site speed section? My favourite tool (developed and supported by Google) is webpagetest. If you check your website with it you will notice few area of improvement, in particular the TTFB (Time To First Byte). The two metric you should care about are TTFB and the total page loading time. TTFB is a factor in google algo ranking of your pages. The total loading time is affecting your UX, and potentially damaging your bounce rate. In the webpagetest your site is getting an F for TTFB, which seems to be between 3 and 7 seconds. Which is really bad and potentially hurting your SERP ranking.

Your dev is correct. You do need to set up redirect. We have a great guide about how to set up redirects. Redirects that are set up properly will help your SEO, not hurt it.

Thanks for your help. Google is so picky about link quality these days. The site has some links going out but I don't think has any coming back. I will check out the discussion you sent a link on. Thanks again.

In my experience, the date created referred to the page itself as opposed to the entire site. I have migrated about 20 sites and this has not created an issue at all. As long as your domain doesn't change you should be ok. Part of the domain age is when it was first registered, how long it is registered for and whether or not it is an active site. New pages get added to sites all the time. The "date created" is another tag for Google to be able to use to know that there has been an update and there is new content to crawl.

I uploaded file named .htaccess

Hi, according to Google's official documentation canonical URLs are sufficient: "In the world of content management and online shopping systems, it's common for the same content to be accessed through multiple URLs. With content syndication, it's also easy for content to be distributed to different URLs and domains entirely. For example:... Your server is configured to serve the same content for the www subdomain or the https protocol..." Proposed Plan of Action: Decide which of non-www or www should be your preferred domain. Set the canonical urls and the preferred domain in GWT accordingly. Divide your site into dozen or so sections and every day for the next 2 weeks correct the duplicate titles and content of each section. At the end, leave a day to go over the work and at the start give yourself a day to get familiar with the work. So you will not be overwhelmed by the details, even if you don't finish everything in a day. See how the work done affects your sitemap and overall SEO when you go forward. If possible, only implement changes to the CMS after this SEO work has been done. Why? Because by then you will be familiar enough with the CMS and with the goals you want to achieve to fruitfully communicate with the developers. I see you are running a CMS based on ASP.net — changing these boutique CMS-s can be quite expensive, as you stated

Hi Jeremy To my knowledge this is not possible with wordpress.com - this is a little old but states such is the case: http://en.forums.wordpress.com/topic/is-it-possible-to-embed-canonical-url-in-my-posts-and-pages adamxj2 posted a good link below from Google, which gives some other steps you can take to help mitigate common issues a canonical tag is meant to address. I find that very often people use canonicals as a band aid anyway, instead of a deeper fix - so there is likely another way to achieve what you need to.

Options +FollowSymLinks RewriteEngine on RewriteBase /example1/ RewriteRule ^example2/(.+)$ /$1 [L,R=301,NC] Try this.

Justian....if it "looks like" keyword stuffing to you then it is! Google will see it that way too, eh! Bad practices, I'd say....

Hi, had a similar problem just last week and solved it by strengthening the interior page ranking factors. Here's how: my page was domain.com/services/page, changed that to domain.com/keyword/page on both the URL and breadcrumbs (that becoming brand -> keyword -> page). better internal linking, added a couple of internal links with or in context near the keyword throughout the website's news section and corporate pages linking to the interior page. Hope this helps you

Check your settings in Screaming Frog for obeying robots.txt, obeying canonicals, etc. That might be your problem.

Get new, better quality links ASAP, before or while you're disavowing It depends on your outreach methods - I had ~50% removal rate with one of our sites which is multiple times higher than the average. You can just disavow and hope it works or you can get as many links removed as possible, disavow the rest, then hope it works. I'd go with the latter.

Here's the step-by-step right and easy way: 1. Sign-up for Google Webmaster Tools and create individual sites for 4 variants of your website: http non-www http www https non-www https www 2. Set the preferred domain among the above four. 3. Add an canonical URL for all pages for either https://www. or https://.., whichever you choose. 4. Add 301 redirect from http:// to https:// via htaccess using mod_rewrite. 5. Use Google Webmaster Tools "Fetch as Google", under "Crawl" in your http:// sites to confirm that http://.. gets redirected and optionally submit those redirects to be indexed by Google (just to make sure). 6. Build and submit a sitemap for your preferred domain site (one of the https://..) via Google Webmaster Tools. 7. Optionally, connect your Google Analytics property with your preferred domain site in Google Webmaster Tools.

This is really great, I appreciate your help

I would suggest moving your h2 tag to something else. The engines pull what they feel is the most relevant item from your page. Your h2 tag is "Awesome, you're signed up" so the engines think this is the second most relevant item on the page. http://www.onradpad.com/ask-radpad/can-i-pay-rent-with-a-credit-card/ - This is the page that surfaces with weird language when you search "pay with radpad". This is because of the text on the page that is linked elsewhere. If you look in the second paragraph, the phrase is underlined and taller than the other text, telling the search engine it is more relevant. It is a link to your payment page, which is why there is weird text attached to it in the SERP. Since the engines pull the information they feel is most relevant to exactly what it typed in by the searcher, you kind of have to make sure that the h tags and text on the page are targeting exactly what you think will be searched. I would move the h2 tag and make the text on your link look the same as the text on the page, it should help you get your meta description showing instead of content. You can also add the key terms here to your meta description. That will also help avoid content out ranking the description.

Very, very interesting Lewis!

http://moz.com/community/q/how-to-do-ip-canonicalization

0, No 1, Yes 2/a If **voter lists **is your SEO keywords. Than I would change as following: <i<strong>mg src="assets/images/Voter-List-Data-Manager-Marlon-K-Brownlee.jpg" alt="Voter List Data Manager Marlon K. Brownlee" border="0px" title="Voter List Data Manager Marlon K. Brownlee"></i<strong>Marlon K. BrownleeData Integration Manager Marlon has over 25 years of systems integration and database management. He has an MBA degree from Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management and an undergraduate degree from Cornell University. Marlon is responsible for managing data integration at eMerges. 2/b I hope you have somewhere written Voter List If you are targeting keyword. You should have that in Page Title and H1 and in the URL and somewhere in the text, but probably you know these.. Adam

Thank you for quick response. We are working on co-citation (and we get many natural links from highly authoritative domain), Further, we already stopped any kind of automated link building. I dont think so we were effected from other algos, Im saying this because whenever google launched new algo update, we didnt see any drop in traffic yet. We solved many technical issues, suggest new design, improve breadcrumbs, remove ambiguous java scripting, setting up tags, fix metas, fix content etc but wont find any positive change in organic results. I agreed to some extent, our old automated links done much damage to us but we finally recovered from manual penalty, had removed bad links and continuously monitored our link profiles. But Wont recover our rankings and traffic. And i will definitely try to follow your article Thanks Again.