Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Completely agree with Fede, the 301 process will redirect the juice to the new URL but this process always loose small amount of link juice. If you think adding the new URL will help you better than losing a bit of a link juice is fine!

I'm pretty sure meta language is the only thing Bing recognizes for language at this point. http://returnonnow.com/2012/06/international-seo-hreflang-tag/ For any other search engines, you need to employ the Meta Language Tag. There are two ways to set up the syntax on this tag: Or the alternative syntax would be: If the site is only targeting a language, the latter would suffice. However, if you are targeting to language and country (e.g. Spanish for Spain vs. Mexico), use the first option.

I've done a little more research on this I was intrigued... My site uses a custom blog, not a public platform, if you visit it (the blog area) it looks alike wordpress but it isn't. We also use NetDNA to serve images, which is the parent company of maxcdn. My image search in Google returns to my posts, not the images (but there are 2 differences with your site: custom URLs on NetDNA (also possible with maxcdn) and not a Wordpress site). Then I checked for a small blog I write about SEO, works with wordpress but without NetDNA (CloudFlare instead as the CDN) and the images in google search also link to my posts. So that leaves with only one option, custom domains. You are serving images using a third party domain, which can be seen as a hotlink by Google and therefore they may link to the domain hosting the image, as it is probably the image owner. This are just guesses, but it looks like a nice/possible theory. Why don't you start using custom domains with maxcdn and see what happens?

Thank you I looked under  Search Traffic -> Manual Actions this is the message Manual Actions No manual webspam actions found. I am also working on your other recommendations .

Thanks all. The page is now being indexed.

Without seeing the actual 301s and tracing it all on the server, my guess is that that what might have happened during the 301 process is that all of the server rules in .htaccess is forcing a user to go through multiple "hops" before the redirect is complete. This is a simplified version, but what might be happening is something like this: /store/widget-group1/ --> /store/widget-group1/index.php --> /store/widget-group1/index.html  --> /store/index.php?widget-group1 If this is the case, I'd try to create a 301 that reduces the number of hops. This page discusses how Matt Cutts of Google shoes that after a few 301 hops, Google may give up crawling: http://www.mktdojo.com/matt-cutts-discusses-301-redirect-limits/ Hope this helps...

Wow. I wasn't expecting such a detailed and awesome answer Danny. Thanks so much, I'm in the process of migrating away from S3 anyways (for other reasons) though you're right in that I'm going to miss the cost & load times. I'm using Middleman for now, though the technical part of my brain is indeed interested in how you're going to accomplish the Jekyll solution. I'll look out for your post! And thanks for the tip on my site. Another thing to add to the list Arun

Thats why its good practice to compete on price but not go nuts as if you do its just a race to see who is out of business first, I agree.  Lots of these people can not do math.  They don't know what their profit margin is.

Hi there, Really interesting question that I just noticed here. I've never done this before, but my best guess comes from the Google Guidelines on moving the site: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/83105?hl=en If Google recommends keeping the redirect in place for at least a month or so, the implication is that you can remove a redirect from site A to site B after a few months without significant ranking drops to site B. That also implies that removing a redirect from site A to site B will not return site A to its former rankings, because the link equity will continue to count for site B. That said, maybe it's different if Google sees the same content that people originally linked to. I wouldn't think so, though - 301 generally means permanent, no take-backs. You'll have to make the decision on whether it's worth it to remove the redirect based on how much it helped site B. Without knowing the details (was site A properly redirected to the same or similar content on site B? which site is more valuable?) it's hard to give you advice, but hopefully this gives you enough to reason it out!

With the recent changes to the algorithm Google has started the move toward more semantic / intelligent search.  What this ultimately means is writing for the user.  So it's still very important to include your key phrases that you have identified as part of your research phrase but in a way that is very natural and what the user would want to read to help them find their answer they were looking for when they entered it into Google. In the past many SEO agencies etc have made the mistake of just cramming pages with keywords / phrases that might rank in Google and deliver traffic but do not deliver any conversions. Hope this makes sense and helps

Just in case anyone stumbles across this topic: We started using honeypot captchas in 2011 and it really paid off. Not only because we got rid of the old captchas, but also because they are keeping out 99,99% of all bot inquiries or spam.

Hi Greg, we have done something similar in the past. Here is what we did: We had few images (flow charts and stuff) and some of them acquired some decent links. So, we came up with pages that had content highly relevant to those images. We redirected all those to these new pages via 301. After few weeks we saw great results both in web and image searches. And yes, the link juice flows to the new pages though not that much which used to flow in the past but most of it will. Hope this helps. Best, Devanur Rafi

Hello Nadir, We generally don't remove Q&A questions unless they are spam or not TAGFEE. Other community members have taken their time to answer the question, and deleting the question removes their MozPoints, and also doesn't give people a reason to answer questions if they keep having their answers removed.

Great to hear. Let me know if you have any question when you start that project. Casey

Good idea! I appreciate the time and feedback, Thank you! I will try what you said on a few slider images and see if it shows the images when crawled. Maybe I can pop the the same images as the links out on some of them so they are still being used on the page and not lose too much "juice"

Hi Denis I'm afraid this isn't possible.  Therefore, if you plan on keeping both, make sure the blogspot has unique content from your main website and offers good value for people who come across it. You can redirect domain > blogspot, however.

Olivier - A couple of quick ideas to make sure you are ranking locally for SEO: 1. Have you verified ownership of your Google Places Page? 2. Have you added store hours, verified your address, business category, etc? 3. Does your website list your store address on the footer of each page?  That can certainly help.  I'd also recommend putting it into an RDFa or Microformat tag, so that it's easier for companies to read. For example, our corporate address is: Customer Paradigm 5353 Manhattan Circle #103 Boulder, CO 80303 Phone: 303.473.4400 Google and other search engines can figure this out, but if you use a v-card type of format, it's easier for them to structure the data more properly. Here's an example: Customer Paradigm 5353 Manhattan Circle Suite 103 Boulder CO, 80303 303.473.4400 4. Make sure you add a few photos onto your Google + page, uploaded by you, the owner.  This should help with ranking. 5. Try to get some of your customers (perhaps in a second day email, after a product has arrived) to do a review on your Google+ page. More google reviews, especially with star ratings, will help. Hope this helps! -- Jeff

I have blocked the Wayback Machine for a client and not allowed them to index the site. I blocked them via the robots.txt and not Meta NoIndex, and while blocking Wayback Machine it did NOT impact the positions within the targeted Google results. Hope this helps.

Thank you for your response! I had looked at that article before I posted, and it also has this paragraph: Googlebot can index almost any text a user can see as they interact with any Flash SWF file on your site, and can use that text to generate a snippet or match query terms in Google searches. Additionally, Googlebot can also discover URLs in SWF files (for example, links to other pages on your site) and follow those links. This makes me think the link might be a problem. It is only one link out of a large link profile, so I am not too worried but it's always good to be prepared...

Thank you for your responses Davanur and Kurt.  The page /foo is copied a great deal across the Internet.  I believe the Canonical Tag pointing back to our website helps as Davanur mentioned.  The content of the page is fairly short -- only one screen.  Kurt's idea of using an abstract on /foo and linking to /nov05 would work if the page contained more content. I believe we will leave things as they are based on these two responses.  It is easy for us to change these design points (the use of Canonical on every page for example) with little effort as the website is dynamically generated. Thanks again! Greg