Welcome to the Q&A Forum

There are varied opinions with regards to using CDN for media. But the general rule of thumb is to use CDN only if you have a massive number of images or media on your site. In that case, using CDN will certainly increase your site load speed, and as we know, loading speed is a ranking factor for SEO. However, if you do not have too many images in your site, setting up a CDN shouldn't be a priority of yours. Even if you were to set up a CDN, you should take note of how to set it up properly on a self-hosted sub domain. Here's a guide that will be relevant to setting up a CDN: http://seo-hacker.com/implement-selfhosted-cdn-site-speed/ Hope that helps!

Good luck.  Would love to get a follow-up on this later to see how it all works out.  Either post here or send a PM.

Hi Noah, The short answer is that a link that contains the rel="nofollow" attribute is not counted by Google and therefore, it wouldn't affect your rankings. You can read more on the official position of Google and nofollow here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/96569?hl=en Putting that to one side, the link itself is a little "messy" and it is plausible that it wouldn't count anyway even if it didn't have the nofollow attribute include. The reason for this is that it looks like the link is powered by JavaScript and when clicked on, the website pulls your URL from a database and sends the user to that URL. This is indicated by the "id=295" part of the link which indicates that you're listed in a database as entry 295 and the URL is pulled from that when clicked on. Google crawlers are getting better and better at understanding links that are like this, but it is hard to know for sure if it would be counted if the nofollow attribute wasn't present. I hope that helps a bit! Paddy

Hi Pugh, Glad to hear it! Yes, you should also implement the tag on your homepages.

Good point.  If a new domain is able to rank as well as the old site before the 301 redirects are put in place, that's very compelling evidence.

I'm not quite understanding the purposes of having two pages here. I took a quick glance, but it looks like the 2 pages are two different views of the same content. I would just consolidate the pages into one by 301 redirecting the text-based view to the graphical view that way everyone wins. -Mike

Hello Ahmed When you look at things like this, I think the first question has to be what is 'stuffing' (how many keywords vs. overall text)? Next, you have to ask is the only thing that is going on KW stuffing. The entire "competitors are doing this or that as a way to rank," is usually a poor way to look at your site or your competitors. But to answer your question, I have seen tons of sites/pages with text that I could not even understand due to KW overuse. If a lot in that vertical are doing the same thing, you may see many ranking. I have not seen Google utilize a manual penalty for KW stuffing alone. I would expect the effect to be the result of the algorithm. If it is a vertical where there are a lot of affiliates trying to simply push traffic and where it is very very competitive, you could see sites/pages with all types of incorrect (according to TOS) SEO. The effect of them moving down or off in these situations is often algorithmic and if most are doing the same, the effect is less measurable. Best

you have an exact match domain first I want to ask you have you been told by Google you've been penalized? if you have not and you're talking about adding it to valid directories of course you can. If they are spam directories something not relevant to your website and would not help the end-user then by all means do not submit. There are a lot of exact match domains out there some of them have gone down some of them are still ranking very high. If you're worried that doing something that you feel is the right thing to do will get you caught then it sounds like you have a guilty conscience but I don't want to guess on that. I would simply check out any directory you are going to submit to and make sure it is something valid like the Yellow Pages. Sincerely, Thomas

good info cheers

use robots.txt vs the meta tags - robots.txt is preferred.

Thank you Gentlemen!!!

Thanks Chaps !! Have a great weekend CHeers Dan

I asked this same question a little while back and got some great responses: http://moz.com/community/q/shared-hosting-bad-for-seo-exp-godaddy Hope this helps! Kyle

Thanks for your suggestions chaps, I will take onboard what you have said and complete an audit.

Hi PH digital labs, After working on our project we decided to write about how to do a Parallax scrolling, Responsive web design and SEO website. You can read about it here. http://moz.com/ugc/website-design-wars-seo-agencies-vs-web-design-agencies-worldwide-trends Thought you might like it Carla

Thanks for mentioning our Content Strength Audit. I would of suggested Wordpress SEO for the easiest solution to this problem but It seems it's already been suggested and seems you're using it.

We updated this today to include a new type of content to look out for... Broken Content (Extremely Dangerous) – Broken Content refers to pages that are broken in some way. Ask yourself if a visitor arrived at your page, would they notice something was wrong with the code? This typically includes broken links (internal and external), broken images, embedded content that no longer works and improper use of HTML or CSS. We added this after seeing that Google was typically filtering/unfavorable of "broken content". Let us know what you think!

Just to clarify.  You have a main page or node page, and off of that node page you have various comment pages that are commenting on the node page.   The comment pages are canonical linking to the main page. I would say this does not make sense.  You would want the comment pages to rank potentially or at least add more to the main page.   I would consider making the comments on the same page as the node page - much like they do on Moz.  Or if you had to break them out, I would make them paginated pages off the main page and then use rel next prev to show the relation to the main page. Google treats the canonical like a 301 and it usually means that something is a copy of the original.  As new comments are not copies of the original and actually may add to the main page, using the canonical does not make sense. Different example, I use canonicals for the printer friendly version of a page. It is a duplicate and I want to make it clear why and which one is more important for ranking.

Have had this question before. It's not wrong, at all. In fact I'd argue having canonical on every page is a very good thing.