Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Google + is great for increasing brand awareness and increasing traffic,  but you will need to  build up your network circles and update the page with fresh and regular content posts. Set up a google page for business embed  a + 1 button on your website for people to provide your site content, article video etc. with a  citation  the more you get the better Google registers these as how popular your content / brand is which  has an impact on your SEO.. Go here for more info on why you should have a google page for business http://www.seomoz.org/blog/why-every-marketer-now-needs-a-google-strategy To setup a page visit : http://www.google.com/+/business/ for step instructions see: http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/how-to-set-up-a-google-page-for-your-business/ Hope this helps, Good luck

Shane, Thanks again for the response.  I agree those pages aren't the strongest, and don't have a ton of great content.  A few of my other sites have more than 2-3 articles, and the content is rich with media. I guess time and content will tell.  If after a few weeks of adding some new content and building a few links nothing has improved, I will start to worry.  It just seems shocking that one of my sites that has been holding the 6th position for it's exact match phrase (and has some links/social) dropped completely out of the top 50. The sites and pages are still indexed, but only come up when you search the exact URL. Vinnie

It's just one user right now, but we know many people want this option and it's on our wishlist. You can see the help desk response to this question at https://seomoz.zendesk.com/entries/20199538-is-there-a-way-i-could-add-another-user-to-access-my-pro-account

I have used disallow parameters for all kinds of things; you can set it up and test it in Webmaster tools under "crawler access" before you implement on your site to confirm it's done properly.  There have been a few times I've had to tweak it to get exactly what I wanted. I'd test with the "/" in front of it as one option - again, just in testing, to see if there's any difference in results. Since Google already got a hold of it, it'll take a lot of time to see results but don't be discouraged since they have to re-crawl and figure it out. Good luck

Thanks guys - much appreciated.  Personally I didn't think it mattered which way it went round, however just interested to hear if there was a good reason for this.  The a href= example is a good example of how it shouldn't really matter.

Thanks Alan, The internal tracking was added through the cms but unfortunately canonical can't be added in the same way currently, and will require time from the web team - this is why I am investigating a way round this as an interim, but yes agree canonical is the way to go long-term. Cheers.

Hi Sema, I am glad I could answer your question. I wish you the best with your venture. Sincerely, Thomas Zickell QuiZick Internet Marketing

Are you running a content management system like Wordpress? There may be some plugins there that can help tell you. Otherwise, I'm not sure. I'd try possibly a Google Alert for the query site:yourdomainname.com and see if that turns up anything.

I think it may be important to state that the only real "ding" is within your Analytics. Google does not use Analytics data in its search algorithm. So if you are monitoring bounce rate for that purpose, worry not.* More than likely we're looking at a tracking anomaly of some kind, that, at its very worst, is throwing off your Analytics data. I might add that the "bounce rate" that DOES influence the search algorithm isn't really bounce rate, but dwell time. See what Duane Forrester wrote about here: http://www.bing.com/community/Site_Blogs/b/webmaster/archive/2011/08/02/how-to-build-quality-content.aspx This metric is calculated internally by the search engines, and does not cull from Analytics data. Additionally, it is one of thousands of signals that influence ranking, and likely a relatively small one overall.

Do you mean that there are not enough pages in the index, or that it doesn't show up as high in the results page as you would like? I'd verify your site in Google and Bing webmaster tools, and run an SEOmoz crawl. That will help alert you to any technical errors on your site and will be a good start.

Do you mean they are marked as duplicate content by SEOMoz, or they seem to be getting treated as the same page by google? I assume you mean the first? If it is SEOMoz, then I am thinking that there may not be enough content on there to let the bot know that it is different. None of the pages linked above have a large amount of content, and so a bot may think they are too similar to be considered completely different pages. At least that may be likely based on the content to code ratio... That is just a guess though, so take it with a grain of salt.

I'm not sure I fully understand why you need a spoof.  If you put the 301 rewrite condition in the .htaccess file, Apache will read that before doing anything else with the page, is doesn't matter if the extension will execute on Linux because it is redirected before anything happens with the actual file.

Thanks for the comment. I was able to get them to make the changes, but I think I have made some new enemies. Oh well, I will move on in a few months anyhow. Thanks again, Joe

Hi Ankit It appears as if you have Yoast SEO installed in your main site, but All In One installed in the blog sub-domain. I do recommend Yoast as best plugin. The trouble is, there are a few ways to handle the pagination of category pages. I don't think you need to actually do it the way Matt has it on his blog (i've never even seen that before, ironically, with the canonical to first page). The primary concern is to noindex all pages beyond page #1 of category pages, which you have done with the All In One Plugin. Ultimately, I like Yoast's complete setup though, which when set correctly in the settings, does this; Category Page One - _http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/_ Canonical - http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/ robots index (note you're supposed to leave out robots all together if it just says "index" but no harm done if its there) rel next - http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/page/2 then... Category Page Two and Beyond - _http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/page/2_ Canonical - http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/page/2 robots noindex rel prev - http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/ rel next - http://blog.travelindia365.com/category/travel-news/page/3 That would be the recommended settings to go for, I've never had any issues with them. - Thanks Chris and Gareth for chiming in too!! -Dan

Technically, the trailing slash version is the "correct" version. Almost all modern browsers automatically add it, so the practical implications are pretty small, but I think your consultant's essentially correct. As @walrus said, you're probably talking about in the ballpark of 1%, so I wouldn't obsess about it.

Thanks, that's helpful. We've got a flat URL structure and we don't have category info in the product urls so we're all good there I'll aim for somewhere in the middle, where the category page can introduce and explain the range, then there's a product page for each product model, with some drop down choices for fitments. That system was well received in our customer tests and seems to make most sense to me. Just a minor point, but you might want to check your definition of an SKU btw.. The whole point of a 'stock keeping unit' is that each sku relates to a specific variation of a product, and this can be used for stock control and purchasing. So in your example of the pants, although I can see that there's a parent product which all the variations belong to and it makes sense for this parent product to have the product page with the 6 choices on, I would expect each of the 6 product options to have their own individual sku in the back end of the store. regards, James