Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi, I think there is only 1 redirect chain happening and that seems to be from the http://stickylife.com URL which redirects to the https://stickylife.com and then redirects to https://www.stickylife.com Could you place a redirect on the http://stickylife.com URL to redirect straight to the https://www.stickylife.com URL? Here is a more detailed article into how to fix redirect chains https://moz.com/blog/heres-how-to-keep-301-redirects-from-ruining-your-seo If one URL is gaining a higher page authority than the other, have you considered placing a canonical tag to said URL explaining to Google what URL you want to rank?

The problem is that the page I was hoping to get indexed is https://www.psglearning.com/catalog/productdetails/9781284060454 but the page that is in the SERP is www.psglearning.com/sitemapcustom/sitemap.gz .

Tx Tim for the answer, it make sense. I explain you in more details my site structure: site.com/destinations - hub for all the destinations site.com/destinations/tanzania - single destination page site.com/tours/tanzania-tour-1 - single tour page site.com/travel-category/cultural-tours - a second way tour are organized, for travel category. So lets say i dont want to sell anymore the destination Tanzania and all his related tours. In the case i want to keep the ranking for the destination and tours i would need to 301 redirect the destination Tanzania to the more general page site.com/destinations and the site.com/tours/tanzania-tour-1 page to site.com/travel-category/cultural-tours since this is a cultural tour. Does this make sense?

Great! I'll mark this as resolved then. Craig

If you want to Redirect via Windows 7 IIS so just follow some steps. <configuration></configuration> <match url=".*"></match> <add input="{HTTP_HOST}" pattern="^phbalancedpool.com$"></add> <action type="Redirect" url="http://www.phbalancedpool.com/{R:0}"  redirecttype="Permanent"></action> <location path="pool-repair/pool_repair_arizona.html"></location> <location path="About%20Pool%20Cleaning%20Arizona/About_Page_Pool_Cleaning_Arizona.html"></location> <location path="specials/Pool%20Cleaning%20and%20Pool%20Repair%20Specials.html"></location> <location path="service-areas-in-arizona/Chandler_Gilbert_Mesa_Queen%20Creek_San%20Tan%20Valley.html"></location> Also Downlaod Directx 12 for graphics then redirect it.

If you can do it: Yes! If it's easy: Quite easy if you know basic JavaScript. If it's a good option: Maybe, but probably not. You can use GTM to quickly make some changes but if you want to make more structural changes you definitely don't want to use GTM as a way to hack your site around.

I would concentrate on creating the most logical site structure from a user perspective and less on the length of URLs. That combined with highly descriptive, clear and concise Meta Page titles will make your site rock.

you can use as many strutured data as you can for google is better 1. Does Google consider both of them? **   R > **Example you have a hotel with schemas for  Hotel and Local Business. Google consider both but if you it will show just the data that relevant for the search query 2.  Is that OK to have a few Items for one type of schema on the page? **R >**You can include multiple structured data objects on a page, as long as the information is appropriate to that page, and applies to the user-visible content of the page. When you have multiple entities on a page, we recommend that you mark up all entities on that page to help Google algorithms better understand and index your content. For example: A recipe page might have text describing the recipe along with an accompanying video. Each of these types should be marked separately with schema.org/Recipe and schema.org/VideoObject respectively. A category page listing several different products (or recipes, videos, or any other type). Each entity should be marked up using the relevant schema.org type, such as schema.org/Product for product category pages. Marking up just one category entity from all listed on the page is against our guidelines. A video play page might have related videos embedded in a separate section on the page. In this case, mark up the main video as well as the related videos. For more information https://developers.google.com/search/docs/guides/intro-structured-data

Hi Aua, The word you may have been looking for is "reciprocal" linking (you link to me so I link to you). Reciprocal linking isn't/wasn't really a best practice for SEO it's something that SEO's used to do because it was easier to get a link that way. This was used a lot before the conversation in SEO (in a broad sense) really turned towards providing value instead of just trying to game Google. It's actually defined by Google as a no-no (if used excessively) on their support pages: "The following are examples of link schemes which can negatively impact a site's ranking in search results:...... _Excessive link exchanges ("Link to me and I'll link to you") or partner pages exclusively for the sake of cross-linking" _ In example it used to work like this; I reach out to a small business in my area who I want a link from. I explain it's for my SEO and that the more relevant local links I have the more trusted I appear to Google. In lieu of providing any real value or reason to link to my website (such as killer content that might be useful to the businesses users) I would offer to link back to them if they linked to me. That way, both of our websites were getting a link and Google will love us both. To summarise; No it wasn't best practice (never was as far as I am aware) You don't need to link back to the article

Unfortunately most of the largest examples are not shared publicly. You could go looking for external data (e.g. SEMrush / searchmetrics / similarweb) around the time of big / well-known mergers. There have been a few over the years - but I don't know off-hand what historical data there is available. The biggest I remember being interested in was when Adobe bought Macromedia back in the day (but there won't be historical data going back that far, and anyway everything has changed since then). Aside from "outside looking in" approaches, the biggest public case study I could find is this one. Hope something there helps.

Hi everyone, I have a related question about personalisation too which is a variation on the theme but which I would appreciate some help with. There is a project afoot within my company to "personalise" the user experience by presenting pages to users which better respond to their interests. That is to say that, when a user visits our page about "tennis-shoes", the next time they visit the homepage they will be presented with a homepage which focusses on tennis-shoes. So far so good. However rather than personalising certain elements of the homepage, the idea is to intercept those users, and 301 them to an entirely different URL, completly hidden from Google, which will contain entirely different content focussing only on shoes. The top navegation will remain the same. This sounds like a massive breach of Quality Guidelines on at least two counts to me. It reeks of cloacking and "sneaky redirects", and I am very concerned this will do us way more harm than good. I'm guessing that the correct way of going about this would be to either generate a great "shoes" page and allow users to navigate to it, visit it, and do whatever they want with it, or to personalise the homepage including some dynamic elements on the same URL, without hiding things from Google or frustrating users by not allowing them to access the page they are trying to access. Any feedback from the community would be a great help. Thanks a lot!

Will do, thank you Martin.

Hi Furseo I would say that it has the potential to affect your SEO as you are not able to close the pop up without selecting a city. I do not live in any of the cities listed so I can't navigate your website. Google will penalise sites which it deems are obscured behind an intrusive pop up. You can read more about interstitial ads and pop ups here: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2016/08/helping-users-easily-access-content-on.html If you want to ask then have a pop up that can be closed by the user. Having a sniffer on the site is not always a good idea as servers can be hosted in different locations to the user. Kind Regards Nigel

Whoa, this is a weird one. I saw that you posted this on Google's forums as well, and they suggested that this might be the Japanese keyword hack. Did you look into that? If that's not it, did you try loading the URLs that are showing up on the Wayback Machine? It's possible that someone who owned this site before your client created these pages. Either way, the answer is to double check that your 404 pages really are 404ing. If that doesn't remove them from the index fast enough, you can actually create all of those pages, with a noindex tag, add them all to a sitemap, and submit them to Google. But the 404ing is really your long term solution. Good luck!

Hello! There are three parts to this answer. Firstly, your technical setup. Are you confident that the website's SEO and technical configuration is appropriate and correct? For example, are you using hreflang tagging to map out the relationships between your pages, languages and territories - and if so, is it implemented completely and correctly (and, in conjunction with correct canonical tag behaviours), etc? Are you also using Google Search Console to manage your international targeting? Secondly, the markets themselves. As Igor hints at, it's important to understand that these territories, markets and search results are all very different. Your competitors are likely to vary by market, in terms of their physical presence, their marketing efforts and effectiveness, and their own international SEO + targeting strategies. More significantly, the users and markets themselves are different - user behaviour, preference, market demands, price sensitivity, and a myriad of other factors can affect how well a brand performs in one locale vs another. I'd spend some time looking at who's beating you, and to try to understand (from the perspective of a prospective consumer from the market in question) what might be better about their proposition, pricing or other factors. Thirdly, your linking and promotion strategies. Is your website naturally acquiring links, citation and social coverage in each of the territories you're competing in? And, what tactics and strategies are you using to grow their authority and footprint? The way in which Google might assess links and these kinds of signals is likely to vary by country, in comparison to what your competitors are doing, and in relation to how narrow or broad your international coverage is. I'd spend some time assessing - again, from the perspective of a prospective consumer for the regions in question - how well-represented and cited your brand is from reputable sources in those territories. Sorry that there isn't a simple, easy answer - but there are plenty of places to explore, and I'd be happy to help you probe further!

Hi James, I don't think you have anything to worry about here. I'm assuming you publish the content on your WordPress site first, before you send out the web-based email? If that's the case, Google is pretty good at identifying the original publisher of content and devaluing other web pages that feature the same content. If you are worried about it and can easily add "noindex" tags to these web emails, do it. If you can't "noindex" them, I wouldn't be concerned about any duplicate content "penalties". Cheers, David

Very helpful, thanks!