Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Ryan, Thanks for the quick feedback.  This clears up things for me a bit. Thanks, Stephen

Hi, Ryan has given a great answer there. On the subject of what you will see in the search engine result pages, it does not have to be an either/or situation. It is quite common to see multiple pages in a site appear in the same results. The most important thing is that by optimizing specific pages for keywords that are relevant to their content you have more chance that visitors will arrive on a page that gives them what they are looking for. This is much better for the user experience and likely to help with conversions. Congrats on the new job, sounds like you're a natural! Sha

Hi Karthik, I'd recommend posting a new Q&A question about this, as this is now a few months old and a bit buried. You might hold off until Tuesday US time, since we have a holiday tomorrow and there won't be nearly as many people online. When you do write your question, it would be helpful to add to your post what types of errors you get when you try to implement this -- just what you have tried, and what the results are. I also see that your site doesn't redirect non-www to www. If you want to fix that too, now would be a good time to ask about it. Keri

Agreed and thanks, unfortunately, the host provider is anything but a one man op. Its huge. Moving to a tier four farm in Nov/Dec. Major company, in house phone, email, chat support. Etc. As to Sha......I don't care if her answer came from martians, it was one of the best I have seen. (Note to moz staff......Hint, Hint)  

hopefully that is correct.  I would hate to get knocked down just because I took myself out of the wayback machine.  I have had the domain registered in my name since 2006 so I should be ok then.

Short term loses are to be expected unless you are a serious player. It could take several weeks, perhaps a month or two to recover fully but it should do in time. As ever, I would now concentrate on building new links & updating any matured links to the moved content and the 301's will take care of themselves. All the best, Anthony

Thanks Keri, Yep, it was the Db I was searching for, but the site was a GoDaddy install and was moved to different server because of software install issues. So, having checked Wayback, Google cache and searched through the files without finding a Database, I think I can just refill my mug and settle in to write some new content. To be honest, that's not really so bad - I'd rather start from scratch than rewrite bad copy any day! Less than a dozen pages, so its all good. Most importantly, I now know that I am still sane and not as stupid as I was starting to fear, so thanks for helping resolve that! Have a great weekend! Sha

Hi Doug, I'm going back and looking at older questions. Can you share with us what you decided and how it turned out?

A cleaner way to do this is to use a print css file. In your HTML you call it like so: <link type="text/css" rel="stylesheet" media="print" href="our-print-version.css"> Then you have only one document for both print and screen, and you can 301 one of your duplicates back to the original.

Thanks for your response Tom. Essentially there is only one query string variation that is live and linked to for the 10 pounds url. /10-pounds-products/     =>     /10-pounds-productss/?display=cost&value=10 The text content is identical on both URLs however the query results are obviously different. I don't think there is a way to remove the canonical tag aside from removing the plugin so I may have to go with changing it to the query string. Ideally I would like for users to see the non-query version in the SERPs and the click through to the the query version of the page. Not sure that's possible now though I will speak to the developer to see if this issue is avoidable. Thanks again Rosh

An SEO who thinks adding thousands of useless pages will do a website good? Get rid of them, or (preferably) get them re-educated!

As long as the content is found on your website first before anything else you should be ok with the panda update. Regarding the datafeed and resellers or affiliates, its just the way it is, they run the risk of being flagged with duplicate content. There cats and sub cats should contain unique content then its up to them to either block Google from the duplicate content pages which will 99% of the time be product pages, which means know long tail keyword terms or roll with it and combat it with different SEO methods. Far as I can see there is know work around, what your describing is a overall problem for all resellers and affiliates.

Thank you Daylan, the 301 help instantly. Great suggestion.

AceSEF is designed to handle this problem. I recommend you ask this question on the AceSEF forums. SEOmoz is a fantastic resource for SEO information, but if your question is directly related to a particular extension for a particular CMS, the developer's site should be a far better resource for information.

Analyze Page, within the SEOmoz tool bar, offers an HTML text character count. This isn't scalable in the way you describe though. I also checked a desktop crawling tool that I use, Screaming Frog, but it doesn't provide that feature. Sorry.

Yessir.  SEOmoz is just trying to have your back - there's no need for concern whatsoever.

I don't believe that would work as the results pages display different content. I think I've got my head round this and its quite simple really, mainly an error on my judgement. We've chosen to no index the dynamically created pages, but leave the follow on so that the actual jobs still get some juice and display in Googles index. I made the mistake of assuming that by no indexing the search results this would also block the googlebot from finding the actual individual job pages.