Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I agree with the thin content assessment. Below is what I wrote before I read your comment a second time. I'm looking at interior pages on the site, and my question is "if I were Google, what benefit do I get from including this site in the index?". What does this site offer that's not already on the web? I visited a few random pages. Several of the offers were expired, some as much as a couple of years ago. The product information is taken from another site, and is duplicated all across the web. The blog hasn't had a new post since January. There is very little to this site that is not from a data feed, from what I can tell. Why should Google include this site in their results, when other sites can offer more information? On the technical side, don't include "all" in the robots meta tag, it's not an option (see http://www.robotstxt.org/meta.html). I don't know if it's causing any problems, but it doesn't need to be there.

I took a quick look a quick look at the plugin and it seems to explain what each area is for right below the boxes you are asking about: Canonical: "The canonical link is shown on the archive page for this term." This allows you to modify the canonical output on the archive page for any specified category. Breadcrumbs: "The Breadcrumbs title is used in the breadcrumbs where this category appears." You are able to modify the breadcrumb output accordingly for SEO purposes in regards to the specified category. While I like the vast majority of the functions on the Wordpress SEO plugin, some of these options seem redundant, or would only be needed if poor site structure/naming was implemented originally implemented.  If that is the case your time may be better spent correcting that. There is a good chance it would be best to contact Joost directly since this is more of a support question for him than SEOmoz, but I hope my answers clarified a few things for you.

Sounds like you need to be looking at implementing some canonical tags, here is a blog post from Rand Fishkin when this advancement was made, probably a good starting point to launch your understanding into canonical tags http://www.seomoz.org/blog/canonical-url-tag-the-most-important-advancement-in-seo-practices-since-sitemaps

You can test the robots.txt file in Google Webmaster tools. It's under "Crawler access" in the "Site Configuration" section. Input the robots.txt content and the directories you want to test and it will give you feedback on the status.

It seems to me you're a bit confused between canonical URLs and URLs that have been rewritten. What a canonical URL does is telling the search engines what version of your URL is that canonical one, which can for example exclude some parameters. One the actual url www.example.org/special/?foo=bar&test=3 you can tell the search engines that www.example.org/special/ is your URL (and therefor the parameters foo and test will be ignored and won't create any duplicate content). But, these canonical URLs have to exist! To create new URLs, you should either look if the CMS (Content Management System) you're using has the option to switch on static URLs (sometimes called SEF URLs). If you're using a custom system, or your CMS doesn't support static URLs, you can search google for terms such as: mod_rewrite, static urls php, htaccess url rewrite.

I would recommend reviewing any content including your images for their names, alt tags, and anything which may indicate your content is adult oriented. If some of your competitors are succeeding in an area where you are not, I would suggest taking a closer look at their site and noting any differences. A bit of conversation around this topic: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=5515ba22bd52d12e&hl=en http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/021499.html

In my limited experience it's about clarity, not density. EGOL  makes a good point, if your page is clear and well written about its subject, in general you should be alright.

Ryan has a great idea. Think about who will link to your site. Will people want to link to a "cheap flights" website or would they prefer to link to a magazine?

One advantage of using the first type of URL (the absolute URL) is that if people scrape (copy) your content, the links within the content will go back to your site.

I don't think this is correct. ? is an attempt at using a RegEx in Robots file which I don't think works. Further, if it was a properly formed regex, it would be ? is a special character for the user agent to mean all.  For the disallow line, I believe you have to use a specific directory or page. http://www.robotstxt.org/robotstxt.html I could be wrong, but the info on this site has been my understanding from the past too.

You do not want to no-follow the image link. There are two methods which you can use: 1. Re-order your html code so the anchor text link appears first. Feel free to use CSS or whatever means necessary to achieve this effect. For example, on my site my navigation bar is located at the bottom of the html but it still appears at the top of my site. 2. You can add an anchor link to the end of your html. Example: mysite.com/example#. Several people have theorized this method works and some have offered test results as evidence. I would use the first method if possible but otherwise this is an option.

Use relative paths, and you lose all link juice when someone scrapes your content and reposts it.

Alright, sounds like I should keep the URL structure. My reason in thinking about removing it was that I don't really want to have the menu structure of: Services Web Design SEO Internet Marketing I want Web Design, SEO, and Internet Marketing to be main menu items to draw attention to them. Maybe I'll leave the services page but only link to it from the footer. I guess that provides flexibility for the future if I add services.

I'm pretty sure that's what's happening. So mendely.com is a book mark approach to tabs, as opposed to the javascript ? variable and then bookmark approach here: http://ugmo.com/?quicktabs_1=1#quicktabs-1 I can see how the content is all on the page. Is there any dilution with the bookmark approach? To what extent is http://www.mendeley.com/#mobile different than http://www.mendeley.com/ ?

Hi, I work in SEO for the Australian market. My advice is if you host e-commerce websites then I would advise to host the website in Australia, you want speed you want to host it where the user base is. Furthermore if you are looking for hosting deals many Australian companies now offer good rates, I use Ventra IP I am quite happy with them. Also in regards to power of .com.au, it is far better then using a geo targeted .com in my experience. Hope this helps. Kind Regards, James.

well, i read a post that said that, the second link to a page has no anchor text value. e.g. if the anchor text DOGS, links to pageX, and the anchor text DOG COLLARS links to pagex (further down), then only the first anchor text will be applied to the link vector. So, on a typical YouTube style right nav bar, you have the thumbnail and the title clickable. Given that the title text would have no value, i simply made the thumbnail the only clickable element on the whole right nav bar assembly. Good idea of bad idea? Thanks!