Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thank you for the response. I ended up disabling pagination on the category pages (as there aren't  more than 20-30 posts per category) to fix the duplicate content issues caused by paginating each page 5-10 times with the same 1000 word article on each page. I then fixed the author page Titles and Description issue by adding some dynamic tags provided by Yoast in the Author page. Simply changing it from "All Posts by (Author) - Site Name" to "All Posts by (Author) - Page 2 of 36 - Site Name" dynamically, it fixed the duplicate titles completely. Same with the meta description.. As for the home page links, I changed the linking structure entirely. Instead of random posts per category, it now has a link to each category page with the 5 most recently added articles per category under them with a link, image, and text snippet so the page will be more "static" for a while and provide some link flow to my new content, but still update as i add content. I then moved the top 5 posts of all time in the sidebar followed by the most trending article from the last 7 days (by view count). Finally, I customized my 404 page to show the top 3 articles from my top 3 categories after reading an article about keeping your 404 page relevant and helpful to your viewers just in case I have a bad link come in. I made all of these changes about a week ago and am waiting to see any changes in rankings, but I think, at least from a reader's viewpoint, the site looks much cleaner and easier to navigate. It didn't make a whole lot of sense to just randomly display whatever the theme felt like every refresh. Thanks again!

Hi  eduapps, Did you find Roman's detailed response helpful? If so, please mark it as a "Good Answer." Thanks! Christy

^^ Ayup.

Hi Healthmate Google will choose whichever page has the content that matches user intent most closely in relation to the key phrase or word typed into search. So if a user searches 'How much is Aspirin online?' and one page answers that perfectly then that page will show higher. If the user searches 'Aspirin' and both pages mention the word you will be in Neverland - in the far lower reaches of Google. The best thing is not to produce any duplicate content - if you do then rel=canonical to the best version of the page. Regards Nigel

Hi belton It's perfectly OK to do cross-domain canonicals which is essentially the same as saying source:. What you are actually saying is that these two pages are the same as each other, don't rank that one, rank this instead. so for example: abc.com/page1 has a duplicate, abc123.com/page1 Put this code on abc123.com/page1 rel="canonical" href="abc.com/page1" /> Google will likely not rank abc123.com/page1 and only rank abc.com/page1. The result in my experience is that abc.com/page1 will rocket northward in search now you have taken the duplicate away! I hope that helps, Best Regards Nigel

Be aware that a ccTLD is meant for people in that country, it does not mean it is targeting all people who speak a language of the same name. Spanish is spoken in more countries than Spain, so if you wish to reach all Spanish speakers, I would recommend a .com site (which is country agnostic) and having English and Spanish language content there. If you wish to target Spain citizens, the .es domain is perfect. The way you have it set up above though, what will most likely happen (but this depends on your industry, competition, etc) is that the English language queries coming from Spain will see the .com version of your site as they should be searching in English. If someone in the US or Mexico is looking in Spainsh, they might not see the .es site as it is targeted to Spain, not Spanish. That doesn't mean they won't see it at all - if there isn't much competition they will see the .es if it is the best result for their search, but .es is meant to Spain based businesses and you can't change the country targeting on a ccTLD like .es You can try to help Google understand with HREFlang as Joe said, but do understand that you'll be sending mixed signals with a .es domain if you are trying to get Spanish speaking searchers from other countries. Hope that makes sense!

Hey thank you for your answer, really appreciate it.

Did you try to add a third hreflang annotation like this? You can assign more than 1 hreflang annotation to an Url. Maybe you could test this idea for a subfolder that you can easily track on Search Console.

Need to be clear on the purpose of "no-index".  Search engines will still crawl the page, but in theory will not be published in the index.  Some search engines may still choose to index the page despite no-index tag.  Also that page will still be publicly accessible on your website. As already noted a couple of times I would be very slow to noindex any page. I can't think of very many applications where it would be used. The way I view it is either something is public or its private, if it's public you properly want search engines to find it, or if it's private it should be locked away behind a username and password.

Hi romaro, From my understanding, using these tags as part of a mobile XML sitemap is not necessary and in fact, Google don't recommend having a separate mobile sitemap: https://www.seroundtable.com/google-mobile-sitemaps-20137.html Instead, for a dynamically served site, the important things are: Use the Vary HTTP header to signal your changes depending on the user-agent. Detect user-agent strings correctly. You can read more about Google's guidelines for dynamic serving here: https://developers.google.com/search/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/dynamic-serving

I got it. By the way I love how your alphabet looks like. I don't understand even a single sign but it looks good... Maybe there is an issue with your code/menu, but I have no chance of understanding anything with an alphabet I don't know... Idea: Add a sitemap that shows Google all you pages and the hierarchy: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/183668?hl=en. In a sitempa you can also assign you pages a relativ importance (score). I guess this should help. Cheers, Cesare

Thanks for all your feedback. I don't think we have any technical problem. I also don't think its due to Fred. Can you  guys think of anything else that might be issue as of now in the website that is causing the issue and due that it is not  performing well in google search.

So that's sort of my initial thought in using the rel=canonical tag for its stated purpose. But I know that Google is pretty liberal with its understanding (say in using rel=canonical for individual events in a series) of user intent. So my example would be: if I had a gray washtub and a black washtub - two separate products because they have different dimensions, capacities, etc, I would want to point any value back to the category "washtub" where both these products are listed. Do you still think that would be frowned upon?

Thanks a lot for your advice, James!

Sweet! Thanks, guys! That's a solid quite, EGOL: "Don't build your house on land that belongs to someone else."

Bump. Nothing ?

+1 on James' response regarding the fact that positions 73 and 90 really don't make much of a difference (few-to-no people will go that far to look for results). There are a few reasons the right page (or any page at all) won't rank for your keyword. Other results have greater page authority (or come from sites with greater domain authorities)–you can ID these in Moz's Open Site Explorer, or with the Mozbar extension for Chrome, by looking at the top results (top 7 or 10) for "mobile column lifts." Other pages provide more/better information that fits users' search intents–while this is largely subjective, take a look at the top seven-to-10 ranking pages for your keyword term and ID the differences in content (compared to yours). Are they longer? Do they link to valuable follow-up information (either on or off the publishing domain)? Is the quality of the writing better than your own? What about any featured imagery or multimedia/video content? Your competitors may have more linking root domains pointing to their whole domain or to their ranking page. You can check this in Moz's Open Site Explorer, as well as AHREFs.

Thanks to Donald's post, we could improve the value we get out of moz.com. As our keywords are phone numbers and the "best" numbers are changing a lot, we are now updating our keywords on a weekly basis. This gives us a much more relevant visibility value.

From my experience, Flipping Book works well for SEO. It provides HTML 5 content which you can integrate into your website. This will help with the time spent on the page and with content as well.  Therefore, what I would suggest is to implement the HTML versions and then offer a download button for the PDF. I think the users will enjoy this change and it will be good for crawlers as well. You can see an example of our implementation here -> https://www.catalog-az.ro/. Let me know if my answer helps.