Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi localwork! If Ryan answered your question, would you mind marking his response as a "Good Answer?" It'll get him some bonus MozPoints, and it helps us keep track of things.

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to do, but we typically recommend downloading all of the links from OSE, Majestic, ahrefs, and Google Search Console--and then putting them all into your own spreadsheet in Microsoft Excel. If you're wanting to look at anchor text data, you can combine that all into one spreadsheet (except for the GSC link data). You might also try combining all that link data into Link Research Tools' link detox tool to review the links. That way you can include all of the Google Search Console link data.

This is the second question you have posted around a site and Panda issues. From "reset project of a site caught in Panda" I have to assume what you did was got a new site and tried to get it to rank. You state that you tried not to use any redirects, but the bigger issue is did you reuse content? was the site "spammy" to start with and is it still "spammy?" Are you in an area like payday loans that Google is really more careful with today? Etc. From looking at both questions, I have to think there was something wrong initially and that you have in someway brought that with you to the new site. I do not believe you are suffering from any type of sandbox effect for 6 months. Best

Spanish, I think you really need to consider what you are doing and why you are doing it. First, a manual penalty means you are on Googles radar and you are outside their terms of service in some way. If your decision is to get a new domain then what you should do is put the old one in the trash and forget it ever happened. You are starting from square one if you are smart IMO. Why? because if it is a penalty around linking and you redirect to a new domain, you are going to carry that wait to the next site. That doesn't mean that the penalty will show up on your new domain at point just because of the old, but there is no real value in the links so why risk it? There are just too many reasons not to try and save the old and move it to the new with redirects. BUT, is there a reason you would not simply address the penalty? Maybe it is cost as cleanup is expensive; if so, you weigh cost of cleanup versus cost of rebuild to all new site with new domain. Second, an "algorithmic penalty" is something we say from time to time, but if you are using that as a line of thinking - "the algorithm has in some way penalized us" - you are then setting yourself up for further pain down the road IMO. With a site failing to rank because you have bad links, poor content, ads everywhere, I suggest you not look at it as a penalty. Look at is as: "What must we do in order to grow our site in value to our customer and in ranking against our competitors?" If you believe you have a "penalty" of sorts you are really saying things are not as good as they could be. Why not change things? If it is linking, disavow bad domains and links and move on. If it is Panda in your thinking, what can you do to change the content, etc.? Often, when this type of question arises there have been a series of missteps by a site owner trying to shortcut really building a web property. If there were true short cuts without risk, I can tell you I would have found them or learned of them from people on various forums like Moz. I simply do not know of any. Clean things up and move on or start over and move on. I think that is the only choice you face. I wish it were easier for all of us.  Best

The page is indexed in Google just fine, if you use a site:https://www.globecar.com/en/montreal-truck-rentals query it is there. Most likely, though, there is an issue with duplicate content. The is not a lot of text on that page, and that may be very close to other pages on the site. I would check siteliner.com to see if the page has duplicate content similar to other pages on the site.

I don't believe they currently do this. So reorganizing, rewording + adding additional info/links would make the resource pages even better. Just be sure to give credit where it's due.

Hi Martijn, thank you very much. Now I am absolutely confident to build my own silo As far as I understood it is only ok to link to the main landing page of other silos ... not to the silo subpages. And you should not overdo it... for whatever that means... Thank you very much.

Spot on! "If you see them giving great advice for free, imagine what you will get when you pay them"

Quite a few plugins do the same thing you are talking about. Yoast SEO is a big name when it comes to everything SEO related but there are others as well. My idea is to read the comments and reviews about the plugin before you actually install it on your website. If the reviews and star ratings are bad, probably its not worth it. Just a thought!

Thanks for the detailed answer Jonathan. What you suggested was definitely in line with my thinking - indexing just the single topics at most and trying to either noindex or canonicalize all the thousands of possible variations. I definitely agree that all those random combinations of topics/objects hold no real value and at best will eat up crawl budget unnecessarily. I can make sure Google treats these parameters as URLs via Search Console, they're unique to this piece of content; and I think I can noindex all the random combinations of filters (hopefully). I'm still waiting to hear more from the dev team but I have a feeling that I won't be able to change the format to subdirectories instead of differentiating everything with query parameters - not the ideal situation but I'll have to make do. Anyways, thanks again for your thoughtful reply! Josh

Is there a good way to avoid it on for a blog that's part of a larger site, (the whole site isn't a blog - and couldn't be powered by a blog CMS like WP - but we have a blog, currently on a subdomain)?

Hi Beth, My apologies I had a brain fart - I meant to type "LSI" keywords - it stands for "Latent Semantic Indexing". Basically these are keywords that create syntax and context for a keyword you are targeting in your content or on-site SEO to help Google return reliable results. Example: Let's say a user wants to learn more about the solar system and starts searching for planets. Without the proper context, Google doesn't know if it is returning results for Mars the planet or Mars the Roman god of war. Chances are they are searching for something recent rather than ancient mythology, but since both could be possible, Google can misinterpret user intent and direct the user to the incorrect website. Now let's say a website has statistics on Mars - its size, distance from Earth, where it is in the solar system, etc. If a user searches for "where is Mars", the context provided by the query and the stats given on the website will give Google everything it needs to rank that website above websites that focus on Roman mythology. On the other hand, if someone searches for "Who was Mars", Google will use LSI keywords like "Roman gods" or "Roman mythology" to create SERPs and websites featuring these contextual keywords will rank higher than those that don't. Long story short, LSI keywords are used for SERPs and queries featuring the 5 W's (Who, What, Where, Why, When) and H (How). It is a new model Google is moving towards which features a specific focus on the Knowledge Graph and becoming the answer for users rather than directing them to other websites. Hope that helps! Rob

TTFB is server time, spent processing the http request. So you have more than a load of things to look after, in order to improve response time, it largely depends on the technology stack you are using. You may need to review your server side code, your sql queries, your infrastructure. Anyway more often than not is a matter of poor backend coding.

Hi there When I access your sitemap at http://www.guitarcontrol.com/sitemap.xml, you'll see it hasn't been updated since 2010. These old URLs point to an old site as well. I would definitely update this! You'll need to create a new sitemap XML, upload it to your site, and then resubmit it to Google and Bing. You can learn more on how to create one here. Let me know if you need anymore help!

We only did it a month or so ago. I have contacted all the bloggers and asked them to change their link to the site. Thanks for your help, I thought this was the case.

Could using canonical links help in this situation? I guess if I have no external links to the category pages then canonical links wouldn't be appropriate here?

Ah! By 'bug' file I just meant a mental note to yourself so that this issue doesn't hold up other work. Looks like you're doing everything right on your end.

Hi there. Yes, the global rule should work. However, there is a reason this is happening, and it look like there is an extra rule, which adds that trailing slash. Go through those new rules you've added, make sure that you don't have anything extra. Example might be "Redirect everything from old blog to new blog with adding trailing slash" or something. It's quite common error, so you should be able to figure it out. Also see when these 404s were discovered, if it was right after you did redirects, it means for sure, that some of the new redirect rules are messed up at some point. Cheers!