Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Anthony, thats a great solution..

As somebody who just finished building a scholarship program that I must say for outweighs the SEO benefits and honestly that is how it should be. The scholarship they should not be based on what we can get out of it. Having said that doing the right thing sometimes does have its rewards. in the 15 days since this has begun I am over the moon in how we are able to help people as well as our clients from my point of view right now it is a win-win. All the best, Thomas

Having an identical image and page name didn’t sounds spammy to me at all but if your page will contain the same keywords everywhere in title, description, h1 and more than obviously it will become spammy and it will hurt your rankings from the desired key phrases. Hope this helps!

Hello, This is most likely not something to be worried about if it corresponded with the latest Mozscape Index. The number of links and depth crawled with each update can vary - the details on this can be found on the Mozscape API Index page (link below). Since the crawl changes in depth/size, the DA, PA, etc. numbers will differ from crawl to crawl even for a "steady-state" site. If all five companies experienced a similar percentage or numerical drop, I am inclined to think that this drop is simply related to the crawl. The current stats for the latest crawl can be found here: http://moz.com/products/api/updates Rand wrote a post that explained the crawl well here. Have a great weekend and good luck!

I'd worry mostly about it becoming a duplicate content nightmare. It would be better to have a choice to buy the brand new item or a refurbished one on a single product page. Think of how Amazon lets you select different versions of a books, movie, etc., different sellers, new/used, etc., all on one page.

Thansk again for the effort. I like your answers, they are very helpful. Although in this case our target aren't English speaking people, just Spanish people from or in Tenerife for vacations.

As Dennis as hinted we went to https, we saw an increase in traffic and ranking when we swap to https.  We also made sure site speed was rapid as well.

Many thanks both I previously had locations in these places but now we don't hence the 404's. thanks Peter

Thanks so much, Robert! We'll start by setting the canonical URL to the page we want to rank and see what happens over the next little while, then decide on moving forward with the 301 after we have some more data. Thanks again!

Thanks guys! Just wanted to clarify if that was actually an H1, or just an H1 styling thing to be viewed as "make this look like H1, but it isn't actually H1".

I have deleted to old images and uploaded versions with optimized files names alts tags etc also done all my page seo too

Hi there! Yes, you've definitely received some great responses! If your question has been answered, please mark up to three responses as a "Good Answer" and mark this question answered. Thanks!! Christy

Yeah the line above - "...should do the trick in a non-spammy way...." is worrisome to me. You need to think on various counsel here and here's some ideas fyi... Miriam (a leader here in Moz) offers up these great tips... https://support.google.com/business/answer/3038177?hl=en http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide http://moz.com/local-search-ranking-factors (is the big David Mihm LOCAL factors reports that many of us here have contributed to!!!) Great places to start! Me? Yeah, I think the G local algo is now good enough to parse when someone is trying to get way too much ranking juice using that kind of "stacked" location page trick. Beware, bad local tactics HURT!!!

Monica, you should see if EGOL will be your guy! I believe it states in his Moz bio that he LOVES that type of work. Juuuuust kidding!!! But seriously, he made some great points!! Best of luck

I ignore those junk links. I figure that Google is pretty clear that disavow tool is only for extreme cases. ["In most cases, Google can assess which links to trust without additional guidance, so most normal or typical sites will not need to use this tool."] That being said, I do notice that many people talk about routinely disavowing low-quality links even when there is no penalty in play. It seems to me that that in itself could create an unnatural link profile—after all, if you just let your link growth happen naturally, you'd have those types of links accumulating. I too would be interested in hearing more about what people choose to do (or not) about bad links that arrive uninvited...

Cloudflare.com is a great CDN if you need a free or low cost solution.

Hi Jason! The marketing practice you'll want to bone up on involves the creation of city/local landing pages. I think you'll find this Moz Blog post to be right on the money: http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide Hope this helps!

I think Hutch42 is right. If your urls have no file extensions on them (.asp, .php, .htm), you really shouldn't see any dip from merely changing over. It would be worth triple-checking about the extensions, though. We changed our site over a few years back and saw a dip in some key lead-generating pages that had extensions on them. One place you may see a difference is with load times. Your pages' code structure will likely change. And .NET/IIS sometimes has different speeds than a LAMP stack even with the same content.

If they have no traffic and no links, I would not move them. I would only re-purpose them if you think that by combining/editing them they would have value, but in a situation like this, that usually isn't the case. (Unless we are talking about a significantly large percentage of your website becoming 404--in that case some rewriting/repurposing would be in order.)

The algorithm will use freshness based on the urgency/nature of the keywords. For something like that keyword, I dont see it being a problem at all. If it's a really important page, just move it to a page (im assuming you use WP) -then improve it and use the same url structure.