Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The answer on this page is from someone that tested it, with 2 authors: http://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/25140/how-to-implement-rel-author-on-a-page-with-multiple-authors You can test it as well and use the tool (http://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/richsnippets) to see what happens.  I don't doubt that you'll end up with the same results -- the 1st instance of rel=author is going to be used. I've come across this discussion a few times, and it always ends the same... there just isn't (currently) a way to handle multiple authors for 1 page using rel=author.  On your forum, is there a "best answer" chosen?  Maybe you can assign the respondent that gives the "best answer" the authorship?  I'm not sure how Google will feel about that though, as it's not a clear article or blog post that is being assigned authorship.  Rather, it's just a response in a discussion.  Much like blog comments.  Although blog comments aren't exactly like your scenario, it's similar enough, and it would be strange if a blog comment author was set as the author for a whole page.

Agreed with Andy that this is about what you want to achieve with the content. I would be making this choice based upon what type of marketing you plan on carrying out with the graph. In some cases, something more simple like a jpeg is going to work better. In others, you're going to want to invest in the interactive HTML5 option. I know this is a vague answer, but it really does come down to what will be appropriate.

I would look more for a site that has a squeaky-clean profile of its own (both in terms of its inbound and outbound links), has an appropriate page to link to you from and (for extra credit) is perhaps marginally related to your business (also in tech, for instance), rather than go on its numbers and try to shoe-horn a link in there, if that makes sense.

Hi Michael It looks like everyone here pretty much has you covered. I also wanted to point you to this resource I did for Moz on setting up WordPress for SEO: http://moz.com/blog/setup-wordpress-for-seo-success In general, I'd agree with noindexing tags. You can index categories, but this won't result in overlapping content as long as you put posts in just 2-3 categories each.

Hey jStrong, Thanks for your response. I was thinking along the same lines, but I'm TERRIFIED of losing rank for this keyword. Technically, you're correct. However, what Google actually does can sometimes be questionable. I think we'll test this out on one of our lower volume and less strategic keywords and see how Google reacts. I'll respond to this thread once we get results back. Thanks again! Kevin

Hi Deckjur, Looks like your homepage is highly optimized for the keyword in questions, and has more link equity than the internal pages, which is why it might be showing in search results. For one, "vloerisolatie" is the first word of your homepage title tag, and the keyword appears several times on the page. If you really want the subpage to rank first, you could try pointing more internal links to it - not just navigation links, but honest-to-goodness text links. Think of it from a visitors point of view. If you really wanted them to go to this page, how would you direct them there? You could also try de-optimizing your homepage for the term, or roll with the punches and accept your homepage as the best result and do your best to convert visitors there.

Hi Kimberly, Sorry for the delayed response! You're mixing two fields here: "last modified" fields in the .htaccess file are not references for search engines; "last modified" in meta data in the HTML or in the XML sitemap may be. Beyond that, webmasters have tried to manipulate "last modified" dates so much, Google's fairly wary of them. So, I wouldn't worry about using a last modified field in your .htaccess file. Hope this helps! Kristina

Did Andy get the answer you needed? It sounds like everything has been taken care of but I wanted to be sure.

Hi Fabio! I can't find any good updated information on this either, so I am marking it as Discussion to get the conversation going. From what Pete said on the other post two years ago, it sounds like they may pick it up in a similar way to how Google does: with recognition, but will ignore it if it doesn't make sense. It would be good to hear from people who have implemented this and seen results in Bing, if anyone has experience with this.

I did run a search on our old pages in the SERPs and found a large number of them are still showing. I also found most of our new pages, some where both the old and new were represented. I have also seen a lot of our positions go from page one to not in the top 100, these are all from pages which were 301ed to a nearly exact replica in the new version. I had originally thought Google had hit them, but not updated their listing to the new version. I am now thinking that they are just being ignored, and have not had their 301 picked up.

And once your site gets out there as a place with followed links, you'll have more spam issues to deal with than you'll want.

Ah, yes, the product will need reviews before it shows up. In my experience, specifically with rich snippet ratings, they don't usually show up immediately. A couple things can help to get them to appear quicker. Sometimes it seemed that products that had more reviews appeared first. Also, once your markup is correct you can go into Google WMT and resubmit the pages to the index using the 'Fetch As Google' tool. You can also check to see what pages the structured data markup is being found on with the 'Search Appearance > Structured Data' section in Google WMT.

Thank you guys, both good answers. I just watched the video, good stuff. Then responsive design is the way to go.

Hey Robert! There are a few tools you can use to get a good idea of when an external link was created. opensiteexplorer.org (a Moz tool) will give you a "date discovered" date. ahrefs.com will give you a "first seen" date. majesticseo.com will give you a "first indexed" date. Google Webmaster Tools will give you a "first discovered" date when you export "recent links." Between those 4, you should be able to find the link you want.  Webmaster Tools is free but will be limited.  The others show you some data for free, but require a monthly subscription for all the details.

As a new website I think safe bet is to include all content on 1 page. Keyword variation means content stays seperated. Better combine and make 1 powerful page.....thx for the insight

Generally agreed with EGOL here. Not sure why you'd want this on your website, but if it's a single page that is noindexed and uncrawlable, I don't see a problem with it, either. Just make sure it's "noindex, follow" so you're not blocking up the page from passing any link equity it accumulates.

What kind of CMS do you use? That might help figure it out. Sounds like your CMS is creating these garbage pages, whether or not they live on the backend or not. On the other hand, this is pretty common and it may not be something you need to worry about. Are the pages cached by Google? You can find out by pasting this search parameter in your browser: cache:http://example.com/url or a site: search for an overview of all your cached URLs. (site:example.com) If the garbage URLs aren't there, you probably don't need to worry much. On the other hand if you see pages of bad results, this might be something you need to address with your developer.

Egol echoes what I was going to write. Would you trust someone else with a major portion of your website? What immediately came to mind was this MySpace incident with John McCain in 2007. http://techcrunch.com/2007/03/27/john-mccains-myspace-page-hacked/

If you want to write great content today, then you need to not worry too much about one key phrase, but look for additional synonyms to fit into your content. However, don't just add these in - build them into your content and write more if required. Take the word "clothing". Additional words (synonyms) that could also be used that related to clothing are "dress, clothe, garb, tog, garment, apparel". Try and fit these in somewhere to give your content some depth and variety. Synonyms of man (men) could be male, gent, gentleman, youth, boy - I am sure there are loads more. Just remember that there are billions of other pages of content out there - you need to be trying to make yours stand out from others as much as you can. -Andy

Hi Claudio, To the question of "is it dangerous to start with similar content to the old site", I would say that it's very hard to tell. Some sites in some niches all have very similar content (think or real estate aggregator sites in the same cities - it's not as if they have access to different properties on the same market - they generally list the same houses for sale and rent at any one time). However, Google is ver adept at processing text to understand it if has been recycled or "spun" from other content it has seen before. If the original content came from a severely penalised website, re-using it in this manner would definitely not be risk-free. You would probably also want to take the old site offline completely as opposed to simply noindexing its pages if you were to do this. Google understands very "similar" content due to content spinning having been such a popular way to create content in previous years. If you can re-work your existing content to be of a fairly different length (shorter or longer), take a different paragraph structure, and be placed on the new site that is very dissimilar to the old one in terms of structure, this may work out well. I cannot say that this is risk free however, for all the reasons Casey has brought up already.