Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Happy Holidays to you, too! It's possible that the penalty is related only to the duplicates, but the process I described above should help uncover whether that's the case. It's definitely worth cleaning up the domains you owned that are duplicates rather than 301s. As for the other older links - it depends on how bad they are, how many there are, and whether you think there's risk that Google may penalize you for them. Unfortunately no easy answers there. SEO isn't the only inbound channel! Social media, blogs, building an email list, content marketing, etc. are all options, too. I like targeting hihgly relevant, rarely searched phrases. The CPCs tend to be lower and the quality of leads higher. And working on conversion rate is a great idea since that helps all kinds of traffic. Wish you all the best!

Hey Erick Did the old URLs/Pages get new URLs? If they are clean from a link perspective on the old site they all need to be individually redirected to the matching new pages. Also, check to be sure all the new pages/content is indexed and cached with some site searches etc. It might be a matter of getting that to happen completely first as well. -Dan

I agree with Arjen, onsite SEO is going to improve your rankings for the keywords that matter. Your main keyword "Name Necklace" doesn't really appear on the homepage as a keyword for that page. It is the anchor text to your category page of Name Necklaces, plus that page has it as the page title which is why Google thinks it should be indexed for that keyword. Another thing I noticed, your canonical tag has the O capitalized and your URL does not. Make sure you keep this consistent as the SE's will think this is a different URL.

Google doesn't care the W3.org language tag (Bing does it, instead). Said that using it on every page is a good practice for W3.org, hence do that. For Google, if the site is using a Country Code Top Level Name (i.e.: .it, .fr, .de...), then the site will be automatically target the country related to the domain termination (i.e.: .de > Germany and just Germany, not Austria or any other German speaking country). If the site is under a generic domain name (i.e.: .com), then you have to specify in the Google Webmaster Tools setting of the site what country (hence regional Google) you want the site itself to target. NOTE:  if you are targeting language and not countries, don't use ccTld domain names, because, as I said before, those domain names targets only the country the domain termination is paired to. Then... use the hreflang="x" markup so to suggest to Google what URL must be shown to the user depending on the language they use (check this official Google page). Finally, do a great localization of the content and try to obtain authoritative quality signals like links from local sites and social shares from local users.

Hola Carlos! I'd suggest you to use the tool Mediaflow offers for free for creating sitemaps.xml with the hreflang annotations. Check this page from their site, because it explains well what the tool does and how you can use it: http://www.themediaflow.com/resources/tools/href-lang-tool/

Subdomains are basically different domains, so if your competitor does it a lot, and they interlink all those pages, they could even get a penalty. If you use subfolders, all the link juice you get to any page will affect the entire site, as opposed to subdomains, where each backlink affects the subdomain itself, and therefore the main domain gets less juice. Both are possible and accepted, but if you ask me, I would go with the sub-folders instead.

I would definitely recommend to keep your shopping cart out of the SERPs. I would not recommend to use nofollow to try to achieve this goal. In a recent video  Google's head of webspam, Matt Cutts, explains why using nofollow only really works for external links. It is probably best to no-index shopping cart page your in robot.txt or in the HTML of the page itself.

I cant pinpoint the date but it has been in the last 3-4 weeks. We have never purchased links in the past. As for the Panda algorithm we were ranking as high as third for the term with all those slim content pages so i dont think that is it, but ill look more into it.  We have two versions of the site, a paid and example. So it shows 2x the pages when a site: search is done, the HTTP and the HTTPS. That is something we are working on fixing. Thanks for you help and if you have any other idea what could be causing this please share. I also added another picture showing the drop, maybe its more helpful

Thank you so much!

Thanks! What about re=next and rel=prev - if we added it to the desktop version, should we also add to the mobile version?

Great suggestions above. I have many legal clients in all of your practice areas so this is hitting close to home and i think you could improve in so many ways. One suggestion below. Show some indicators on your home page via an in-content internal link to the PI page you mentioned . Also you have two pages competing for the personal injury keyword. Choose one page to target the personal injury keyword. Choose one page and add your office locations to the footer. Maybe optimize your image  name http://www.kempruge.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/90201067_8.jpg but do not over optimize. You could also benefit from some additional link building to the page you want to rank.

Thanks Andriy, Appreciate views. I like that Video reviews idea, is there any free tool you aware of which can capture voice and screenpic. Thanks

There are no problems at all. Google+ Local's ranking factor is a bit different from Google organic rankings. If you actually link building for local citations, you will also find a variety of link building opportunities for your organic ranking as well.

Hi Eduardo! Our engineers are very close to resolving an issue where the in-app page grader is not finding your pages from the crawl data. A fix should be going out very soon but you can use the on-page grader tool as others have suggested as a workaround at https://moz.com/researchtools/on-page-grader Hope this helps!

I agree with Lynn, but I'm a little confused about the intent. If you create the new URLs with product categories in them, you'll need to move the old URLs somehow, such as with 301-redirects. The new canonical tags won't help those old URLs, so you're potentially creating even more duplicate content by creating a new canonical version. Generally, I don't think adding categories to the URLs is a great idea. You can squeeze in a few more keywords, but the impact of that in 2013 is very small. As you said, you're also making the URLs longer and you're pushing back the unique keywords. So, Google is going to see more repetition toward the beginning of the URL and less unique information (as are users, although most people don't read URLs closely, IMO).

This is generally an exception Google supports - for example, they say that you can use rel=prev/next and rel=canonical in conjunction, where one handles pagination and the other handles sorts/filters. In the case of a sort (like ascending/descending) the actual results could be very different, but the intent is still legitimate. They generally understand you're trying to clean up these pages. In a perfect world, these filters wouldn't create unique URLs, honestly, but now that they already exist, you have to manage them. The other option would just be to META NOINDEX those filter URLs or set them up in parameter handling in Google Webmaster Tools. I tend to prefer the canonical here, personally.

Hey Aron Just wanted to chime in on the wordpress bit. EGOL nailed the core answer though. But for the noindex, yes you can just noindex any pages you want to and this isn't going to cause any issues. Noindexed pages do not count towards Panda or low user metrics in the algo, so it's a great way to let the content exist but not have it cause trouble in the SERPs. -Dan

Thanks Peter - developer was only redirecting from www. version of pages - when other versions exists, so will ensure he redirects from duplicates too, Luke

Hi Luke I wouldn't say keyword density is totally irrelevant, but what I mean by that is that you would expect to see on any page the keywords related to the subject of that page. But attempting to add keywords to a page to increase density to make it more indexable is not what you should be doing. The focus of a page for semantic search needs to be the subject as a whole so content should be written for the whole in much the same way as you would write offline and include related content where relevant. I'm not sure if there really is a safe percentage as such for keyword density, but suffice to say that the higher the percentage the more likely a page will be seen as spammy. I would have thought in most cases though <3% should be fine. Peter