Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I would use a dash "-" Jelly-Donut and 301 to that page. Essentially only use a canonical when there is a direct reason for the similar content to be there like a dynamic database search and a "similar; SEO version. Or Pagination. Give the Jelly%20Donuts/mmmNice.php will no longer be needed and an exact duplicate of its new location a 301 is best here. -Phil

If it helps, my links are showing up again on GWMT as of mid morning.  Looks like the fix is in place.

Indicate the canonical version of a URL by responding with the Link rel="canonical" HTTP header. Addingrel="canonical" to the head section of a page is useful for HTML content, but it can't be used for PDFs and other file types indexed by Google Web Search. In these cases you can indicate a canonical URL by responding with the Link rel="canonical" HTTP header, like this (note that to use this option, you'll need to be able to configure your server): Link: <http: www.example.com="" downloads="" white-paper.pdf="">; rel="canonical"</http:> Google currently supports these link header elements for Web Search only. You can read more her http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394

News stories from the main site shown on other sites the company owns. It's a hospital website wanting to show their news on the individual doctor's websites.

Thank you...I will appreciate if you will give me 10 mins of your time....i sent site to your PM

Agreed. My domain name is our brand name and doesn't touch on our products however that doesn't hurt us. Over optimization is usually just trying too hard to force keywords in where they aren't needed; like name dropping.

I suspect this isn't so much a general SEO problem as a local SEO problem. Those two worlds have really diverged a lot these days. Generally, you're ranking well for brand terms (you even have expanded site-links) and you come up first in the local 7-pack for "insurance newberry florida". I suspect the problem is related to Gainesville, and that your local cues aren't very strong. The location (not being in Gainesville) is a stumbling block, and there's no easy answer for that. There are other cues you can tap into, though - the big one is reviews. Reviews still have a big impact on local rankings, and legitimate reviews can go a long way (don't spam them). David Mihm's piece on Local Ranking Factors is still the go-to, and it shows just how complex this has gotten: http://www.davidmihm.com/local-search-ranking-factors.shtml The main thing is that on-page factors (like Gainesville-related keywords) will only take you so far these days. Google is going to treat any "Gainesville"+"insurance" query as having local intent.

You have to be very careful about this, as Keri suggested. Google can crawl some JS, especially basic stuff, and if they detect a clear intent to present different content to crawlers and people, you can get into trouble fast. I would say, though, that pop-overs are pretty common these days. These are usually just a CSS-styled box that appears, with an ad, survey, etc., often the first time you visit a site. Even some reputable survey engines used them. Now, I still think you should absolutely test this for usability issues, but if the pop-over is just an overlay that appears the first time a user visits, the SEO consequences should be minimal.

It won't hurt you in normal circumstances; however in a 100 link rule, I would certainly avoid it. Best practices has taught me that any other cloned link will be skipped over and will not add any additional weight to a particular page. It would be more for usability score if anything. *I would stick to the 100 link rule for each page and be unique with those links.

So that would mean there would be no duplicate for the product and only similar for the categories. For instance in a supermarket store candles might form part of the household category, home decor category, kitchenware category and valentines category but they each reference the same un-duplicated page www.shop.com/products/white-candles.html You have to make the call as to whether your category content is too similar to one another and if so take action such as writing 100-200 words Prior to or after the product listings.

Yeah, sorry, would get rid of the 1-to-1s (can't think of a work around just now). See if you can find out why they can't do it. If it is something like MX records then change those and put the 301 in normally. You could also put a meta refresh in to take customers to the new page; no real SEO value though.

Reply edited- Yes, I would also use this if possible: Disallow: /*?rid

I think the answer is are you paying for a link or are you paying for an editor to decide if your website is of sufficient quality and relevance to be included. This is what differentiates a worthwhile listing.

Hi Cyrus, Thanks for your detailed reply, really appreciated. Seems the site did get some what buggy with the new PR update. It was back to normal after 12 hours or so. No drop in rank or traffic over the weekend so it looks like we're in the clear. The Google cached image of the homepage has resolved it's self also. Thanks again for your help. Mark