Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Those comments definitely have value since it's some of your only unique content. There will likely be lots of junk comments, but every few will be decent comments with good references to the songs. Since your lyrics are for things like kids songs, or christmas songs, and you have a way more attractive theme than most lyrics websites, I could see that earning you some decent comments that people wouldn't post on a junky looking site. Regarding Pagination / AJAX Alternatives: AJAX would look nice if you can find a good SEO-friendly version, but that sounds like lots of work with questionable SEO value to me. How about just loading all comments in a div that has a set height and overflow:auto; in use, and apply some custom formatting to the scrollbar appearance using javascript or jquery? http://www.net-kit.com/jquery-custom-scrollbar-plugins/ http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1256258/div-scrollbar-any-way-to-style-it http://www.n-son.com/scripts/jsScrolling/jsScroller.html Regarding Spell Checking: It looks like your whole site is PHP. If you're handy with coding your own PHP, you could quickly borrow the code from a spellchecker such as a wordpress plugin, use it on your comment forms, and make it automatically apply that to the users comment. Then, give the user a pop up window after they click submit that says "Your comment has been spell-checked, click here to edit any of our changes" so that users can override it. It requires some extra effort upfront on your part, but could result in some very high quality content for the niche. Add Social Buttons: I would get Like / Tweet / +1 buttons up on your site, I imagine that will be a good indicator that you're not a junk site. You have share, but these easier-to-click buttons get a way higher usage rate IMO.

Google hates search results pages and it is usually difficult to rank them. I've seen some bigger brands and sites get away with it, probably because of their history and authority though. I don't suggest using them. I suggest creating permanent pages with clean URLs and using those instead. That means that 301ing that ugly URL with all of the search parameters in it, to a cleaner URL is an option. Or just build the page statically and create the URL, rather than having a 301 to it.

So despite the different look and navigation you recommend migrating the whole site to a subfolder on our subdomain? If you own this site now I would suggest you take some time to investigate branding. A standard look and navigation is desired. On the other hand, you need to be careful making changes to successful platforms. Based on what you have shared, the likely recommendation would be to use a subfolder, but a proper recommendation on such an important topic cannot be offered in a Q&A. A SEO would need to learn about your company, your business, your niche, the site you are absorbing, etc. prior to making a decision.

http://www.bing.com/community/site_blogs/b/webmaster/archive/2011/10/06/managing-redirects-301s-302s-and-canonicals.aspx

Even if it's legit, if there's anything I don't like about a potential company, I wouldn't employ their services - there's plenty of competition. Would you want your company associated with the sort of content you mention? You could always ask them about those links and see what they say. It might be worth paying more money just to go with a company that has a reliable reputation. There's some good advice about employing a link builder below the video here: http://www.stephanspencer.com/hiring-a-link-builder/

Google contradicts itself on their guidelines. And if you read between the lines, then  it seems that YES, a competitor can screw with you!..... Can competitors harm ranking? There's almost nothing a competitor can do to harm your ranking or have your site removed from our index. If you're concerned about another site linking to yours, we suggest contacting the webmaster of the site in question. Google aggregates and organizes information published on the web; we don't control the content of these pages. Taken from: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=34449&topic=2365140&ctx=topic

I have the same problem with one of my websites. Can someone please shed some light on this topic...

No go today with SOPA: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=development+sanbox

I work at National Positions, an SEO company, and have access to hundreds of different GWT accounts. In my 4 years here, I have seen the same issue persist on many different websites. GWT is definitely clunky in certain areas. But the most frustrating thing is the inaccurate 404's and duplicate title issues.

Those tutorials well show you step by step just how easy it is. If you dont have access to IIS control panel, it also has the code to put in web.config manualy good luck

bless your little heart erica

Hi Phil, Just to be clear -- are you asking whether links in the website body are more valuable than links in the footer? If so, I recommend that you watch what Matt Cutts (head of Google's web spam team) has to say about the matter via the link below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0fgh5RIHdE He doesn't come out and explicitly say "yes", but it seems like if you had to pick one or the other, I'd put the link in the body of the page. watch?v=D0fgh5RIHdE

Sorry to rain on your parade, but article directories are next to worthless. these are the sites that goolge has been cracking down on. Matt Cutts recommends that you dont do this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5xP-pTmlpY

Hi MVBryanB, There are a variety of choices available to you in terms of markup. The main benefit of Schema is that Google, Bing and Yahoo have all agreed on it as a standard. I highly recommend that you read Mike Blumenthal's article on this subject from last autumn, as well as all the comments following it: http://blumenthals.com/blog/2011/10/07/a-free-tool-to-build-geo-sitemap-and-schema-org-compliant-files/ Take special note of the free Schema tool Mike links to. I think this resource is exactly what you are looking for. Miriam