Welcome to the Q&A Forum

https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/site-redevelopment-using-deepcrawl-to-maintain-and-grow-your-audience/ https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/managing-url-redirects-301-302-307-and-meta-refreshes/ http://www.screamingfrog.co.uk/audit-redirects/

Thank you Jonathan, I had read some articles on this "significant" change. My current website is NOT mobile responsive, however we are launching a new fully responsive website in mid-May so hopefully we will not fall of mobile SERPs for too long.

There's a 100 different ways to do this, but typically my favorite approach is to try to work the synonym into the same copy without seeming spammy. For example, if my primary keyword is "GMO" and my very literal synonym is "Genetically Modified Organism" then I'd try to work both variations into the copy. <title>GMO Dangers - Knowing the Risks of Genetically Modified Organisms</title> Here's a great article that goes into depth about the advantages of incorporating multiple variants into your SEO targeting http://cognitiveseo.com/blog/5370/941-traffic-increase-exploiting-the-synonyms-seo-ranking-technique/

There isn't anything different you should be doing for Bing on site. The page you mentioned is indexed in Bing (url:https://www.sitegeek.com/000webhost is indexed in Bing). So it's tough to understand what might be going on. There are many potential issues here. 1. The language changes causing an issue. Bing's tag is different from Google's. 2. The site quality or content quality is not enough for Bing to want to index. I doubt that, but it's a potential issue. 3. Sitemap issues. Bing is not as good as Google at telling us what the issues are with sitemaps. Without doing a full analysis, there isn't much we can do to tell you the problem. 4. Sometimes it's just Bing. They are always behind ...

Thanks Marie, we'll get on that. Appreciate you (and everyone else) taking the time to help.

Well, it looks like they went dark. No response to email or calls. I even developed a child theme for them. Ah well, now to contact their competitors. I'm not doing that out of spite, rather I found an interesting situation. I would very much like to see how something like that changes things. A few CSS tweaks, a banner redesign, and I can have my case again. Fortunately there aren't any contractual obligations involved with the first instance.

Thx Jamie one more time. This can be a lesson for ohters who has such idea like I did

Thanks for reply Matt. Agreed these are some links which surely could be out of frustration. Can get them removed. But I have a question, check out our competitors who rank in India. You will be amazed to see their link building. Even one has a sub domain pligg sub domain for all kind of bad links even sex related etc. However, how can you help us to achieve our goal. You can send a PM too... I will be very glad.

If you want to disavow the whole domain, use this: domain: website.com When you submit, I'd submit to both www and non-www.  But to get rid of a whole domain just use the above.  Also, space after : or not doesn't matter. Domain:website.com or Domain: website.com

Thanks guys. Can anyone recommend an SEO company who has a good reputation for managing this type of monthly maintenance service?

Hi Brendan, That's a great idea! I'm asking our web guy now. Thank you so much, David

Agreed! Thank you for that Massimiliano. Definitely a lack of deeper browsing is of concern.

Hi Nevil Google does support cross domain canonical tags as they announced here: here http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/handling-legitimate-cross-domain.htm However I am not sure this is the best strategy for you. When you use a canonical tag you are basically telling Google not to index that page but the one in the canonical tag instead. If Google listens to this it means your job pages will not be indexed in Google. The better strategy for this would be similar to Indeed's where you take a snippet of the job, add your own unique content to the page and then have the call to action button link to the original job itself. This should give that page the best chance to rank. Indeed is a tough example to use. They are pretty much number 1 for every job related term with a site that is extremely thin. I believe Google has listed this site similar to Wikipedia where it is a credible source for jobs and they give it additional weight. How fair Google is being here has been a long debate of mine I hope this helps

For internal linking you should try to be as precise as possible. You can also freely control the anchor text of the links so if you're talking about a specific product, link to that specific product. Google has enough data to know when you link to a page and the content it should be finding is not there (as may be the case with some of your home page links).  I would clean up any and all internal links that don't point to the best page, either deleting ones that just don't apply or pointing them to very specific products. With external links it can vary. A lot of times people link to the home page when mentioning the company, while some sites garner a lot of product specific links (eBay, Amazon, Craigslist, etc.) due to the nature of their content. Wikipedia would be another example. Using OSE you can find some great ideas around how the competition has built links, but also some really spammy examples. Avoid the spam and make it a goal that when you do add a link to a page or work with someone interested in linking to your site, that the link is as user helpful as possible.  Think of the link or mention from a conversion perspective more than as a way to help your rankings and you'll be much better off. Cheers!

My experience improving page copy tells me the ranking improvement is not dramatic and the exact amount depends on a variety of factors, as far as I can tell the biggest of these factors are domain authority and keyword competition, if you change content on pages of a domain with a high DA, the ranking of those pages will improve more if compared with the improvement you may get with lower DA pages. Also the improvement seems proportional to the previous SERP position, in other words it's easier to go from pos 20 to first page, but much harder to go from pos 3 to pos 2; considering all other factors the same. Of course if you have a page with a a lot of backlinks and a decent ranking despite the content being thin, or poorly related to the keywords you are targeting, improving it will gives you the biggest jump. Anyway that's just my experience, no golden rule. EDIT, now I read EGOL answer I can see I totally missed the real core question. I have never seen a page ranking improve just because a new fresh content replaced the old one. Only because new better quality content replaced old poor content. And when I heard and read about fresh content boost, they were always talking about new content in new pages, and that depends on the query being searched. If you browse old whiteboard friday from Rand you will find one on this topic which explain that. In one sentence, if you publish new fresh content about a sport event the night of that sport event you may benefit from freshness boost for query related to that sport event. For obvious reasons google believe new content about a recent event is more relevant than stale one.

Hi, sorry I don't seem to have this email. Can you either PM me here at Moz or send to matt@payonperformance.com.au? Thanks!

Hi Ryan, thanks for this! I'm also hoping to see more and more markups turn into Rich Snippets in the SERPs. But as you say, this is a story for another time as it will happen gradually. It's about getting a balance right between being too enthusiastic with schema.org and identifying the right level of information to markups... which is trickier than it seems! Thanks!

I totally agree with Moosa....I am guessing you also have limited resources. Maintaining two separate sites, one desktop and one mobile requires a lot of major time that most small businesses and small website owners just don't have. One version of your site that's managed via one CMS that is a responsive design is the way to go if you are short on time and resources...and let's face it...even if you are an enterprise corporation, you are still short on  on resources.

I agree with sir here as most people consider these URLs are spammed but yeah normally good shorten URLs are 302 so there is no impact of it on the original URL you want your audience to land on! Just a quick participation!

I don't think they're coming out with HTTP/2 as another option vs HTTP, each with their separate pros and cons. I don't look at it as HTTP vs HTTPS, for example, but rather HTTP 2.0 - the next generation of HTTP. There may be short term, temporary issues as it rolls out. There may be hosts that take a while to get on board. But aside from that, I am hearing that it will seriously speed up load times as it will be able to load multiple elements at a time simultaneously, as well as an increase in security, which is much needed in today's day and age.