Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Sorry for the slow response Christy. We never could pinpoint the problem. Since everything looked good, I asked her to give it time. Took about 6 months after the website launch, but she's back on the first page in position 2 and 3 for "LDS poems." She just kept doing everything right - writing poems and posting  in her channels. She also continues to post on Blogspot on the same day she posts on her main site. I advised her not too but it apparently doesn't matter. Google is not showing her blogpspot site in the SERPs. I added the publisher and author tags on this site and connected that to her G+ account, so maybe that helped at the time.

Hello! I just ran the page through the Facebook debugger: https://developers.facebook.com/tools/debug/og/object?q=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.laserfiche.com%2F which re-caches the page, and it looks like it's pulling the logo fine? It is doing a 302 redirect to the US-EN version of the site that you might want to check into (not sure if it should be a 301 or not?). If ever you have an issue with Facebook, be sure to run the debugger to get the page re-cached. I find that often helps! Hope that helped a bit. Jen

Sure! Have read of this one http://moz.com/blog/building-a-video-seo-strategy

Are you talking about local results, and having Yelp and Yellow Pages show up in search results for local searches, or are you talking about searching for things like book reviews and directories are in the results?

Hi Michael 1. Bullets - This is also something I have not heard much about, but you could try to method in this post for bulleted lists in SERPs which Google goes on to explain here. 2. Landing page code - Do you mean having this show in the title tag and use "near me"? I don't think there's a way to do this. Google does not dynamically change title tags for you in such a way. 3. You can make a brand image show up, usually only for brand searches, by using rel=publisher: https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1713826?hl=en

If this were me (or my client), I would focus on claiming and taking over the Google Local page.  While that can be a complicated process, and communicating with Google can be slow, if you keep at it they will eventually help you get control of the page.   Can you share the Google page that is causing the issues?

Linking with #part1 won't cause issues for indexation and how the site is structured. They're commonly used for internal analytics and other purposes that don't refer back to Id="" or name="" tags on the page. Regarding the rest of it, I'm afraid I'd have to see example code or the actual page to fully understand your question. If it's still an issue, feel free to leave additional code examples here and I can take a look.

With a follow link the link juice on that page would get recycled (depreciated of course)  thought out the site via site Nav. If the link is nofollowed then all that link juice is lost.  Am I missing something?

Not ideas anymore? With respect, Shanaki

You're throwing out the baby with the bathwater (to use a colloquialism). External pointing, followed links are not only good for the web as a whole, they're good for YOUR site, too. We've seen numerous examples of sites that began opening their external linking policies and received greater search traffic and rankings as a result. The most famous of these in the NYTimes, which Marshall Simmonds talked about in his Whiteboard Friday here: http://moz.com/blog/convincing-upper-management-aka-justifying-your-existence-whiteboard-friday I'd also suggest watching Cyrus' video on the topic of linking externally here: http://moz.com/blog/external-linking-good-for-seo-whiteboard-friday And finally, I'd point out that sites that never link out with followed links create the perception that they are not generous and thus, not deserving, of links of their own. You might point out that only a fraction of web users know what a nofollow link is, and my response would be that those are the same people who control most of the websites and links. All in all, I'd strongly advise against this (and Google does, too!).

The placeholder text on the ballpark estimate tool is using an html5 attribute which isn't supported in ie 9 or earlier. You can circumvent this with placeholders.js which will allow the attribute to work properly in browsers that don't normally support it.

Yeah it is weird they don't support that.  As you say its easy to fake, and many did.  There used to be more rich snippets in Surps but google has gotten stricter with them.

Thank you for your responses. It seems it's not quite as clear cut as I was hoping! I think using your definition Tom, they would appear to be far from natural then.  Afraid I can't fathom out how the links are being labelled ameliavargo.... I'm still trying to understand how to decipher the data that moz is providing me. It's interesting because if this is in fact a valid "loophole" to gain links then it seems pretty effective!  Looking at my example, this method is generating thousands of links for the individual businesses listed within the internal directory which I'm imagining must do wonders for SERP's. So is it fair to assume that the reason this does not get picked up by Google is because all of the links are of businesses in the same field of work?  I guess what I'm asking in effect is, how does Google go about assessing the integrity of the links?

Hey There, Thanks for writing in. We actually don't have a way to submit an XML sitemap and we only crawl the site by following the HTML links in the source code. From what I am seeing in your crawl, we are find very few unique internal links on your site, so we are only able to find unique 6 pages using the HTML links. Unfortunately, it looks like the majority of your site is in Javascript, which our crawler is not able to parse, so we don't see any Javascript links on your site. I'm afraid that a site that is primarily in Java would not be compatible with our crawler. I apologize for the inconvenience this causes. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Chiaryn

im am compelled to use brightlocal as moz local is useless to me in new zealand, I came across this discussion looking to see how trustworthy brightlocal is, seems it might the solution

Providing an alternative way for search engines to access content that is not otherwise available to them, but is clearly available to anyone who "sees" the page is a legitimate use of the Display: None tag. Here is what Google has to say about it: http://www.seroundtable.com/google-hiding-content-17136.html .

Hi Jordan, I would only stay away from tags related to frames and iframes as they're not good for SEO. Besides that you'll be OK with every kind of tag. Including the span tag. It's ridiculous that somebody would argue that using these tags are not good for SEO as they provide a lot of opportunity to style elements within an element.

Thanks Tom.