Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Spencer & Kevin for valuable input, But why it doesn't show this same with the website has its own wikipedia page link.

If you haven't already found it, here is what you need to implement: Schema Markup for Job Posting.

Hi David, just wanted to give you a quick tip that your domain is showing a 301 redirect to | HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently | http://cabinetsbayarea.com/ | however is resolving www.cabinetsbayarea.com and that is because of this below. Make sure there synchronized. | Rel="canonical" | http://www.cabinetsbayarea.com/ | Sincerely, Thomas

Hi there, Unfortunately the site seems to be down right now, so I can't have a look (I'm getting a 500 unavailable error), but I would say that while copy is important to give Google an idea about the page's topic, copy for copy's sake is not necessary. In other words, as long as the page says enough to get the message across about what it's meant to convey, you don't need to add another 200 words for no reason. That said, each page should contain a good paragraph or so of unique text in most cases. I don't love putting minimums on the number of words that should be used, but keep in mind that text presented as images, etc. should use a technique like CSS image replacement in order to show that text in a search engine readable format, i.e. HTML. I would not be confident that this has caused your 30% drop in traffic unless the pages are now extremely void of unique content and could be seem as "duplicates" or near-dupes of each other as a result, or simply as not very useful. On the other hand, if there are SEO errors with the site already, a big drop in content will certainly not help. Get that 500 error checked out!

Hi Ryan, I guess the first point here is that Google doesn't treat this sort of filtering as "penalisation"; it's just filtering two or more versions of the same content because it believes (sometimes mistakenly) that users don't need to see two versions of the same thing. This gets REALLY tricky in fields like real estate when all the aggregators in the same town have access to pretty much the same feeds or properties. If Google were perfect, you'd put up the two pieces of identical content for all 55 millions products, and Google would serve the right one given the appropriate query, like the example above ("fridge sale san antonio" brings up the local page; "refrigerator" has your main site rank). And this might happen, because Google is getting better at these sort of query-appropriate results. We still recommend not providing dupe content solely because we can't be sure that Google will get it right. As an aside, it would be so great if they worked on a tool for localisation in the same way that they have given us the href lang tag for internationalisation. rel="city" or similar would be awesome, especially for big countries. Your idea about serving the content from a shared source will certainly work (iframe, text hosted on separate URL, JS etc.). The pages serving this text clearly won't be credited with that text's content, which removes its SEO value of course.

Thank you for all of your feedback. Unfortunately, this website is a on a old propitiatory platform that requires to have these long URL strings, but thankfully there are no separate pages for each of the backslash categories. For now, I have to accept having these long URLs and just make sure all the correct pages are submitted in sitemap. Thank you again for you all of your feedback. This was very helpful!

Bingo! My theory was correct. It was the extra // on the product pages in the site map. Once they fixed that, it went to indexing the sitemap again.

There's also an article about it right here on the Moz blog, which includes a title tag preview tool: New Title Tag Guidelines & Preview Tool http://moz.com/blog/new-title-tag-guidelines-preview-tool

If i was you i would consult with a company face to face before hiring and also see if you can do some things on your own. Social media and blogging is something that someone in house can do and they also have first hand knowledge of the business.

Thanks, Jane! I really appreciate it. If the now noindexed category pages have already been indexed, do you think I should request removal from the index as well? Best... Mike

From developer: "Looking into this, we need to have /uk/blog, /us/blog and /ca/blog in order for them to appear on the menus – we could put a noindex meta tag on the us and ca pages to avoid duplicates?" Or do you recommend href lang tag? Thanks.

Hi there, While looking at metrics like this is important, you're approaching modern link development in a slightly misguided, old-fashioned way. This is the way we used to link about link dev three or four years ago. For one, there is little use finding an older article (anything published more than a few days or weeks ago) and trying to get a link on it. This was a very popular, effective tactic up until about 2010. However, figuring out if a link was included as an original citation or added after the fact is incredibly easy. Thus, it's easy to discount links-added-later, and you can be fairly sure that Google is suspicious of these links given how popular this link development tactic was pre-2010. If a site has good Moz metics (DA, etc.) and no or very low toolbar PR, this can be an indication that Google finds something wrong with the site... but toolbar PR is a relatively outdated metric now, so take its figures fairly lightly. If you can potentially get a link from a site, look at all of these metrics and then look at both the backlink profile of the potential linking site and which other sites it links out to. Does it look like it sells links to unrelated, spammy websites / industries? Don't go for a link with them. Do they advertise a text-link service where anyone can buy a link on their site? Definitely stay away. If you come across a less-popular site in your niche with original, quality content, don't turn a link down on that site because it has low metrics. "2. If a site is a PR2 DA 30/ PA 32 with 14 root domains, 250 total links.... Would a link like this give me any benefit or should I skip links like this? Why?" To answer this, you're going to need to look further than these metrics. Those numbers are good enough that if the site is otherwise a good match for yours, the link could be worthwhile.

Karen, Was the site ever ranking for these terms?  In other words, did they have rankings and then lose them? As others have mentioned, the backlink profile for this site does not look good.  You have a large number of keyword anchored links from low quality sources like directories and press releases.  This type of link profile is a prime candidate for a Penguin hit.  Can you tell if you took a hit in organic traffic on a known Penguin date?  The last one was October 5, 2013.

So glad it helped, Edward. Thanks for letting me know that!

Good Afternoon, That's an interesting situation you've highlighted! You are quite correct that Google only allows one listing per physical location, but things get a bit fuzzy when it comes to multi-language listings. The first time I ran into this scenario was in about 2009, in which Mike Blumenthal published this article quoting Google's stance on how a business could have multi-language listings without creating multiple listings (http://blumenthals.com/blog/2009/08/10/local-business-center-same-listing-in-multiple-languages-is-ok/). However, the current Google Places for Business setup does not allow for multiple languages. Google's stand on this is that you're supposed to pick a single language and create a single listing in it. See this: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!searchin/business/language/business/Ok7wphTl6hQ/v8pfqDRtj2gJ Despite this, businesses have old multi-language listings from former times and are also creating mutiple language listings by using different accounts (which was once recommended as a best practice). The exact guideline, currently, is found here: https://support.google.com/places/answer/142906?hl=en ... and reads: "In countries where more than one language is spoken, choose a primary language that you want the listing to be displayed in. Even if users have their browsers set to another language, they'll still be able to find your business on Maps." So, according to Google, you should only have one language and one listing, but as we can see from your example, people are getting around this. You could try to report your competitor, but it may not be worth it. What I actually find most interesting about your example is the fact that Google is surfacing those 3 same listings for your search term, hinting to me that Google may be confusing your search intent with a branded search that matches the titles of your competitor's Google+ Local pages. The titles on those pages don't look quite right to me. So, bottom line ... yes, it's supposed to be just one listing, but I suspect this whole situation is a big mess given Google's guidelines that don't meet the real-world situation terribly well, coupled with their failure to sometimes police their own product. Hope these thoughts are helpful.

I don't understand if you look at source code and see the text url, then that is how you are linking. Using text rather then a ID gives you a chance to insert a keyword so text is better then ID. Linking to an ID then redirecting to a text url as many CMS do, loses link juice on the redirect.