Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Linking out gives away link juice. That's how PageRank works. Someone links to you, they give you some of their PageRank, you link to someone you give them some. Matt cuts once said it can be beneficial to link out but did not elaborate. I believe he means as a user experience. But the google PageRank algorithm shows you give away PageRank

There has been a sudden leap from a couple of sites employing the same tactic. In fact one site I checked also had a very similar backlink profile (possible a sister brand to the one I mentioned in my first post above) and they too have climbed in recent weeks. I will look forward to any further insight you can provide on the matter Good luck.

Hi, Couldn't see categories in my brief look but to answer your other question - If I index both category and tags, should I use canonical URL tag to pass referring to main category. As I want more my categories in SERP results ranking higher? use the canonical tag if the content is the same (duplicated) I recommend using it on the folder closest to the main level. What the tag will do is tell Google "this content is the same - here is the original" and all juice will be fed to the URL you pointed to in the tag. Using the tag won't get more categories in the results as I just mentioned they are not indexed as they are "duplicates" It does however give you a stronger structure to a degree but only if you've got duplicate content due to e.g categories. Just to help you out a big more here is an example of a great way to use the tag: two URLS with the same content www.example.com/author www.example.com/genre/author you would put a tag on www.example.com/genre/author pointing towards www.example.com/author (however you can do it the other way around depending on how you feel) More info here- https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en Good luck!

Thanks Anthony! This is the best way to handle it. If you are using Yoast SEO, go to SEO->Titles & Meta - and check off "noindex subpages of archives".

It's just a naming convention, so for strictly navigational purposes it doesn't matter what you call them as anything will work.

I definitely agree with this. Also, why would you want your website to listed in your google places if you don't want it to show up in search results? It seems a little bit counter intuitive to me.

We want to block the Google Places listings from search, and only show up on the google places listings." "Yes correct" www.mywebsitetor.com (google places) (PG)  ( Is the site we want to only have google places, and block search engine from searches.

As Mike has said, the fact that you are often linked to, and the content is translated, would put this far down my priority list as far as SEO goes, in that it's not going to hurt you (unless the site are extremely poor quality and linking to you a high number of times, which doesn't sound like the case here). I take it they're just lifting the content, not scraping the HTML, given that the content is translated. If they were taking the HTML, you can place the canonical tag in the source code and make it quite likely that they'll publish their version with a canonical tag, pointing to your site. From a legal point of view, you probably have good claim to go after this behaviour, which is up to you. This should not hurt your SEO, however.

If you won't want to adjust the technical implementation of the videos - I'd recommend just using an XML video sitemap, rather than Schema.org mark up to provide metadata about your videos. You can use the gallery_loc tag to account for playlists.

If mywebsite.com is 301'ed to some other page, then mywebsite.com will no longer be reached buy requests, so the content will never be read. The content when talking about a 301is irrelevant, all a 301 does is redirect the request. when google follows a link to your old page it is redirected to the new page and the link juice will now fall on the new page. The content on the new page is read instead,

I have the same frustrating issue it says the data is provided by other sources but I have no idea what that means exactly.

Feel free to inmail me your url and I'll look at it more closely. Best... Mike

There's no one-sized-fits-all answer to this, I'm afraid. Any large-scale change to a site carries risk, and could even look like over-optimization. Even if it's a great, high-quality change, Google may re-evaluate the site, and you could easily see short-term ranking fluctuations. Long-term, you very well might improve, but there is definitely short-term risk. As Kevin said, my recent post explains the new width guidelines - it's not as simple as one number. I also don't think that falling outside of these guidelines is the kiss of death. It could impact CTR and I wouldn't make a habit of it, but some titles are just naturally longer than others. It really depends on what the before and after look like, how big your site is, how authoritative your site is, and a lot of things that are hard to dig into on a Public Q&A. Personally, I'd say test it - pick the pages where the change has the most value and the current titles are long and try changing a group of them. See how it goes. Doing it in phases and measuring can help you get a better handle on things and even help you tweak the changes as you see what works and what doesn't.

Sorry, but there is no bulk upload feature in the Rank Tracker. However within a campaign in Moz Analytics you can bulk submit keywords, comma separated. Hope that helps!

I do see for the root domain that there are 8500 links, and only about 400 of them are external. Do you perhaps have absolute internal links using non-www, but your campaign is using www?

Hi Jane, Thanks for the comment. We are 301ing the 404's to appropriate locations. By endless scrolling (also known as infinite scrolling) it's just the Facebook style news feed auto load of new contact when a user nears the base of a page. However, we have reverted back to previous pagination, this has slowed down the traffic drop but not ceased it. Any other suggestions?