Welcome to the Q&A Forum

My personal guideline is to make it sound as natural as possible. William and Alan are correct, what you're doing isn't against any rules, and footer links don't hold up as much value - especially because their on the bottom of the page. Maybe you could do a list that says something like: See More Reviews: Category XCategory Y Category Z To me, that doesn't sound spammy or clogged up at all. Also, just keep in mind that the more links you have on a page, the less page rank they carry onto other pages of your site.

Ah, I see what you mean Alan and I'm inclined to agree. With the JS you mentioned, there's no risk of a user (or crawler) being taken away from the page itself, so no link would be passed and "diluted", as it were.  Thanks for posting this!

No problem, glad I could help! Sometime it's helpful to have an extra set of eyes looking at a site's seo. Let me know if you need any additional help, and the results after your changes.

Hi 1AKAL, If you have a physical location in those cities, then you would simply be building a location landing page for each office you have. These would be optimized with the complete NAP (name, address, phone) of each location and should feature good, unique content about the specific location. If you don't have physical locations in these cities, the choice to build out a page for each target city should be predicated on having something unique to say about each location. Check out: http://moz.com/blog/local-landing-pages-guide Find the business model in that post that describes your business model, and hopefully the recommendations provided will help you form a good, clean strategy. Please, let me know if you have any questions after reading that post.

Where are you getting the data from for the search volume difference? Secondly, what are you using to look at your rankings for both terms? Manual searches do not always give you the whole picture of what is ranking or not ranking. Before you restructure the whole site, set up a few test pages that focus on the non-plural version of your keyword. Monitor the ranking closely. If you see a large influx in traffic, then slowly implement change across your site, although I would not place all your eggs in one basket. Use some of the keyword idea tools available to look at broad match keywords related to photobook(s), and build out your content to cover additional areas. (if you have not already)

As I said before, if you are changing just the domain, then you can do the whole site in one redirect, but if you have a different page structure and thousands of pages, it would be a waste of time to do any pages that does not have a external link.

if I understand you correctly, this sounds like an issue I am facing and this is what I am experiencing and maybe that can be of help. My site is real estate related.  Page 1 title tag: "City Homes for Sale" (page I want to rank for)  Page 2 title tag: "City Home Picture Gallery" (lots of original pictures and videos I want G to index in order to increase the amount of unique content from my site G is indexing, but I don't care much for - more a page for users to see beautiful pictures) Unfortunately, when users search for "city homes for sale" on search engines, often this Page 2 type will show (I have a lot of Page 2 types for various neighborhoods). I guess because Page 2 has more unique content it ranks well, also because it uses words "City" and "home" in title tag. I have now taken the word "Home" out of title tag and I look forward to see if it helps. Not just in terms of dropping ranking for Page 2 (which would be great), but more importantly will search engines be able to get the point that Page 1 is the relevant page. I am interlinking from Page 2 to Page 1 in a logical way with appropriate keywords. It should be crystal clear, but our supposed super smart / advanced search engines do not seem to get it. Conclusion: As a smaller / less authoritative website, I would definitely be very careful with keyword selection in title tag, as my site has proven that it can work against you. Large powerful websites can get away with more of this I believe and search engines seem to understand them much better. Therefore, I find with SEO advice it is so important to consider if the perspective is in comparison to similar authority websites.

You are spot on, all you are doing to hiding and showing, if you can see it with fetch as googlebot you have no problems.

We can't really say as we can't see the sites OSE shouldn't be your only way of checking a site's details. There are other factors involved, their fresh content, maybe they have old 301s, more links (OSE wont be able to see all of it) and so on. Add to it that maybe they have better bounce/UI/UX and a better social following. If you could share a bit more info, I think the moz community would be able to help further

Exactly, I removed some URLS, and tweeked the priorities, in Dreamweaver, then saved.  I want to make sure nothing got messed up.   WMT has the ability to test before submitting, which I just learned.  I used xml-sitemaps.com stand alone, which passed the WMT test.  Now I'm going to do some editing, and try it again before submitting.

We run 2 sites on Magento and I've seen these problems before. Problem 1 - this looks like a link to the privacy page (maybe in the footer?) is missing an initial /. Hence it's not being treated as relative and trying to build it onto the existing URL. Problem 2  - shouldn't be an issue as long page has a canonical tag pointing to itself. I tried one of our pages with index.php/XXXX and it resolved and has a canonical tag pointing to it without index.php.

Thanks for the tips, Highland. Per the PPC info, they aren't running any PPC now and will be using another company for those strategies. On the optimization side of things, providing a "Disclaimer" in the footer or even on the individual product page could do some help. We did discuss implementing content on the site for "Comparison of A & B Products" type blog articles, but my clients feel the other company is simply protecting what they built, even though my clients essentially bought over their market share. Big brand ego's! Appreciate your tips. Any others would be great to read. - Patrick

Hi Clair, Regarding the connection between the various types of Google pages, check out this excellent Mike Blumenthal post: http://localu.org/blog/merge-google-pages-usually-cant-now/ And here's another one: http://localu.org/blog/kind-google-plus-page/ Regarding your question about a local listing - a 'local listing' is kind of a vague term. It could be a profile of your business on literally any platform. Google-specific lingo these days is that you can create a Google+ Local page using the Google Places for Business dashboard. There are other types of Google pages, as well, described in the above articles. Hope this helps! http://localu.org/blog/kind-google-plus-page/

You might also try this one recently published on the Moz blog by @CyrusShephard : http://moz.com/blog/google-plus-correlations

Thanks for the suggestions Guys. I'll have a think and see what fits best.

As Marie says, doing this isn't likely to throw a penalty your way due to the way Google handles duplication (and you're unlikely to be doing this on page after page after page of your website). You always want to link to the source of the quote, with the (very likely) assumption that the source is not linking back to you (and if they are via a trackback "comment", that link is probably nofollowed). If you're quoting something like the author is in this example, you've taken quite a hefty chunk of text from the source, but you're providing a LOT of original commentary, linking back and providing a blockquote tag (which is not "necessary" but probably sends a good signal).

I like what David and Samuel have to say here. There is and always will be room for press releases when it comes to spreading PR and information. Businesses will continue to put releases out there and often link back to themselves, but they should be sure to link with brand terms, generic words ("find out more", etc.),  or URLs (similarly to the way people generally build links now). You wouldn't put out a press release linking back to yourself with "car insurance" and spread it to 150 different sources now, if you knew what was good for you. News stories and releases are always going to get picked up and spread, but what Google is looking for when it comes to actually hurting sites with links like this is a lack of a natural pattern. Does the site receive next to no media attention, but suddenly has 500 links from an identical piece of copy, whilst also receiving no new social media attention, no additional coverage (e.g. no one has taken the press release and written their own story about it nor conducted an interview with a company representative)? The pattern there is unnatural and warrants further investigation. Is the company regularly being cited, mentioned and written about? Does it put out a release about a real new product or development and have that release picked up by real news sources, some of whom put their own thoughts on the web about the company development? This is natural-looking. I hope this makes some sense. Essentially the goal is to spread information in the way you would if Google was not an issue, with the resulting coverage being beneficial to your SEO efforts nonetheless. Putting out press releases about nothing and expecting links back from newswires, etc. isn't a brilliant idea but using press releases for PR can be very beneficial for SEO when done properly.

Check out the page cached in Google and go to text view. Fetch as Googlebot in Webmaster Tools Web Developer Toolbar with cookies and javascripts disabled. User agent switcher with your string set as Googlebot so you can determine if different content is being shown to users than bots. Browseo.net