Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Always happy to see your questions come in, Ruben!

grt thanks Dennis yes that what i meant

Now this may cause some debate, personally I prefer the www version, you can see that moz prefers the non www version and there is a article here http://www.searchenginejournal.com/canonicalization-seo-should-i-use-www-or-not/6950/ that may help you make your own decision. Basically choose one and stick with it.

Hi Luis, Since the launch of the Penguin algorithm in 2012 (and for some time before that), over-doing anchor text has been dangerous. It still works for some sites, but the likelihood of being penalised is greatly increased when commercial or non-brand / non-miscellaneous anchor text outweighs brand / miscellaneous anchor text in a backlink profile. Directories were a popular way to build links in "the old days", pre-2009 or 2008. Many people had stopped using directories before then as well. As Richard says, too many links from irrelevant directories is a bad thing. It's super easy for Google to notice and either ignore or penalise. I would be very selective with my choice of which directories I wanted to be listed in and would take a very white-hat approach to directories in general. That is, don't get listed in one that you wouldn't want to be listed in even if you received no link or a nofollowed link. Some say that directory links should be nofollowed for safety - I'm not sure that just being listed somewhere with a followed link is really that dangerous, but it's safe to say that using directories for SEO purposes is not a good tactic in 2014.

OK guys, that's good enough for me, will not be disavowing. Thankyou to all of you for your help.

I don't know. A good decision would require me to understand the content history, SEO history, and technical history (CMS, htaccess, canonical) of both domains.  I would need study the site and talk with all of the people who have done these things and compile that history as it occurred through time.   I would then get technical advice from a consultant who really really knows the technical details and be willing to pay them for research and study. That history would be only as good as what the people who did the work were willing to share and could remember.  I would not be comfortable with that information, because, the people who did the work have methods and views that are very different from mine. One thing that I can say with certainty.  When I was done with this site the ecommerce pages would be reduced to product pages and a very small number of category pages.  That is all. Would that fix the problem?  I don't know, because I would worry that penalties and technical problems in the history of the site still hang over it.

I would recommend using tossible digits then. Each number is only a few dollars a month, and they have an on site tracking system which allows you to see all calls, with dates,  call duration, and time of call. Another benefit is you can enable email tracking, which sends an mp3 of the phone call to the email(s)  of your choice once the call is over. Very affordable, excellent features. I think this would work better for what you are trying to accomplish. We have used them for 3 years now with no issues. Hope this helps!

As far as I can see, if the content is exactly the same on both the .com and .co.uk sites and you intend to keep it this way for the forseeable future, then there is no point maintaining both. Put all your efforts into developing and maintaining the .com site. Not only will this ensure that you are able to build the authority of one domain, it will also ensure that all your social media activities will be for the one site rather than sharing both .com and .co.uk URLs. Alternatively, if you want to differentiate your content slightly for a global and a separate UK audience then hreflang across the.com and .co.uk sites is the way to go.

Hi there, There's a bunch of conflicting information floating around about this, but the last thing I read from Google was that they no longer recommended using the canonical tag when implementing hreflang: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/new-markup-for-multilingual-content.html See the greyed / crossed-out section and the note underneath. It was super helpful of them to not announce this in any way, but just edit that article. Keep in mind that the original was written in 2011, of course...

Thnaks for commenting Alrockn ! it definately fits the content of the page, just worried about it increasing kw rich word count & repeating key phrase sentence. but if i understadn u correctly then so long as fits content which it does then should be ok ?

If you are going to move it, do it soon. Also compile a list of places where you have already gotten the links and message the site owners to ask them to update their links.  The longer you wait, the more of a pain this will be.  Also, is your other site as sound for on-page optimization as the current one?  If there are issues with title tags or h1 issues or any number of items, then it may not be as successful on the site where you want it to be.

Hello I apologize for the delay. Weekly reports are scheduled based on when campaigns were created so when creating a weekly report they will automatically be scheduled to generate the day after the previous week's collection is completed. Monthly data will be collected by the 4th day of each month so until all data has been collected, reports will not be generated. Weekly reports will re-generate automatically if there is a delay in data.

Hi Jason, I would definitely not canonicalise between the three+ URLs about one text unless those URLs contain identical information. Since they won't be identical (one will be plot, one characters, etc. as you say earlier in the thread), I would not canonicalise. You will result in content such as that on characters not being indexed or crawled. The site is therefore probably less likely to rank for queries like [othello characters] if the characters page has a canonical tag on it, pointing to the plot summary page. Without having seen the site or mock-ups, I believe you would be safe to use separate URLs for each area of study surrounding one topic. However, you could indeed put all this content on one page and use tabs to switch between the content, given that it is too long to fit nicely on one page. The tabs should be operated by CSS, and all the text (plot summary, characters, context) would be in the source code upon page load. People would click between tabs to read it. This is not considered cloaking or hiding content, although I would avoid doing this if the content for each section is particularly lengthy. I doubt it would get you in trouble, but if you are creating substantial content for each area of study, this would work well on separate URLs _without _canonicalising to one particular page, as per your original structure. Cheers, Jane

Hi Courtney, Yes, that's correct. The process is outlined in the Google Places Quality Guidelines (see: https://support.google.com/places/answer/107528?hl=en). If you're not familiar with these, they are the main starting point for understanding Local SEO, as Google sees it. Google's guidelines regarding this are as follows: Businesses that operate in a service area should create one listing for the central office or location and designate service areas.  If you wish to display your complete business address while setting your service area(s), your business location should be staffed and able to receive customers during its stated hours. Google will determine how best to display your business address based on your inputs as well as inputs from other sources. Learn how to add service areas to your listing. If you don't conduct face-to-face business at your location, you must select "Yes, this business serves customers at their locations" under the "Service Areas and Location Settings" section of your dashboard, and then select the "Do not show my business address on my Maps listing" option. Hope this helps clarify your client's options. Additionally, if you're just getting your feet wet with Local SEO, please take advantage of the super free education offered in our new Moz Local Learning Center: http://moz.com/learn/local

Cool. I'm flattered.

You can track conversions through both platforms, and still upload conversions from Google Analytics (GA) to Adwords if you want to.  It makes sense to track conversions through both, because I'm sure you have conversions coming from other marketing campaigns and from organic sources that you can't track through Adwords.  Adwords conversion tracking will only track conversions where the user clicked through from an Adwords ad, so you won't get a complete picture. Unless you view conversions in GA showing all touches, you'll see some differences in conversion tracking between the two platforms, due to differences in attribution.  For example, if someone clicks on an Adwords ad, and then later that day clicks an organic listing to your site and converts, then in Adwords that'll count as a conversion for Adwords, and in GA that'll count as a conversion for the organic listing.

Sadly there is not a way to do this in Moz. Your best bet is to do a trial of True Social Metrics, as they have all that info! You can also check out Rival IQ, and see which works best for you. Hope that helps!