Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks for the link. I will request this because it took me an age to add everything! Thank you.

Thanks!

Happens to me all the time in Chrome. Quick tip is if you think you are going to see this problem (and I usually know that I will after being idle for more than an hour or so) then instead of clicking the 'moz analytics' button top right click the little person icon to the left of it and choose 'logout'.  You can then login again as normal without having to go through the deleting cookies hassle. Works for me.

Hi Stephen! Thanks for writing with a great question! Campaigns have up to a 90% tolerance for duplicate content. This includes all the source code on the page and not just the viewable text. So if a URL is at least up to 90% similar in code to another URL, this warning will appear. Although the pages in question are may appear to be different on the front end, they are actually duplicates based on this percentage. We don't know what standard Google uses, but it's safe to say they are a bit more sophisticated than us - so you might be okay in this regard as long as you have a couple hundred words of unique text per page. Google won't say how much duplicate content is too much, so we like to be better safe than sorry. Hope this helps!

Hello Carsten, I am not a developer, but hopefully I can be of some assistance. If not, we'll leave the question open to see if anyone else can be more specific for you. First, I came across a good list of eCommerce sites using Isotope: http://isotope.metafizzy.co/ . If you scroll down to "Isotope in use" you'll see examples from Anthropologie, Rimmel London, Lexus, Biodroid, etc... Perhaps looking at how they handle things will help. For example, it looks like Anthropologie uses unique identifying URL for each product that is its own .jps file (e.g. 4130265414412.jsp), or is meant to appear that way. A lot of AJAX sites will use a hashbang (#!) to enable crawling of dynamically created content on the same URL each time. Here is more information about that. The solution you provided above sounds good, but I'd want to see it in action first. Be sure to view the page as Googlebot, and to see how it looks in Google's Cache Preview in the SERPs to make sure they are treating it the way you want them to. Good luck with this, and please let us know how it turns out so we can be more informed on the issue in the future.

Using your keyword twice is definitely not what I would call keyword stuffing. But I would make sure that you create quality content for this post as the EMD (exact matching domain) could get  you in trouble someday if you don't do this.

Hi Scott, Check out the Moz Recommended List - included are companies whose services Moz recommends for consulting, covering SEO, CRO, design, etc. You may find a good agency or freelance consultant through this list that meets your needs or who can refer you to someone appropriate. I echo the statements regarding contacting the person who developed your website if you had a specific developer. He or she may be able to help too. Best, Jane

No problem if the listing is free or paid but when it comes to local SEO your NAP (Name, Address and Phone Number) should be consistent across the website and if any service is changing the phone number that means you will face the issues with regards to local SEO. My idea is to use the service that submit your business to these yellow pages and data aggregator website once, and then manually shift the listing to featured (I you like) usually not all local citation websites produce leads but websites like Yelp, YP.com, super pages are good names when it comes to conversions through citation websites. Hope this helps!

Thank you Moosa, I really appreciate the help!

Thank you for the reponses I'll get on this.

This feature would be a great addition to custom reporting!

Depends on the type of penalty. Manual spam penalties almost always target the entire site. Algorithmic filters like Penguin can target groups of specific keywords. Though to an outside observer, it's often hard to tell them apart.

Thanks! Yes I see the top comments in the discussion are around that topic. Can't wait to see what the determination is on impact of Titles and/or description specs.

Of course. You can see one of mine here at http://linkbuilding.inetseo.co.uk. That started to rank after less than a week of it going live. -Andy

I hear actually two different reactions, still wondering what's better for SEO. Someone who can help us out?

Getting the publisher markup to work is much more important than HTML validation. One is going to have a bearing on many factors, whereas the other will make no difference at all. -Andy

Thank you for your responses.