Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi, I'm going to answer with 2 separate and very excellent blog posts that can answer the question much better than I can: http://seogadget.com/link-auditing/ http://www.stateofdigital.com/step-by-step-guide-finding-low-quality-links/ There are also a number of automated tools out there link Link Detox, but a manual review is always necessary before disavowing links. Also keep in mind that although Panda might have some backlink elements baked in as part of the algorithm, most people consider Panda to be mostly caused by on-site issues, such as duplicate content. You may want to do a bit of digging into recovering from Panda penalties, including removing thin and duplicate content, and improving on site experiences, before removing links. Hope this helps! Best of luck with your SEO.

This video by Matt Cutts is quite (strangely) explicit: Cross linking to the others site's country/language versions is not a problem, and should not be considered a cross-linking scheme thing; It is better, though, not using the footer for those links, but the classic flags/country names selector. A good alternative for solving this problem is creating a page with all the links to the other versions of site, as the Apple site does (but, please, don't take into consideration the bad geo-targeting Apple is using in term of International SEO, in that sense it is not a great example). Why is that kind of page useful? It is because you can suggest it as the "x-default" URL in the hreflang="x-default" mark-up (here what Google says about this so forgotten tag).

If you filter and show only cells that have been formatted a particular way, say red, all you should have to do is copy and paste the results into a new column. Then you should be able to find and replace the city state with nothing once. That should yield your root keyword list. Just make a copy and delete the other columns if they're presenting an issue.

Awesome! Thank you!

Thanks so much! You really do a fantastic job monitoring this community. I appreciate it! Ruben

Mike, I specialize in on-site audits and related consulting - sent you a private message through the Moz member system just now about it... Alan

I checked the link profile in Majestic. It seemed to hug the X axis in a bad way. There were likely precious few links of any value. When the vast majority of links appear to be garbage, you're pretty much back at ground zero. And that's given a clean bill of health. Best of luck, cleanup can be a thankless job.

@Mike Roberts Sorry, I somehow missed your response. thanks for your advise, I'm aware of the problem. Whole site should be replaced with something more up-to-date and this is the direction I'm trying to push them. Regards, JJ

I've overseen a few websites that duplicated the occasional article between themselves. I always recommended exactly as EGOL said, and it worked fine. The duplicate article on Site B had a canonical link to the original on Site A, and the "Originally published here" link was added at the bottom of the duplicated version of the article. If the page is relevant to the audiences on both websites I don't foresee any major problems. The only issue I'd see is if you overdid this and started to copy a high percentage of pages. The search engines don't always get it right - they can choose to ignore a canonical and sometimes a duplicate on a higher authority website might outrank the original on a lower authority website, but this has never happened to me.

Thanks, Martijn, The lawyer that is helping me put together the new privacy policy says I need to use this copy: "We also use third party cookies (such as DoubleClick) to run Google Analytics Demographics and Interest Reporting. These cookies gather website visitor data (such as age, gender, and interests) to optimize website content and marketing and do not collect any personally identifiable information." I can't find where Google actually explains how the demographics and interests info is determined. The instructions, such as they are, are in the digital advertising section, so it may be possible third-party cookies are involved (?). Ah well, better to err on the side of caution - we can say that they are in use, and not get into trouble if they aren't...but if we do use them and don't say so, then we can get into trouble. --Janet

Thanks Miriam, I actually reached out to Phil before posting here, I know he is very knowledgeable in this space. Do you know anything about Facebook reviews? Are they important enough to go after them?

Thanks for the info!

I took a look at it, and the Facebook page is definitely indexed for both your keywords. I did a search for both of the keyword and site:facebook.com. It's just not ranking very highly for the keyword anymore. I would focus on making sure your content is solid. It also looks like Google may be biasing against Facebook pages for these keywords. Since it's a service, you're in local SEO territory, and you'll want to focus most on ranking well locally over anything else.

No Hangout video on the 1st page of results for me - I tried "United States" as my location, and "Tampa, Florida", signed in, signed out, PWS=0, etc.  results were consistently the same. Forthepeople.com page KempRuge page Richard Mizel Youtube video theinjurylawyers page Burnetti page Burnetti home page Capazlaw page Personalinjurylawyertampaflorida home page kfblaw home page injurylawyers page

Hey Federico! Thanks for your note about the images linking from a site to the author's site with a NoFollow link. We thought that was the answer, but wanted to get confirmation and appreciate you reassuring our gut feeling. I may have not been too clear in my question, but we aren't trying to rank images for SEO as we know the original authors will get top priority (hopefully). Per the stock photo accounts, we have spoken with the copyright teams from iStock/Getty and 123RF and they are of the same nature. If we, the company, buy images on behalf of our clients, then we are not allowed to send the client the raw file or a copy of the raw file, as that would break their copyright rules. However, we can use that said image for any number of websites or blogs as we choose since we have the royalty free rights to that file. It really is such a grey area, but when we talk with clients we inform them that if they want any images for the website/blog and wish to use those same images for any print material (brochures, magazine ads, flyers, etc) then we ask them to open an account with the respective site and purchase the images, so they hold the rights. We then upload the images and then delete from our systems. It's too much of a hassle. I will review the link you shared for the FlickR CC images. Thanks for sharing that! - Patrick