Welcome to the Q&A Forum

just perfect, thanks Moosa

I agree with Jeff's suggestion. Although, just for fun I plugged both URLs into Open Site Explorer and they are really kind of a statistical dead heat, One has one more link than the other, and the one Jeff prefers has marginally better MozRank and Moz trust, but not by much. The overall Page Authority is identical at 13. They probably both could use some love, but yes, it appears you might at the very least have a keyword cannibalization issue. I understand how this happens because it usually results from an attempt to address navigation and try to assure that visitors are finding items they want via several different paths. Frankly, duplicate content happens a lot on eCommerce sites. People often talk about "duplicate content penalties." There is no such thing. It might just cause Google to rank one page and ignore the other, or rank both pages lower because it can't tell which one is really the important one....but it isn't a penalty, per se. Still, lots of duplicate content can cause other problems (like interfere with how much of your site gets crawled on a regular basis), so it's good to address where possible. Canonical tags should do the trick in this case. Cheers, Dana

I've been seeing a fairly long time for Google to catch up with 301s and pass along the link juice....a couple of months.  Consensus is that something around 90-95% of the link juice passes through a 301.  There's some talk about 301s not passing link juice forever, although I haven't heard any evidence of exactly how long that might be, but seems like it would be in the 1-2 year range at least.  Just my opinion & recollection of a whole bunch of other people's opinions though :-).

Hi there, I am sorry your invoices are MIA. Please email our Help Team directly about this at help@moz.com. Thanks for your patience! Christy

Fred, Indeed, we are using magento Blake

Thanks Tim. I will def check these out.

Hi Jenni1, You are right to be concerned. Do not use the canonical tag like you have described above. I would recommend putting that content on it's own unique page. Then, pull in the content to your product pages via a an ajax request to pull that content into the tabbed area. This would make the content visible for the user but not a part of the page html for the search engines.

Thanks for the responses!

Thanks for responding Anthony....in response to the stars displaying on page here is a website for an example, their schema reviews are on the bottom of the page. The stars displaying the rating above each review do not seem to be JPG so I assumed they were part of the schema code. http://www.usdish.com/mo-dishnetwork-springfield.html

I think Anthony's idea on this is a good one and would be worth considering. I guess it depends on how many of these you have rotating at any one time and how many URLs you therefore have to maintain. My thought on it would be to create a custom 404 page for your site that is a more pleasant landing page than regular 404 pages are. It could provide a nice apology that the content the link took them the person to is no longer available and show a number of anchored links for where the visitor may like to go to next, e.g. where to view other promotional flyers or other pages on the site which may be important to the visitor. By doing that you provide a better visitor experience. Here are the recommendations from Moz's page on HTTP status codes. I think these make a lot of sense: ----------------------------- When visitors reach 404 pages, they should be given navigational options so they do not leave the given site. Web optimized 404 errors pages should contain: notification that the user has reached a page that does not exist a search box a easy to understand navigation system so the user can potentially find what they were orginally looking to access a link to the home page ----------------------------- I hope that helps, Peter

Yep I agree with Dan, unless you really want people to be able to find your lost password page through the search results i'd disallow it as well - actually there is a bunch of stuff you can do to further secure your wp-admin folder should you so choose : http://www.wpbeginner.com/wp-tutorials/11-vital-tips-and-hacks-to-protect-your-wordpress-admin-area/

Danarchism raises a good point. Is there a place where crawl impacts are noted? Given the respect that your metric has earned and the number of questions it raises when there are unexpected fluctuations, it would be really helpful if Moz shared their observations. Also wondering (like Danarchism) if that's already available and I too have missed it. If that's the case, please share. Lastly, was this a one-time anomoly that's now fixed?

That's a really good answer!  I have seen some REALLY confusing metrics on the web, and in particular one site that claims to calculate link juice - <cite class="_jd">www.ecreativeim.com/pagerank-link-juice-calculator.php</cite>‎ The calculations done by this tool indicate that almost no link juice is passed without PR! I beg to differ  - what do you say?KeithPS: Love the tools you guys design!

Yes be careful with back links Adrian. If you employ a company with a good reputation, they'll make sure the building blocks for your company link strategy is authoritative, as well as informative for the targeted audience. Google algorithms will penalise poor links for sure. In the last 3 years, Social Media has had a massive impact on link development. Social Media is the future for "authentic" link development. Regards, Gary

If you remove the redirection, you remove the link juice from any links to site B that was flowing to site A.  Having a link or two from B to A won't likely provide near the link juice of the redirects (I see 10 domains linking to site B today). Still, we're only talking about the link juice from 10 domains, so it's not a huge deal.