Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Not 100% sure but those "rogue" pages look like pagination pages and no-indexing them could cause some issues.  They don't have any content on there so I am not sure.  Also, this is just correlation and I'm not saying its causation but Google+ links have indexed my sites extremely fast and the sites that utilize Google+ tend to have higher percentage of indexed pages.  Again, correlation not necessarily causation. Search Engine Land had a good article on SEO problems with pagination here.

Hello Nadir, We generally don't remove Q&A questions unless they are spam or not TAGFEE. Other community members have taken their time to answer the question, and deleting the question removes their MozPoints, and also doesn't give people a reason to answer questions if they keep having their answers removed.

Damn... this is always a horrible thing and the most frustrating aspect about this is that there is no effective solution that can help to protect anybody in advance from such black hat techniques... sorry to say that but this is a development which becomes more and more common... wish you the all the best!

Thank you for your responses Davanur and Kurt.  The page /foo is copied a great deal across the Internet.  I believe the Canonical Tag pointing back to our website helps as Davanur mentioned.  The content of the page is fairly short -- only one screen.  Kurt's idea of using an abstract on /foo and linking to /nov05 would work if the page contained more content. I believe we will leave things as they are based on these two responses.  It is easy for us to change these design points (the use of Canonical on every page for example) with little effort as the website is dynamically generated. Thanks again! Greg

What would be a 100% white hat way to get the same results?

I would have to second Gary Lee on this one. Chris as great info as well but like Chris is saying you probably need to do some rewriting.

Thanks Greg - definitely helpful to hear your experience and the uplift you saw. Appreciate you sharing that! Regarding the "too many links per page" - one nice part is that this will only be for logged-in subscribers, so Google won't see it (unless their crawler buys a Moz Analytics account!) :-). And yeah, as Keri said and Dr. Pete has pointed out, 100 links per page is more of warning (kind of a "you're creeping up there,") not an error/problem every time.

I have just been looking at this same problem and from what I can figure out, the 2 methods you mention above, separate pages and Ajax pushstate are the best (maybe only) way to go

Thanks, Ruth. I think I'll do this -- double check to make sure authorship is correct (which is, quite frankly, not easy to do!) and just take it easy on the links I put back to my site in any upcoming HuffPo columns. I appreciate the helpful feedback!

I don't think nofollowing lots of links would be unnatural, as it doesn't strike me as a quick "hack" to boost your rankings. If nofollow was taken off lots of links then that might be something Google would pay attention to as PageRank would then be passed to these links. If you can't endorse / trust the links then nofollowing them is what Google recommends: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/96569?hl=en&ref_topic=2371375 If you want to be extremely cautious then you could add nofollow to the links on some of the websites, and see if anything bad happens before doing the rest. George

I would suggest checking your permalink structure. Go to Settings>>permalinks. I typically use the custom structure and just add /%postname%/ . If you are using a custom structure make sure it is correct. That being said, After visiting your site I don't even see a "bands page" so you might want to also go through your source code and and see if there is an old link that didn't get removed. I found one today on a clients site. It was in a slider. So i just removed the link from the slider itself. Good luck hope that helps

Does this site below belong to you? It is a replica of your page http://systemfarmer-web.gopagoda.com/uzemeltetes/ When i take a snippet of text and put it in quotes in Google, that site shows up as the authority for that content. If you own that site I would look at canonicalizing it (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139394?hl=en) or at least noindex it.

Hey Paul, I'm attaching a screenshot of the "Location of your sitemap file." I think these settings - which I didn't change - are correct. But, if I need to change something here, please let me know. Thanks for help! I really have no idea what I did to cause this problem, but I guess, as long as it gets fixed, that's all that matters. Best, Ruben 2aC2XPI.jpg

Actually, I did contact them as soon as I saw it in my report, but when I tried to find the link I was a little lost. Thanks for the help!

Hi Glenn, Assuming you're on IIS7, I think these are the steps you are looking for: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc732930(v=ws.10).aspx. I strongly recommend you test the redirect configuration out on a test server first if you don't have a great deal of IIS experience. George @methodicalweb

Wow! Thanks, Jeff. Can't tell you how much we appreciate your efforts here. It's great to have the wider based testing in addition to our own. Thanks also for your footer suggestion. We always used to have footer links and when we changed over to WordPress, because our menus are html now, we dropped them. But you offer a great reason to put them back in. We need to make a widget spot for that and I am considering some text changes for the Home page, so we won't be launching the Responsive site until those are completed. Thanks again!!!

Yes, using a date structure in URLs can help search engines understand the date context of the information. For example, CNN uses a date-based system, like this, where the date is right after the URL: /yyyy/mm/dd/: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/11/06/documents-show-first-days-of-obamacare-rollout-worse-than-initially-realized/?hpt=hp_t1 ABC News uses a similar structure: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/11/the-notes-must-reads-for-wednesday-november-6-2013/ As does the NY Daily News: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/theraces/2013/11/daily-news-staff-aqueduct-selections-for-wednesday-november-6-2013 Hope this helps... Jeff