Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Translated pages never are considered duplicates by Google. I suppose that you're going to experiment with multilingual, not multi-country targeting. In this case you can create the "foreign languages" versions of your site under their respective subfolders (/fr/ for France, for instance). There, you will replicate the English site, with the exception that you will have also translated pages. Be aware: the "home page", the menu and all the template should be localized too. In the case of the not-translated pages, you can decide to canonicalize them to the original version, but implementing the rel="alternate" hreflang="x" so to suggest Google that it's that URL that you want to show to users using a given language in their search and browser. 100% duplicated content - and a situation like this one - is the only moment using a not  self-referential rel="canonical" URL and the hreflang at the same time is justified (and doesn't cause problems).

Hi, there are a couple of issues here. I could find no reference to the company "ConvertMedia" being called "Convert Media". It's a small difference I know, but it's enough to make a difference. Google is able to split words and understand where one word is made up of two, but because these two words as you say refer to a different service, then that is the main cause of the problem. Google's mission is to return relevant results to the person searching and to do that it tries to fully understand (as much as their current algorithm is able) the **intent **of the search. If someone types in "Convert Media", Google will understand that the person wants to be able to convert some media. The fact that there are a lot of services that offer that means there is a lot of pages Google can return for that search and as such, it makes providing a result for "ConvertMedia" much less likely unless you have a prominent brand. For example, "hoover" has become a generic name for vacuum cleaners, but if you search for "hoover machine" the hoover.com website is displayed top. If however, you search for "convert media performance advertising" then that search shows a different intent by the searcher and the ConvertMedia website is returned in the search results. It's a tricky one, but I would first do some analysis to check where exactly ConvertMedia do rank for "convert media" as that will give you an indication as to how far you need to climb to reach page one. I suspect it will be a fair distance. The other thing you could do is produce a page on the ConvertMedia site that says something candidly about ConvertMedia does not "convert media", but can be mistaken for that service. Having said that, I wouldn't necessarily recommend that because I think it undermines your brand which is exactly what you want to grow and be known for performance advertising. I am not sure the above helps much but I hope it explains the challenge you face is ranking better for "convert media". Peter

You are welcome. Hmmmm.. don't know about Yelp, I've seen others using 303 too, but still 302 seems to be the way to go.

I agree with David K. too - where are sales dropping and when did the trend begin? Check your conversion tracking to make sure it is set up and tracking properly. You an also write in to AdWords Support via the 'Help' link and ask them to confirm your conversion tracking is working correctly too. Tip for using Sitelinks: set them at the ad group level, and use the primary keyword for that ad group as the first sitelink. You need to set the sitelinks to go to different URLs than the primary destination URL. Example: If you ad group is structured around 'Prince George Christening Photos', make the first sitelink be the same phrase. Good CTRs.

This evening, there's nothing you can do to be able to access the reports for campaigns created in MA. If you want to help test our soft-launch of the MA custom reports (which is coming in the next few days, I believe), please send me an email at keri@moz.com and I'll see if I can make that happen for you, and I'll keep you updated on the status of the custom reports.

Just make sure they're linking to your most important pages, and the link equity should flow to them. Otherwise I wouldn't worry about it.

Hi Jason, The difference is: a mobile sitemap is a sitemap showing the URLs of your separate mobile pages. the mobile annotation you mentioned above, for the regular desktop sitemap, is just a way of indicating that there is an alternate version of the desktop page for mobile users (it's basically serving the same purpose as the rel=alternate 'switchboard' tags that go in the desktop page's HTML). You would still need to include the rel=canonical switchboard tag annotation in the mobile page's HTML. Hope that helps!

Bob, My first question would be what are you trying to get +1's for? Is it for your domain, specific link or something else? We wanted to have more +1's for our site, so we added a +1 button on our homepage so people could +1 it on the fly. It worked out and we now have 41 +1's more than before. Also, what we have found is that an incentive doesn't always work. It's a bell-shape-curve and after a while it will actually have a negative affect. I agree with Peter, sometimes all you need is great content but what I do strongly believe in is reminding people to do it. You could be on Yelp but if you don't tell people you are there and the fact that you appreciate their feedback, you won't get as many reviews. Same thing with +1's. Let people know you would appreciate the love, if they enjoy reading your content and they can decide if they want to +1 your link or not. If it is good content, it will work every time. Add that button to the target, it works like a charm. If people see it, they will remember to do it. I hope this helps. Best, Ashkan Sobhe

Hi Paul, Sometimes, you will get an automated response before action takes place. However, if a month has gone by, I would go the Google And Your Business Forum and report the entire issue, including your report to the troubleshooter. See if a TC will take interest in your plight and escalate for you.

Thanks Takeshi, Some useful insights there which we are looking to implement into our strategy. On the more technical side, is there a way of discounting copied information (specs etc) from our searchable content so that we are not penalized by Google for duplicating content?

I would still start with the sites that aren't ranking first. The more things you try to do at once, the less predictable the outcome is and the greater the risk of a negative impact. Start by moving over a few sites that aren't ranking that well. Gauge the impact. Do their rankings increase or drop? What about a month after you've made the move? Once you have a better idea of what the impact will be, you can move over a few more sites, and repeat the process. A piecemeal approach may take a little longer, but it reduces your risk and gives you a more predictable outcome. It also will allow you to perfect the process of moving sites before you get to the moneymakers that are already ranking well.

Actually if you feel some of the links you have created in the past could be problematic in the future and you know they are the type of links that have caused other sites a problem then I would remove them. Penguin 2.1 has affected Businesses who have used bad link practices a long time ago. I would say it is better to be safe than sorry and fix it now before you do get hit. It would be harder getting out of an Algorithmic penalty. That is my opinion anyway

Hi guys, Thank you for your great responses! It is actually what I was thinking, nothing to do with the implementation of rich snippet but because Miriam mentioned that you're not supposed to take reviews from third parties then I am little concerned about this. So my question is then where are you supposed to take them from? What is the purpose of the review rich snippet then? I actually took those reviews from Customer lobby and they aren't duplicating anywhere! @Takeshi: The implementation of the rich snippets were made last week and checked the rankings around the same time. Thanks!

I completely forgot, I sometimes use this http://www.sharedcount.com Can be helpful if they have shares etc.