Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Apologies for the delay coming back to you - Christmas didn't help. And thanks for your answer; I will give this specific use of canonical a shot starting with small subsets of the site and monitor the impact on my ranking first. Another interrogation on top of its impact on the site is to know whether it's worth the effort. But I guess I'll only know it by trying directly.

Ok, thanks Kate!

even i got the same problem i made my website 10 days ago and started making its backlinks and after all these days the backlinks on my site techliteworld arnt indexing

Ed had a great answer. Make sure you have compelling, original content that is optimized for a potential query. Try to make it so valuable that people will want to link to it.  Focus on good internal linking to these pages and make sure that your site is responsive and fast. If you can accomplish this, you will see increases in PA/DA. Good luck!

Bulk would be good if you did not have all the problems you currently have. The big flag I see is having listings out there with the wrong address #1 and also having an address showing when they are SAB's. I would tackle them one by one since you clearly have unique issues with each profile. I would budget about 2 hours of time for each, and work with Twitter support to get things cleared up (not phone support, unless they are USA based)

The links are an issue either way. We are going to be over 100 no matter what. The issue is the additional keywords in the posts

Whos website? If it's your site the Google Analytics or Search Console will give you that data. If its someone else then, as effectdigital detailed use something like SEM Rush or Ahrefs

It's because Google believes that your page doesn't sell the product (which makes the page dramatically less useful) which is due to them crawling your site and caching pages from the wrong data centre (apparently somewhere in Australia!?) Check it out. Here's your beautiful page: https://wattbike.com/gb/product/atom Look how beautiful and useful it is, with the ability to buy the product and with all that nice content: https://d.pr/i/obxBVq.png Now let's look at Google's cache of the page: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https%3A%2F%2Fwattbike.com%2Fgb%2Fproduct%2Fatom You can clearly see in that above link, we're querying Google's cache of the "gb" version of the page (%2Fgb%2Fproduct). But how weird is this? It's cached the AU page 'as' the GB page ,which states to Google that the product isn't available to buy: https://d.pr/i/wkZzh3.png Uh - what Google!? Are you high? Why have you cached the AU page as the EN/GB page. I bet you any money, that has a huge amount to do with this. I reckon' you've got regional redirects installed which snatch up users and force them into their own region's version of the site / page - unless a user manually uses the flag to change their location. Seems like good UX right? And it is, but don't apply the same logic to Google Exempt Googlebot from your regional redirects if you have any (do it via user-agent based .htaccess / web.config exclusion, your dev will know what that means!) You may find that by doing this, Search Console starts giving you more error reports in other areas. That's because you will have lifted a veil that has been cloaking certain issues underneath of redirects (leap that hurdle when you come to it) Either you have a Google caching bug on your hands, or they deployed the wrong data centre to cache your URL, and that's when the redirects bork'd everything. IMO, that's what it is Even if this isn't 100% accurate it will be enough to get a good dev-tective sniffing Hope that helps...

Hey Neil Wow, we are really chuffed here at Effect Digital! I guess... we have a lot of combined experience - and we also try to give something back to the community (as well as making profit, obviously) We didn't actually know how many people used the Moz Q&A forum until recently. It seemed like a good hub to demonstrate that, not all agency accounts have to exist to give shallow 1-liner replies from a position of complete ignorance (usually just so they can link spam the comments). Groups of people, **can **be insightful and 'to the point' Again we're just really thrilled that you found our analysis to be useful. It also shows what goes into what we do. Most of the responses on here which are under-detailed have the potential to lead people down rabbit holes. Sometimes you just have to get into the thick of it right? I think our email address is publicly listed on our profile page. Feel free to hit us up

HI Joe. Yes. Links still work flawlessly. And if you view page source, they look perfect. Here's a button I just made in the theme. http://starttheme2.wpengine.com/url-encoding/ If you hover over it you can see the url is perfect. But the url it's coded in the page like this: https%3A%2F%2Fmoz.com%2Fabout%2Fteam%2Fbritney-muller I'm not sure what plugin is causing this. If you want to have a look you most certainly are welcome to. https://starttheme2.wpengine.com/wp-admin/ UN: demo PW: St#rtTh#m#2018

Both pages are similar, not much work has been done on either since it's a new project, currently only the homepage is being worked on an SEO level. My homepage is doesn't receive links with location anchortext. my homepage has keywords for both areas I mentioned above because they are highly competitive, Tel Aviv and Haifa both appear the same number of times in the home page text, but the Haifa page has way more keywords and is optimized perfectly but still for some reason doesn't show up as intended.

Also found a smidge over 1000 in SEM Rush.  That figures though because you have about 50 x 5 in your navigation alone.  Then the best sellers and then all the gifts and sliders and footer etc.  THere's an awful lot on the page.  Every basic advertising book warns about the common mistake people make when advertising - they write everything they do on one ad (or page). Perhaps you need to organise things a little more.  Read up on data architecture.  It's a big word but not a particularly difficult subject.  They are big on DA at google so the inference is that they use it to rank sites.  I've also found in my own SEO experience that finding the defined edges of topics and sorting into those topics really works.  There is no right answer as usual, it's a game of trial and error.  You need to test everything and add / subtract subtopics from pages and swop them around to find the optimum position.  No tool will do this for you - pen and paper is best. I would say about 100-200 is the maximum amount you want to dilute the links coming from a page.  I think 200 is ok if it's ecommerce.   People say it doesn't work anymore but pagerank sculpting works for me.  I don't do it intentionally but there is a strong correlation between number of links x 'link from' page's authority and target pages authority.  When I link over about 250 links this stops working - presumably because the links are spread too thinly. So get to grips with information architecture and then look at sensible topics for a page.   Or just go to another page like yours that's ranking well and steal their IA, topics and internal linking strategy.  Learning new stuff is great but plagiarism is quicker. 

Yes, you can noindex practically anything using the robots.txt file

Hi Michael, Can you post the site URL so I can review further? Thanks! John

Thank you for the kind comment, John! All credit goes to Darren Shaw who organizes this massive survey. It's such a big job and he did an especially great job this year to make it easier for the respondents to take the survey.

Hi Robert: I just subscribed to Ahrefs and see all the links that are missing in MOZ. Oddly, when I set up a link tracking list on MOZ, 4 of the 6 missing links got indexed within a week. Overall, I find ahrefs to be a better tool. Only think I don't like about it is the lack of a Question and Answer section.