Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Bill.  Exactly the info I was looking for.

To get more reviews, we email approx. 1 month after purchase. Social media channels can help, too. Sometimes calling the reviews - "product feedback -- help us improve our products!" can appeal to a different segment of potential reviews. You can have fun social media contests around writing reviews of products. Product reviews are a channel unto themselves, in my opinion. I do like the message board idea. I feel like message boards seem a little dated.

What you are referring to is link triangles. It's black hat, and punishable. You clearly want to perform a link exchange, but you know the links would be discounted. In order to manipulate the system, you link to another site to avoid the link exchange. The bottom line, it is a search engine's job to determine which web pages are the most relevant and reliable for a user. Links are a large part of their calculations. Anything you do to muddy the waters and make it difficult to determine whether a link occurs naturally, or it is paid for / exchanged, it black hat and would be subject to consequences upon discovery.

Great, I really appreciate the info.

Gabriel- It's no problem for these codes to appear in other sections of the page.  There are many character sets out there, and what may appear great to you (without codes) looks like gibberish to someone else.  The codes help make for a uniform experience for everyone.  For instance, there are no "smart quote" keys on your keyboard, yet some programs (like Word) will automatically insert these for you.  To have these on a web page most systems will convert these to codes for you.  The ampersand, however, falls into this category since it's often an escape character for other characters. So, the place we're still really most concerned about is the meta title.  I'm not sure why the mb_convert_encoding() function didn't work for you? If you'd like me to take a closer look feel free to message me.  This is solvable - I've done it before on WP sites.

I see. I think the concern is with duplicate content though, right?

Not, if an "Add on" domain resolves that typing the added-on domain, you finally are redirected to your primary domain, and if that redirection is 301 (permanent). If the domains you want to redirect are totally new, that means that probably they do not have any history and therefore any backlink and link juice to gift to your primary one. In this case, also a 302 redirection (a not permanent) is not SEO harmful.

I am not sure why you are setting disallow of file types.  Google would not index wmv or js etc anyway as it cannot parse that type of file for data. If you want to coax  google into indexing your site submit a sitemap in webmaster tools. You could also set NoFollow on the anchors for the pages you want to exclude and keep robots.txt cleaner by just including top  level subdirectories such as admin etc. There just seems to be a lot of directories in there that do not relate to actual pages, and google is only concerned with renderable pages.

You can try uploading your video to amazons3 with a link back to your site. I would recommend using <cite>**www.ezs3.com. **</cite> However, there is nothing worse than seeing the same exact video on a SERP.  Why not do different videos related to your topic so each video give usable information.

My apologies, actually I am still running my analysis, & I think I accidentally hit send before I was finished typing. And in fact, as I can see, I definitely prematurely sent. ; ) I promise, I will send any conflicting issues SEOmoz way. I just trust SEOMoz guys information more than I do Hub spots spammy newsletters, & banners. I just really am needing to know how SEOmoz feels about them, and if SEOmoz trusts their guidance. When it comes to the Site Grader portion, with SEOmoz webinars, and suggestions, and tools, I scored a 95%, when 5 months ago, I was an 80%.

I have been enjoying your comments more and more. It is very clear you are reading great articles and expanding your knowledge every day. I had not read the article you shared before now. I enjoyed it very much. Matt Cutt's video is from Aug 2009. He shared that originally links were treated equally but Google's link analysis was growing and becoming more sophisticated. The article you referenced was written Mar 27, 2010. This type of article is exactly why I am a member here at SEOmoz. That article represents the thorough work and analysis of SEO experts on the valuation of links. It's a great article. I am not 100% confident in their findings, but they are very logical and I will accept them and incorporate them in my future efforts. So it appears you answered your own question, and thank you for taking the time to share the results.

Great information.  Thank you.

Hi Rory, That's not the default tendency of apache. If the file doesn't exist, it would normaly return a 404 error. You might have a .htaccess file on your server with some rewrite rule that allow such thing to happen. I might also be a misconfiguration trying to show a wrong default 404 page. Also, to fix your broken css/images/links when the page is in a subdirectory, you should use urls relative to the root of your domain, so instead of simply using href="css/main.css" you might want to use href="/css/main.css". Finaly, have you looked at your HTTP headers to see if this page was returning a 404 or a 200 code? For your default 404 page, you might want to look at this : http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/mod/core.html#errordocument Regards, Guillaume Voyer.

There are website crawlers you can employ to scan the site and hunt for specific parameters such as: http://home.snafu.de/tilman/xenulink.html