Welcome to the Q&A Forum

When you are using dynamic content on a page, if done properly you should have a no-information option, this is the content that will show for anyone who comes to the page but your CMS does not have any information on them.  This content (what you could consider the page's base content) is what Google will see and rate for relevance.

Another excellent question. We're looking for the word "mobile" in the code in a number of languages to help determine whether a page is mobile-friendly or not.

Hi there, Regarding the X-Robots tag. We have had a couple of sites that were disallowed in the robots.txt have their PDF, Doc etc files get indexed. I understand the reasoning for this. I would like to remove the disallow in the robots.txt and  use the X-robots tag to noindex all pages  as well as PDF, Doc files etc. This is for a ngnix configuation. Does anyone know what the written x-robots tag would look like in this case?

I can confirm that Shopify records the source of the FIRST click to the site and does not update it. I can also confirm that (by default) Google Analytics records the LAST source in a session which results in a conversion (ie. Last Click). So in some cases it will be the same (eg. the user first comes to the site from a Google organic search and decides to place an order during the same session). But in other cases, the user may first come to the site from (say) a Google Ad, perhaps sign up for email, then return some time later via the email, or direct, or from an organic search, or whatever. In this case, Shopify will have recorded the initial source (Google Ad) and Google Analytics will have recorded the last source (or Last Click). There are a few edge cases where GA does not capture the conversion (eg. if the users transacts on Paypal, but does not return to the site, therefore does not trigger the 'thank_you' page or the conversion tracking). I find it useful to know BOTH: which traffic source initially acquires the customer, but also which traffic source results in a conversion Does this make more sense James?

We've all been new to this at one point or another! I'd recommend starting out with Moz's Beginners Guide to SEO. It'll take a while to work through it all, but you'll have a much better understanding of how to improve your organic traffic by the end. Best of luck to you!

Thomas, I agree with you about a copywriter's role and expertise. My point is that there ARE differences in the copy produced by a capable wordsmith versus a writer that understands and considers things like SERP features, semantic scope, mobile vs desktop experience, the role of supporting assets, etc. I've spent so much time massaging professional copy that, by the time it was passably optimized, I had basically done it myself. So yes, I already pay 2x for optimized web copy (and code). The problem is that_ half of that cost is my time_. I would definitely pay a premium for a copywriter with SEO chops. I digress... The question is whether decent web page / blog copy published via wysiwyg is any more or less successful, SEO-wise, than the same copy coded by hand (by which I mean foundational SEO, not ninja guru jedi sh*t). I'm asking a specific technical question; wysiswyg vs hand coding. There is clear consensus here that coding by hand (done well) has a better chance to rank on the Google. That's pretty obvious, really. That is not the thrust of the question. Good copywriters write good copy. Good SEOs do good SEO. Copywriting is tough. We ask these professionals to become experts in topics (and their page-level details) in a matter of just a few (billable) hours. On the other hand, we SEOs spend weeks, months, and years with our clients. We understand their market, audience, vernacular, and differentiating nuance. I don't envy the copywriters' challenge, but I will pay a premium for a unicorn who can do it all. ...I digress again... This is a technical question: What is the delta for the same copy produced via wysiwyg vs. by hand?

Thanks Moosa for the kissmetrics post - it looks very helpful for our pricing project. We'll see if any other Moz members finds the original post.

Thanks, Alick300 — unfortunately, the slash doesn't appear like that in the URLs on this site: they look like this www.domain.com/page.html?Page= ......... In running through an online robots.txt tester, all three versions in my original question seem to work. Until proven otherwise, I'm using the first one because it's the simplest.

Okay, great. I'm thinking on the right track here then. I'm mostly after the user's experience here. I want it to be clear they're still dealing with the same site/brand.  I have the same feeling about the 3rd party domain. I just want it all under the same umbrella here as much as I can while being able to keep this fairly easy and low cost.  Thanks for the input. I really appreciate it.

Hi, There's really no difference in the CSE index and the regular Google index. 301 redirects are the best way to ensure people will find your content and to get Google to update the index ASAP. It's a time consuming process to pair up old/new URLs, but it's really the best option for UX and indexing.

Hey There, Joy is correct: the primary concern here is that Google will not understand where you are located, leading to ranking problems. On the user side, the customer may be unable to access correct driving directions, and may end up not finding the business at all. Both of these things impact the business' main goals of being visible and experiencing transactions. So, definitely not advisable.

Thanks Alick. It Helps.

I believe you do have to take an additional step to set up the ads because not everyone wants them. They're done through AdWords Express so I would go here and sign up: https://www.google.com/adwords/express/home-service-ads/

If you launch a duplicate site, Google will sniff it out and neither site will rank because they will treat them as one site with duplicate content. I had an issue like this for 2 legitimate sites with the same content and different brands. When we went with cross domain canonicals, we started ranking in a big way. Without improving Backlinks, Content Quality and UX, your site will not achieve it's old rankings. The site was getting ranked because of link spam, and when those links spammy links go bye-bye your rankings go with them. With the new "kinder & gentler" penguin, stick to 1 site and focus on making the current site awesome and acquiring high quality backlinks.

You guys are awesome!! Thank you so much! That is exactly what we thought! Thank you for confirming, we loaded a backup.

Hi Rolando, Hmmm... How about we look at this a little different: What are the blogs you're qualified to write for (e.g., some publications prefer authors be active members of the community or have written for similar publications in the past) Which publications would be worthwhile for your brand? Which of those publications accept guest authors? You'll need to do a little digging, but a simple, easy-to-use way to find out if your ideal place to share content accept pitches is to do a simple Google Site search: site:domain.com “submit a guest post” or site:domain.com “guest post by” This will help you figure out if the site you wish to write for offers guest posting opportunities. Read these two posts: The No. 1 Reason Your Content Gets Rejected by Prominent Blogs  and Power Guest Posting for SEO

Thanks!

I am confused with the answers. Even though majority claims that different landing pages are not required, I can see clearly top landing pages in our niche are created for same purpose of targeting to rank for particular keywords and majority of them are  successful. I would like to know if there will be any penalty if we create related landing pages.