Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Greg, I know some companies use Zerys. They have an abundance of writers who specialize in different topics and are at different price points. They're definitely an option you should check out! http://www.zerys.com/

Oleg, Thanks for your response. I hadn't considered that Moz had gotten it wrong. I just checked Majestic and everything looks fine. Thanks for taking the time to respond, Matt

Thank you a lot. Those are some superb ideas! We will be sure to implement.

I don't think it would be triggered but only testing would give you a definitive answer.

Hi there! Kristina from Moz's Help Team here. We were definitely experiencing multiple outages yesterday with our API that affected our Open Site Explorer tool, our Keyword Explorer tool, our MozBar toolbar, generation of PDF Reports among a couple other issues as well. You can view the history of these issues on our Health Page and scrolling down to the Past Incidents section. All issues should be resolved as of this morning, however. If you're still experiencing issues please send an email to help@moz.com with the details of those issues and we'll be happy to investigate further for you! Thank you and sorry about the inconvenience on this one. -Kristina

Hi, At least not in above case. As you mentioned that you also have rel canonical tag that means you don't want to index query string URL. Thanks

Hi There! I would run your review schema through the structured data testing tool another time to double check that nothing has changed between when you implemented the schema and now: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/ Keep in mind that Google gets to choose whether or not they want to show the review schema on the SERPs. So, your best bet is having the schema on your website and knowing that it passes the schema grades—but know that there is a chance it will not appear on the search results. Google chooses who it shows up for and when it shows up, which can be annoying but as long as you have it implemented correctly you're doing everything you can.

I also have received this warning since upgrading to https. Webmaster tools  shows that no issues apart from a few 404 errors. No indication of an issue when browsing directly

Hi Pete, Glad I was able to help you identify Possum.

Apologies for this! There's currently an outage affecting all areas of our tools that use or contain link data, including Open Site Explorer, MozBar, and Keyword Explorer. We are working to get things up and running again but we don't currently have an estimated timeframe. For automatic updates on this issue, you can subscribe to this outage at the Moz Health Page. Thanks!

The definition of cloaking according to Google is "the practice of presenting different content or URLs to human users and search engines." For that reason, there is some risk in showing Google a different page than what is being shown to your users in the test. Displaying different content based on user-agent is a red-flag to Google. That being said, cloaking penalties are "manual actions", meaning they are manually applied by human reviewers on Google's team, so unless you are purposely trying to be deceptive, the risk of being penalized is low. Additionally, you can request reviews of manual actions via Google Search Console to appeal any penalties. Another approach could be to use server-side redirects for the test, using 302 redirects and redirecting users bucketed into the test to a separate URL. The 302 redirect indicates to Google that this is a temporary change, and that they should retain the original page in their index. You can further reinforce this by adding a canonical tag to the test page and pointing it to the original version of the page. Finally, for high priority SEO pages you may also consider using a client-side A/B test. Client-side A/B testing uses Javascript to dynamically change the content on the page, and is typically not indexed by Google.

Hi John! This seems to be a common issue with the Moz bar. Are you still experiencing the same problem? If so, I suggest reaching out to Moz support: https://moz.com/about/contact

I think you may have some traffic loss in the short-term, but over the long term, you ought to be able to get the site traffic back up, especially if you point the old domain to the new subdomain, along with related 301 redirects for individual pages, if you keep the same or a similar site structure. I happened to have read this earlier today. "Keep in mind though that subdomains may not fully benefit from the link equity, positive metrics or rankings from the main domain they are associated with and vice versa, if Google thinks of them as being under separate ownership. For example, a blog on blogspot.com does not benefit from the authority of blogspot.com. That said, if you already have content on a subdomain, it’s worth noting that the effort and consequences of moving that content to a root domain is typically not worth it, unless you spot an issue that compels you to do so. (If you do decide to move the content from a subdomain to your main domain, a short-term loss in traffic is typical.)" Via Moz's Top 10 newsletter: https://www.stonetemple.com/subfolders-subdomains-microsites-and-seo/ So, I think you need to fully evaluate the value of moving to a subdomain over staying on a 2nd level domain. -- Jewel