Welcome to the Q&A Forum

**Are there any common metrics or ways to guess what the visitor impact could be? ** The historical performance your content production and outreach teams have experienced in this or a similar vertical, combined with the current strength and historical reputation of the domain where the content will be placed.   This will be the best predictor of future performance if you ask me. It would be really easy to blow buckets of money on this if your project doesn't have the right leadership, financial resources and talent. The plan will produce at least 10 quality, original articles per day. Ten per day?   That's a lot if you want impact.... You might need 50 top people to pull this off,  with a combination of authors, writers, editors, webmasters, illustrators, researchers, and outreach experts.

Hi Etna, I don't have anything official from Google that I can point you to but I think this is fine. There are lots of examples of this in the wild, for examples: http://www.sainsburysenergy.com/products-and-services/reviews.html Your intent also isn't manipulative so I don't see what Google could be upset with you about. Just make sure to attribute the reviews appropriately and to show a balance. Sorry, I don't have anything more concrete to point you to. Craig

Got it! There are 2 options I can see here, and like I said, I'd be very inclined to do some consulting with Linda Buquet in your shoes, if she were available, and show her the complete details of the scenario. From the limited details I have on this, I see 2 options for you: Do a total citation audit first to make a record of all listings located at suite B and formerly occupied by the retiree. Then, if one of your 3 dentists will be occupying suite B, you would be editing the name (and I'm assuming phone) of these to reflect the new dentist. The main problem with this would be reviews ... it's likely that they would reference the retiree and that could be problematic. Read this thread and the links it contains regarding Dr/Dentist duplicates: https://moz.com/community/q/dental-practice-google-and-dentist-personal-google You may need to minimize the old listings and create new ones. I have to confess, the situation with the firm occupying two suites is throwing me a bit. I've never personally dealt with a business that was organized that way, and it's unusual enough for me that I'd be inclined to seek professional consulting, particular given Google's very irregular handling of listings for doctors and dentists. At the very least, I hope my reply points you in a good direction for further research into how your practice should handle this.

Hi there. Your question is not really a question, rather your thoughts maybe? Anyway, Google News rankings are based on, yes, typical SEO signals, but, more than anything, time sensitivity, mentions and social signals. So, an article, released today, which got traction in social media (shares, retweets etc), and some links will be performing at the top. So, base your optimization on that - the more newsworthy and shareable your content is - the better results you gonna get. Hope this makes sense

Just make certain your http > https redirect is a 301, not a 302 (A lot of the examples on the web for this redirects are actually wrong in this regard). A 302 will make it difficult to get the old URLs to drop out of the index.

An update on this topic would be nice! Thanks in advance!

Woot! So glad to see it wasn't a penalty!

Fully agree with Dirk - this is the proverbial Very Bad Idea. In addition to the significant issues this can cause with duplicate content, its also going to bork your Analytics. Could also be siphoning link equity if folks are linking to his URLs instead of yours. Especially if he later leaves and  decides to point his domain name to another (possibly competing?!) site. There's no reason (or justification) for the employee to be using URL masking here. If he/she isn't willing to put the work into making a site of their own, they should be made to do a proper 301-redirect of their domain name to the company site. Paul

I think the issue comes from the way you handle the pagination and or the way your render archived pages.  Example: First archive page of Aktuale http://zeri.info/arkiva/?formkey=7301c1be1634ffedb1c3780e5063819b6ec19157&acid=aktuale Clicking on page 2 adds the date http://zeri.info/arkiva/?from=2016-06-01&until=2016-06-16&acid=aktuale&formkey=cc0a40ca389eb511b1369a9aa9da915826d6ca44&faqe=2#archive-results => I assume that you're only listing the articles published from June 1st till today. If I check all the different section & the number of articles listed in each archive I get approx. 1200 pages - add some additional pages linked on these pages and you get to the 2K pages you mentioned. There seems to be no possibility to reach the previously published content without executing a search - which Screaming Frog can't do. It's quite possible that this is causing issues for Google bot as well so I would try to fix this. If you really want to crawl the full site in the mean time - add another rule in url rewriting - this time selecting 'regex replace' - add regex: from=2016-06-01  replace regex from=2010-01-01 (replace by the earliest date of publishing) This way - the system will call url http://zeri.info/arkiva/?from=**2010-06-01**&until=2016-06-16&acid=kultura&formkey=5932742bd5dd77799524ba31b94928810908fc07&faqe=2 rather than the original one - listing all the articles instead of only the june articles. Hope this helps. Dirk

My sitemap file has them but only because Screaming Frog and WordPress include that information when they generate the sitemap. Reading the Google forum, there is a reply from John Mueller from 2014 that he specifically says change frequency and priority do not affect ranking of URL's once they are indexed https://productforums.google.com/d/msg/webmasters/w9o8bTgqb9c/7hS7hog3ZIYJ He also states that last mod date is good for Google to know. We all know that you can take things said by Google with a grain of salt, but this is also an instance where it is specifically stated so I would tend to believe it to be true.

i added it to the robots.txt, thanks for the tip, it was about 2 weeks ago

Great, thank you both! Good idea Casey. I tried to make it super hard on myself and looked up a markup from BestBuy, I'll try a competitor.

As per Mark, if you are only planning on using one sole language then I would not bother creating a sub directory for your site to reside in when it would sit best in the root. If however, eventually you plan to branch out again and become a more global operator I would keep your master site in the root and then branch out for supplementary languages e.g .com/fr or .com/de depending upon what you have planned for the future. Again as per Mark, sub folders are my preferred option rather than sub domains, but both have their pros and cons. If you do indeed look to branch out also look into serving alternate language set up and definitely check out this article from Search Engine Land on multilingual sites. a great resource.

Hey Chris, it looks like you got some responses to this over on the Google Help Thread. This is an interesting question. My understanding is that you should include all relevant XHTML, image, and video elements within their corresponding <url>tag all within the XML sitemap itself</url>. This is discussed a little bit over at Allotment Digital and they even include an example XML file that shows the best practice writeup. Let me know if that's helpful or if you get any further clarification over on the Google thread.

hello i would like to show you my case study.... i did a seo service for a website in my country for a really competitive keyword 'wedding dress'. total of 15,000 searches a month! from checking my competitors (the firsts google result) i found out easily they used  wix!! nice website - not to go crazy about. with really thin content - only big image slider and 5 words on the ranking page now how did they get there? compering to others who offers much better content! they did a really good link building. their links are coming from major big websites! and their on page seo is ... sorry for the word ... !@#$hit

Try adding rich snippets and/or schema markup to your website. Schema is clear language that search engines understand very well and could potentially lead to getting your sitelinks to appear faster. Try these links to help you in your quest. Good luck! https://moz.com/blog/a-visual-guide-to-rich-snippets https://moz.com/learn/seo/schema-structured-data

What could also help is to ensure that you host the domains on different servers and have more unique content where possible. Itenaries would be the same but I am sure you could re-write the activies. Also the main pages of the website, the pages which you are relying for ranking on popular keywords ensure that the content is unique. If one of the two websites is more valuable in SEO prospective then take that love first, ensure that the Search Engines pick it up, before taking the other live. additional points in order to stay seperate: have google analytics and web master tools on different accounts for each website.