Welcome to the Q&A Forum

We yanked a whole bunch more content than that over the last few months.. blog posts that no longer got much traffic and had never really gotten any traction, articles covering topics we'd covered better multiple times, etc. If they were still drawing some traffic, we set up a 301. If there wasn't much of anything happening, we just let it 404. We haven't seen any negative impact from this so far. I like EGOL's idea of having someone rewrite the content on those pages. If you can't get that done quickly enough to satisfy Mr. Disgruntled, set up some 302s until the new content is ready. I'd also say that it's probably not worth rewriting unless you're planning to do it better than it was the first time around. If you can't blow it out and make it more valuable, then 301 or 404, whatever, either is probably just fine to wash your hands of it and walk away. Stressing out over one half of one percent when it's not delivering results in the first place isn't going to be worth my time, not when I could be spending that time and effort on something more profitable. Opportunity costs apply.

Hi Patrick thanks for your prompt reply, I consider that´s the best option. Thanks for your advice!

I think Mueller's main point may be that if you treat your subdomains separately from your main site, Google will treat them differently as well. For example, if you have three subdomains - www, blog and cloud - but all of them have different navigation, css and limited interlinking and little keyword theme commonality, Google will treat them as separate sites and you will suffer the dreaded subdomain issue. BUT if you integrate the three domains well - same nav, same look & feel and lots of good contextual anchor text interlinking, Google will treat it as the same site and the subdomain issue will become moot. Has anyone done any testing with those variables?

Both answers above are correct and great ones. From a strategical point of view, formally blocking russian IPs does not have any SEO effect in your case, because - as a business - you don't even need an SEO strategy for the Russian market.

Thanks for the answers. Haven't had those figures earlier but I guess you are right. Didn't handle them correctly. I guess it was a mistake from my part. Thanks again.

Dirk, Anthony - Thanks for the feedback. Very helpful. Vic

I would agree with Miram Ellis, I try to make my URLs as small as possible and then use Google Custom Variables to categorise content on the site for Analytics. Therefore my answer would be: samhillbands.com/Charlottesville-VA-Wedding-Bands

I have came across similar situations before and I have to say that Choice 1 should be no problem at all as long as the content is fairly unique on each site. This should rule out the chance of duplicate content. I guess it all depends on the volume, but for me I would go with choice 2. Simply because you then get to cover more spread and aren't stuck in one specific niche. Truth is there is no right or wrong, both will work fine. It just depends on volume/competition

Thanks Ria and Patrick...thumbs up for you both. Definitely seems worth doing. Hadn't thought of it from a fresh content perspective. Totally relate to not buying a product without looking at reviews first, good ratings are very powerful.

There is nothing majorly different. The biggest thing is that the adult industry is plagued with spammy techniques so it can be tough to achieve rankings and disheartening when you're doing things legitimately and you see spammers getting rankings and Google doesn't smack them down soon enough. You have to get creative, which is why PornHub is such a great example in the industry. Best luck!

What about the CTR of your website? Google says "increased CTR as well as more traffic makes your website increase in authority" - therefore increasing organic ranking of all or most keywords - (Google didn't say that part but it makes sense). If AdWords provides both of these things to your website wouldn't your organic rankings increase / increase over time?

Is this still the best advice for this situation? My situation is different but this reply is stale by about three years.

I should have also mentioned the linking structure within the site. All 23 versions of the product are linked from within 1 category that contains roughly 70 products. This is why the products must be kept separate. So users can browse the different specs alongside other products with similar comparable specs in the same category. An example can be found here:  https://goo.gl/5L4cpK (its a little unordered at the moment but will be more organised soon) Take the 572 series, on the page above, it has 11 variations, the link currently filters the results on the page all 11 models are currently canonical'd to one version of the page. The filter also produces a category page that isn't linked on the website   (https://goo.gl/c53sBY) This page is currently no-indexed. How is the following for a solution? Turn the 572 series filter link into a link to the 572 category page (https://goo.gl/c53sBY) Change this page to be indexed and make its description a detailed guide to the full 572 series listing all models, options etc as you suggest Make all the 572 products canonical of this super descriptive all singing and dancing page

Hi there It doesn't matter - I include the current page just in case and to always help search engines understand the architecture. It always felt odd to me if I didn't include it because I am just giving a "partial" structure in my mind by NOT including the current page. My vote - include it. Like Google says you can either add it or leave it, so it's not going to hurt you either way! Hope this helps! good luck!

Hi Becky! Just a reminder, if EGOL, Peter, or both answered your question, please mark one or more responses as "Good Answers."

Hi there, Appologies for the late response... Here's our url's from the page https://www.example.com.au/product-name