Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Many thanks Miriam and Eric.. Another Audit following your resources and a think again with content. Kind Regards Carrie

I'd say your gut feeling is right - in fact, you may want your first post to be a simple "apology" for being absent due to being busy (or something to that effect), and alerting people that from now on you'll be posting often. Address the issue, and present the solution you've already come to.

The interesting part about your question is that the old pages never ranked, and the new pages aren't ranking either. Are you trying to rank for a keyword that's too difficult? Does your site have a manual or algorithmic penalty? Are other pages ranking on your site for different terms? You could have technical errors that are preventing the site from moving forward, or the keyword you're trying to rank for may be too difficult given the authority of your site vs the competition. Can you share more details about this situation? Without knowing the site and the target it's pretty hard to give any real recommendation. Every site with relevant content to the target keyword phrase and tuned up onsite should at least hit page 5 as long as the keyword isn't overly competitive. Would you be able to share more about this situation?

I really hope it helps and wish you luck.

Perfect.. sounds like "It is also possible you are blocking bots from accessing the page with the host or via htaccess.." was in the right direction! Cheers, Jake

Hey, Thanks for your answer but I didn't ask about legal or copyright. I have the confirmation to use this content - don't worry. I just ask how to do it without penalty.

Hi there. I think that the "problem" lays behind the idea of OSE - not to get all possible backlinks, but important ones. At the same time OSE crawls only down to certain depth, which means that for facebook link to be crawled it's gotta be at the top of the list for backlinks on facebook domain. The page you specified has about 7.5k backlinks, which is not a lot at all, if you compare to other pages on facebook with tens of  thousands of backlinks (https://www.facebook.com/VinDiesel/ - example). So, the chances that MOZ will crawl a page with several thousands backlinks are pretty slim. It's the same reason you rarely see local directories in your website's OSE report. I hope this helps.

The likelihood of this change making a + / - difference in the rank of your category page is very low. At best, the weight an H1 has in on-page SEO falls solidly into the bottom half of all factors affecting page rank. Further, based on the theme preview, there is very little on this template to generate search rank in the first place. The vast majority of the content is dynamic, and though it's related by category, the actual snippets of copy associated to the content this page touts aren't topically connected. Given the page's utility, which is to coalesce category-related content, your priority for this page should be to ensure that it does its job, which is to move visitors through to actual content. You don't want a page like this to become a bottleneck. Without changes to the template that result in engines having more unique information about this page, that's the best you should hope for here, IMO. The two primary, static elements on this page are the main heading and page title (there may be others that don't change). They should be tied together in terms of what they communicate about the page. Regarding the removal of the word "Browsing", its presence or lack thereof will have very little, if any, impact to page rank. In terms of how this word choice affects the page's key performance aspect (to get people to other content), it pretty canned, but that's just personal opinion.

Hi there! I agree that something does look funky here. I've never actually seen a site with a Domain Authority of 1 when we seem to have indexed numerous links for the site. There's actually a fresh index update scheduled to roll out quite soon, so I'm interested to see if the update has any effect on the score, as a number of issues with quality have been addressed. If you're not seeing a change after the next index update, then please shoot us a message at help@moz.com to so we can get in touch with our engineers about this issue. Thanks!

Thanks Martijn, we should be all right then. Appreciate your help!

Hi Mark, Sure, I would still submit these kind of domains as well to Google Search Console as submitting the domain name doesn't say anything about the indexation of the URL. It's a monitoring which you could use to submit URLs to be indexed but it's not a required thing. We have certain subdomains or root domains in there for our CDN for example that don't provide us with any additional SEO benefits but we still would like to make sure we can monitor some metrics there.

Remove the trailing slash and it shows some links. Not "many" but it definitely shows up in OSE.

Hi Ronnell, Thanks for your considered response, I appreciate it! Re: #3, I was thinking an advantage to splitting the content amongst multiple pages could be that it gives the search engines more URLs to index, and thus gives more opportunity for users to find it via long-tail keywords. For example, if we split a webinar transcript across five pages, and optimize the title tags, header tags, other on-page elements, etc. uniquely for each page, then it increases the chances a user will find one of those pages (via long tail searches) vs. loading all the content on the first page. We could add a sidebar paragraph that gives an overview of the webinar content, and users would see that when they land on the page (or perhaps a modal would be more effective?). Once a user signs up to view the entire transcript, we redirect them to an unlocked experience of the first page of the webinar. I'm not sure if the effort to separate the content and optimize all the unique pages is worthwhile, and I do think the user experience will have more friction if we go this route. We plan to experiment and see how it goes! Thanks again -

If your developers are able, I would prefer to see these tabs handled with hashes instead of URL parameters, like this: http://www.dedoose.com/in-the-field/#1 (Overview) http://www.dedoose.com/in-the-field/#2 (Publications) http://www.dedoose.com/in-the-field/#3 (Events) http://www.dedoose.com/in-the-field/#4 (Case Studies) Even better would be to created dedicated pages for these topics and get rid of the tabs like Dirk mentioned. Also as Dirk mentioned, set a canonical tag for these pages and crawlers should index them correctly: For example, all of your "In The Field" pages would have this exact canonical, regardless of parameters or hashes:

There's a way to create jump links in the link dialogue box, does this work for you? https://en.support.wordpress.com/splitting-content/page-jumps/ I also found this plugin: https://wordpress.org/plugins/better-anchor-links/ It might help to search "anchor links" as that's what some people call them too.

Definitely a frustrating problem! After taking a look at your site, it might actually be overly optimized for the term "swinger." Specifically, it shows up on your homepage (in the various sections) in the text 122 times. This is an older, but still good WBF from Cyrus talking about over optimization and how it can hurt you. A quick look at your backlink profile for your homepage shows not very links that are followed and aren't on low-quality and potentially spammy directories, as you mentioned. Building quality links back to your site will definitely help. Getting more content built will definitely let you build links a lot better. When it comes to content and social media in the adult space, PornHub is really leading the innovation. They wrote a great article about what they do for our blog. Definitely when it comes to content, part of the problem with your site is that everyone is behind a log-in and thus, behind closed doors for Googlebot. I haven't seen anyone in the swinger space really own content and social; and that could definitely set your company apart. Hope that gives you somewhere to start!

Agree with Dave's comments.  1) Get the syntax updated on your canonical links at a minimum.  2) Yes your canonical solution will "work", but it is not best practice.  This "solution" is really a last resort.  I would try and push to move away from using canonicals this way. You optimally want 1 URL. Just to add some color, a great / classic video on this was made by Matt Cutts.  He gives all kinds of examples where you could have duplicate URLs, i.e. www vs non www subdomain, sorting parameters added onto the URL, different file extensions,  capitalization changes, etc.  He then gives 3 options to fix them. Best practice: Fix your site where you only have one URL per content item and link to it consistently (Best solution) Use 301 redirects to consolidate to one URL (Next best solution) Use a canonical link, if you cannot do 1 or 2. (Last resort) Note that Matt says that they treat a canonical as a strong suggestion (it is treated similar to a 301), but they do not always have to follow it.  He repeatedly says, use the first two options, and would NOT recommend a canonical as your best or first option. My favorite quote is at 2:24 in the video, "Developers keep SEOs in business" What your developer may notice is that Matt does say that using a canonical link for consolidating http and https will work. No one here would say that it would not, it is just not optimal.  Sure, you can use a pair of scissors to cut your lawn, "it will work".  It doesn't mean it's the best idea.  I would think any developer worth his/her salt would want to have "clean code" and having duplicate URLs is not "clean" by SEO standards Ok, so now you need to go back to the developer or your manager with an argument that is stronger than just, "Well, some random dude on the Moz forum said that Matt Cutt's from Google said it was preferred not to use a canonical link even though it would work".  I would never want to leave you in such a position. Here is what will/can happen over time if you stay with your current setup. Report consolidation issues.  When you look at GA for traffic or OSE for links, any spidering tool for technical issues, social sharing counts, you now have split data for any given page potentially.  Sure there are ways around this, but now you have to spend all your time "fixing" reports that should not be broken to start with.   Trust me, this will come back to bite you on the bum and will cripple your efforts to show the efficacy of your SEO work.  Now who really wants that? Link juice consolidation issues.  With any redirect - you lose a bit of link juice.  If you have links to both sets of URLs, any single page is not getting as much credit as it should. Down the line 301 redirect bloat.  If you ever change anything and need to setup a 301 redirect, now you have to setup 2 of them and having too many 301s can negatively impact server performance. One last thing.  If you can get the URLs consolidated into one using 301s etc.  Go with the https   That is the way that we are headed with the web and so you might as well get going in that direction. Good luck!

If we can't change the tags before launch, but change them immediately after, how long does it take Google to recognize the change and adjust our ranking? Will we be digging ourselves out of a hole if we implement it the wrong way and fix it shortly after?