Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi TemaB! You've already gotten some solid recommendations, but I'd recommend checking out this blog post, too. It specifically addresses what you're asking.

Are you especially concerned with ranking those pages?

Two comments.... The rankings of a lot of my keywords flux up and down, especially if they are associated with pages that are less than about a year old.  However, once those pages have a little age and a little strength, the rankings usually become solid.  A few mature pages will have unstable rankings, but these make up just a small percentage of the mature pages on the website. The major exception to the above occurs when the content on your page is the same as the content on other pages on the web.  In those cases, the rankings of your pages can jump around in the SERPs.  They often jump up and down in the SERPs or flash in and out of the supplemental results.  So if you are getting content from other people rather than creating it from scratch, this could be a problem.   Or, if lots of weasels are grabbing your content and publishing it on their site then your rankings can become very unstable.  This problem occurs in both websearch and image search.

Hi Christy, not yet.

Let me get this right before I start answering. You have one article having an issue (just one) that is AU and UK, has hreflang implemented, is indexed for keyword searches but not showing for site: searches in Google. Few questions. Have you geo-targeted the subfolders for AU and UK? What version of Google are you using to check indexation? When you say you checked internal links for both, how did you do that? Your own site search (searching on your own site) does not return the UK article? Or do you mean that the site: search is not bringing up the UK article?

I agree with Alex I was trying to think of a way to make the URLs little bit shorter and would recommend doing so as well. The chicken is not an insult it is an analogy of somebody making changes to a site without checking the site structure and testing it prior. When you make the changes use a tool like deep crawl or Screaming Frog SEO Spider https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/test-development-changes/ https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/managing-url-redirects-301-302-307-and-meta-refreshes/ Look out for redirect chains shown below and or redirecting which you can check using this handy tool in addition to the other fantastic tools above. https://varvy.com/tools/redirects/ You need to redirect from https// & http://  to one URL See the bigger photo here http://i.imgur.com/zQYE65R.png please keep in mind the chicken is just to be humorous and lighten everyone's day it's not an insult. Respectfully, Thomas https://youtu.be/uJkbhAErRl4 rmuCC5j.png uoNm8WW.gif dDHQHSk.gif uJkbhAErRl4 zQYE65R.png

As far as organic search and paid search traffic volumes, SEMrush is the best. But Ahrefs launched a similar feature recently. It doesn't show direct referral traffic coming through the links, instead it's a measurement of how links indirectly affect organic rankings.

Hi John, To clarify, when you say, "Half the address is cut off in the results, the city is not displayed at all. And sometimes results from a neighbouring city are shown." are you talking about organic results rather than local results? I can't recall a scenario in which name length affected address display in the local pack results, so that made me wonder if you are referring to organic results, instead, or, perhaps, are you not in the 3 pack but are seeing the cut-off address in the Local Finder view (which can be truncated, yes) when you click the 'More' link? Are you able to share the actual searches you are performing/actual name of the business?

Hey Shawn, 1. If GWT is showing a 404 without a "Linked from," I wouldn't worry about it too much. Sometimes Google tries to recrawl URLs it crawled once in the past, but that doesn't mean it's causing a problem. I would double check that you don't have any internal or external links to "blog/blog," then just "mark as fixed." There's no point to disallow Google from crawling a page that isn't there in the first place. 2. Nope. The only danger of having a long robots.txt is that you may get lost while checking your rules and accidentally disallow a page you want in the index. Whenever you add a rule to robots.txt, make sure you go to Google Search Console and use the robots.txt Tester to check if you've disallowed any important pages. Good luck! Kristina

Hi Andy, Thanks for sharing. I stumbled upon it right after I posted this discussion on the Q&A. It's an great video and does indeed gives a lot of helpfull information!

Hi Zoe, thanks a lot for your reply. I checked the ranking position through pws=0 and also by Moz's Ranktracker. In Moz it showed up ok but with &pws=0 it seemed to have dropped over several positions. Please see my response to Cyrus if you're interested in what might have caused the drop. I did not know that Google does not update meta data in real time. Thank you very much ! Marc

Hi Jordan, The campaign seems to have updated now in part only, on the dashboard but in search section still previous weeks date with some modules empty, ill email help@moz Re On-Page Opportunities within 'Insights' - according to my understanding this module is completely meaningless without a keyword to give it context so, if i am correct just wandering when its going to be fixed (as in the keyword the rank relates to is actually displayed so we can see which is the opportunity keyword ? Although I think Jeremy @MOz may be looking into this now as per my comment and his replies in this thread: https://moz.com/community/q/new-on-page-reports-launching-today-in-moz-analytics All Best Dan

Google still internally values / devalues the links they discovered based on their algos. I think in 2011, when penalties and WMT notifications started to pop up, many SEOs forgot that Google still does a good amount of this internally.  They'll react when it's egregious. If you see pure spam in your backlink profile, Google suggests you go ahead and disavow. If you see otherwise good domains that are irrelevant (which it sounds like you do), then there's no reason to panic until Google misreads the intent and thinks you're trying to game the algorithm.  If you're not doing that, you're probably in fine shape continuing to build good relevant links and creating the most relevant and valuable website possible. egregious

Neither.  Duplicate content is not a punishment. It is a relevance issue. Google simply thinks the duplicate site is a clone of many sites and there irrelevant. Some sites with greater authority it does work for - but google will only pick one site to display. Hence the other site considers it a punishment as they have the same content - but not displayed. Think of it in fashion, people do not usually line of for mass market product, they line up for the limited edition. Google does not want to show mass market, the same thing over and over again - it wants to show unique relevant content.

Hi! Do you have any news about this issue?

Going to respond to a couple points here, but the question of how many keywords can be safely targeted by a single page is a tricky one and has a lot of contributing factors. For example, for the category Wedding Dresses, the URL contains wedding dresses, so can we use " the best wedding dresses in Sydney" in the page title? The comprehensive approach would be to create a page for "best wedding dresses" featuring the most popular dresses and some unique copy, and separately create a page for "wedding dresses in Sydney, Australia" that is locally focused. These might even be separate from a category page focused on "wedding dresses", but it's harder to target head terms in that manner nowadays, since the search results will be unfavorable for an ecommerce category page. For the bridesmaid dresses (URL is /bridesmaiddresses/) can we use " buy best bridesmaid dresses online in Australia"? First off, use hyphens in your URLs like this: /bridesmaid-dresses/. It looks better for users, and historically is better for search engines which prefer to see hyphens when a space is intended. Second, "buy best bridesmaid dresses online in Australia" isn't really a keyword that you would ever integrate on a page, because it's not a real statement, and is also unlikely to be a common search term. For a page like /bridesmaid-dresses/, I'd prefer to see a title tag like "The Best Bridesmaid Dresses For Sale in Australia - Brand Name", or perhaps "Bridesmaid Dresses For Sale - Free Shipping in Australia - Brand Name". It's going to look bad if you try to cram keyword variations for "best", "buy", "for sale", "online", and "in australia" into the same title tag, so I'd prefer to see you focus on the 2-3 most important keyword variants. Can we use terms such as "buy best black dress in sydney", "buy online in australia" or "shop online in sydney" in the alt-tag, additional from the page title .i.e. adding extra keywords in the alt-tag that do not appear in the title? Would this be classified as keyword stuffing? Yeah, you'll certainly want to include other keyword variations on the page - but the examples you're giving are probably pushing the limits of what you can get away with. Also - "buy online in australia" and "shop online in australia" are pretty meaningless. You'd be better off adding phrases like that to product/benefit/feature copy on the page instead of trying to hide it inside of Alt tags. Use Alt tags to actually describe what is contained in the image. In our main categories .e.g. Wedding Dresses, can we add "best wedding dress store", "buy wedding dresses from best wedding store in sydney" in the alt-tag? Quit trying to stuff phrases in the Alt tags. Figure out a way to include it in the page copy, or in the website's tagline in the header, or in the footer, or something else. Hiding it in the alt tags just looks shady if someone inspects the page. Take a look at competitive shopping niches in America and look at what the top 4 people are doing. Those pages are probably the most aggressive approaches that you should consider for your own website. Also read these posts: https://moz.com/blog/7-advanced-seo-concepts https://moz.com/blog/visual-guide-to-keyword-targeting-onpage-optimization https://moz.com/blog/the-new-onpage-optimization-whiteboard-friday https://moz.com/blog/perfecting-onpage-optimization-for-ecommerce-websites

Hi Gary! In addition to the Moz Recommended Companies list Erica has linked to, you might also check out the Contributors box on the annual Moz Local Search Ranking Factors survey we publish, as all participants are recognized Local SEO experts.