Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The thing is, it could be so many things. The audit will help you narrow it down and you'll learn a lot along the way.

I have a responsive menu plugin which adds an optimised menu to the site for mobile. The homepage link in this was missing the http:// and that was causing the issue. I figured that because the issue was on every page of the site it had to be something with the header or footer.

This make me think of a picture of a snake eating its own tail. You buy a domain and build all this great content and then get links to that content, then you sell the domain but take all the content.  You just took away the think that built all the traffic and links, i.e. made the domain valuable.  If you still own all the content, sure you can put it on a new domain but you are basically starting over in building links to the content as all the previous links went to the old domain.  It is kind of a lose/lose situation here for both parties, unless you do not mind building from scratch. If you are going through with this you need to do the following. Make sure that the new owner of the domain you just sold has agreed to not republish your content.  Otherwise they have the upper hand and when you republish, Google will think your stuff is duplicate. I agree with Kate, if you can, go ahead and 410 the content now on the domain you sold (but I assume still control) and request removal of it all through Search Console.  Yes, this will make the new domain less valuable for the new owner, but you are already going to do that by taking all the content. Good luck!

Interesting. If you share a screenshot of what you're seeing with the filters (IE 11 only, Bing traffic) here on Q+A as a discussion, you may get some more folks willing to share theirs as well. The Moz team would likely be happy to share ours.

After looking at the source code for your homepage, here are the anomalies I've found: A dozen or so links like https://static1.squarespace.com/static/ are in your header. I assume these are due to having built your site through them, but these will still count. The "Loving @ Your Best etc." image at the top is a link to the homepage, but so is "Home". That's a bit redundant. Each of your navigational items (couples therapy, counseling, etc) is an on-page link which is probably an unnecessary design choice. The biggest issue s that you have both your desktop and mobile links on this one source page. That's a big no-no; instead, you should have the page that's fetched determined by whether a user is on mobile or not, and then have a separate page for both. This is likely the biggest source of your headache here. I hope that helps, Travis.

I've been pretty happy with Comodo.  Some of their interface is a bit confusing, but their support is good and their prices are fine.  Enormous numbers of options (which leads to some of the confusion!) but with tech support help I've been able to navigate it all pretty well.  I've bought a number of simple ones from them, as well as multi-domain certs.  They've also been good at helping me move existing certs from one hosting company to another--with no extra charges.

That's right, pretty sure Vimeo works the same way

In regard to shorter URLs: The goal is to find a proper balance for your needs.  You want to group things into sub-groups based on proper hierarchy, however you also don't want to go too deep if you don't have enough pages/individual listings deep down the chain. So the Moz post you point to refers to that - at a certain point, having too many layers can be a problem. However there is one one single correct answer. The most important thing to be aware of and consider is your own research and evaluation process for your situation in your market. However, as far as what you found most people search for, be aware that with location based search, many people don't actually type in a location when they are doing a search.  Except Google DOES factor in the location when deciding what to present in results.  So the location matters even though people don't always include it themselves. The issue is not to become completely lost in making a decision either though - consider all the factors, make a business decision to move forward with what you come up with, and be consistent in applying that plan across the board. What I mean in regard to URLs and Breadcrumbs: If the URL is www.askme.com/dehli/saket/pizza/pizza-hut/  the breadcrumb should be: Home > Dehli > Saket > Pizza > Pizza Hut If the URL is www.askme.com/pizza-huts/saket-delhi/ the breadcrumb should be Home > Pizza Hut > Saket-Delhi

Hi Justin, Some of our team picked up on this question and asked me to send you a quick response. In Schema.org markup, you only should declare one product per page, and you have two. Although the Rich Snippets testing tool will say the markup is “All good”, Rich Snippets will not show in the SERP. Then, it looks like your individual reviews aren’t nested correctly inside of the schema.org/Product tag – that could be causing an issue as well. We’ll follow up with you through our Support team! Definitely want to get this working with you.

Hi Fraser Thanks for the info! Without being too intimately involved, based upon this description - it sounds like keeping two separate sites would have been perfectly fine. It seems like there'd be least user confusion (and much easier maintenance for you) with two sites. As mentioned the duplicate content issue is more of a myth as far as causing penalties in this situation. However with that said - this doesn't mean you wouldn't want to mitigate against keeping the sites as unique as possible. You'd want to customize the content as much as you could for each site. I'd imagine because they are so different in real life, this wouldn't be hard to do - unique text, photos, design, etc. Also - from looking at the sitemap, I don't think every one of those pages would be "landing pages" for commercial search terms. That's really the only issue I'd worry about - if you did have duplicate pages that were competing with one another to rank for the same keyword - but it doesn't sound like that's the case here.

To expand on what Lewis is saying, automated content is pretty much the exact opposite of unique and rich content. There is absolutely no way to achieve good content goals through automating this way, even if automation itself were an option. Duplicate content signals to Google that you're either automating it, stealing it, or simply don't have content worth viewing. It has a huge impact on your rankings, but more importantly, it has a huge impact on your visitors/customers. Think of it this way: would you shop on Amazon if every product description and deeper content section was more or less the same?

I changed my robots.txt but still my website pages did not index please help me

Thanks! Good to know

I believe the issue here may be what you are entering into the search engine. You can emulate your location and check the query as if you were in a geographically different place. Even going incognito still passes your location, making local SEO more difficult. Go to Settings (the gear symbol) in the top right of google search, click search settings and change the location to the city your are optimizing for. That may help, but I am unsure what the exact issue is. When you say it doesn't rank well in organic search, I need to know the keywords you are tracking. According to Ahrefs - While checking your domain backlink profile I see that the top level domain http://5starloans.com has 409 backlinks and 40 referring domains while the url http://5starloans.com/san-jose/ only has 12 referring domains and 24 backlinks. This may be the culprit - dofollow links on /san-jose 23 while dofollow links for berkely is 365 as it is for your top level domain page. The title tag for http://5starloans.com/san-jose/ is also different (title tag is Car Title Loans in San Jose CA | 5 Star Loans)  and doesn't start with 5-star loans as the Berkeley page does the Berkeley title tag is 5 Star Loans | Car Title Loans in Berkeley CA - This may play in, but I still need to know which organic keywords you are tracking. The Moz Chrome tool reveals that the San-Jose subfolder has 1 linking root domain while the Berkeley has 2 linking root domains. Unsurprisingly SpyFu shows contradicting results. San Jose shows an estimated 145 SEO clicks/13 organic keywords/rank 1 for star loans while Berkeley shows 1.38 estimated SEO clicks/ 18 organic keywords/ no ranking keywords on page 1-3. I suggest we have a brief Skype call so I can ask you some relevant questions. My Skype name is Acculytic. Or we can continue the correspondence here, entirely up to you. These are quite inconsistent and if you give me read-only access to your google analytics / search console I can look further. I hope some of this was useful but I do need more info to try and help. dR3pIab WazCkWo YnGWvpv uXDfXbV 8vcKszy OPubEla

I will use the basics here! You have 2 website, website "A" is a total SPAM and website "B" is decent and showing some positive moments. When you shut down your first website, make sure all of its content is out of the Google index and all the links are now linking to either 404 page or some other pages other than the content itself. Also, make sure that the content is not used elsewhere. If this is done, you can reuse the content slowly on your B website and run stuff accordingly and I am sure there shouldn’t be any problem with that! Personal Opinion, my idea is to build the newer version of the content (may be by adding more facts, data and figures to it) and reuse it on the website so that it not only pleases search engine but the real audience accordingly. Just a thought!

Could it be because Deep Crawl hammered the site and the server couldn't handle the load or something? Correct. The server reached its max resource limit. Try to set a longer delay on requests, if this is a setting in deepcrawl.co.uk?

Thanks Woody, Ok, any issues with adding no-index tag - Disallow: */?currency/ to robots.txt? Rel canonical would be very difficult to implement (CMS is Wordpress) to implement and super time consuming.

I'm back about a month later to report that it finally appears to have worked. Google is now pulling up my metatitle for a variety of queries. Now I want to get Google to show local landing pages in the SERPS instead of the home page so that the location shows in the title and appears to be more relevant. Always a challenge.  I know the standard tactics, but specific ideas are welcome. Building a silo of local pages around estate planning is hard as the topic is not really local.