Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Errick, That won't hurt you at all. Please watch Matt cutts video on this @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8eQgx-njk4 Thanks

Hi Adrienne, In terms of the URL not claimed error can you confirm how you are doing this - there are several reasons why this can be lost including - trying to claim more than one URL in Merchant Center - for this you need a multi-client account which I linked to in my original response. You can also lose it if your site becomes unverified in webmaster tools - what I would suggest is that you look at this Google help article in relation to this and see if any of the reasons apply to you - https://support.google.com/merchants/answer/176793?hl=en-GB

Hi, Thank you for useful information, really helps! I wish I could manually (I'm a designer and parttime webmaster on our site), but since the links are too many from too many places, and login page has nofollow norobot, I will recommend my boss 301... Thanks again! : )

Thanks for checking this out. I'm going to do some more digging and see if I can replicate this with other queries.

Fish frys = Link Bait (pun intended)

Hi John, Beside the great points mentioned before these suggestions might help you. I ones saw a few inserted casino / gambling URL’s pop up in a Google Analytics reports. Might be worth your time to check if there are any new URL’s created. Run some security scans on your site to find any vulnerabilities that might have caused the hack. Since you didn’t find it in your database, you could check for any hard coded links with the search through files option in Notepad. If the link is hard coded you should be able to find it. If you are using a CMS like Wordpress, check if all your plugins and themes are up to date. Poor maintenance could have caused the security breach. If your website is hacked, could it be that the hacker changed links to prevent an easy discovery? Might extent your search to more generic spam terms. As Dirk said, don’t wait too long solving this issue. If you are depending on your SEO and you can’t fix this issue within days I would rather hire an expert then wait a few weeks. Goodluck!

Hi, Google's advice on this configuration is to use the "Vary HTTP header" to let the Google bot know that the same url is used for mobile/desktop. See also: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/mobile-sites/mobile-seo/configurations/dynamic-serving?hl=en . While Google strongly recommends responsive design - this option is also valid. Matt Cuts says the same in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va6qtaiZRHg (it starts with all the caching stuff, the part which might be of interest to you starts at 3:38) Hope this clarifies, Dirk

If a lot of your citations are San Diego based then perhaps. Even Moz doesn't get a knowledge box from time to time unless you enter Moz Seattle, WA, and their brand is very national / international. Again, a big part of the knowledge box is user intent and search volumes.

Hi Thomas, I don't think that technically there is a problem with adding url's to a sitemap & then blocking part of them with robots.txt. I wouldn't do it however - and I would give the same advice as you did: regenerate the sitemap without this content. Main reason would be that it goes against the main goals of a sitemap: helping bots to crawl your site and to provide valuable metadata (https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/156184?hl=en). Another advantage is that Google indicates the % of url's of each sitemap which is index. From that perspective, url's which are blocked for indexing have no use in a sitemap. Normally webmaster tools will generate errors, to let you know that there are issues with the sitemap. If you take it one step further, Google could consider you a bit of a lousy webmaster, if you keep these url's in the sitemap. Not sure if this is the case, but for something which can easily be corrected, not sure if I would take this risk (even if it's a very minor one). There are crawlers (like screamingfrog) which can generate sitemaps, while respecting the directives of the robots.txt - this would in my opinion be a better option. rgds, Dirk

They turn me off,

I agree with Highland that this type of solution probably won't be your best choice. How much of your traffic is actually mobile? Rand Fishkin shared this post on Google+, saying that Moz wasn't worried about making the deadline since they have very little mobile traffic. Also, in this discussion here in Moz, Peter Meyers posted that this update is page-based, so if you have a smaller number of pages that are very mobile-crucial, perhaps you could fix those first, and then work on the larger fix for your website.

Hey Noah, The profile looks fine. For the facade, I suggest only changing either the Profile picture or the Cover because it's sexier if they are different. Good day,

Hi Margaret, You should read this review on the Moz spam tool written by Marie Haynes, who is quite knowledgeable on link removal & spammy links. Basically, the tool can be useful, when used in combination with other tools and with manually reviewing the links themselves. So don't take decisions only based on the score of the tool - Ryan made some valuable points on how to determine if a link is spammy. You should also read this post by Marie on how to identify unnatural links. Based on these elements, you can make a decision whether or not to disavow these links. rgds, Dirk

Awesome. Will give this a shot. Thanks, Michael

Hi Charles. Good ideas already. I'd also look for partnerships and promotions around green certification (several sites feature these in relation to their energy uses) with manufactures, stores, repair shops, pretty much anyone dealing with e-waste. If they could be labeled as e-waste neutral via your process that'd be something they would want to brag about. The link back to you would then display their certification. Cheers!

If you canonicalize the damaged product back to the original product, the damaged one won't be findable in search anyway, same as if you had deindexed it. In either case, people could still find it on your website. And are you sure you cannot change the canonical? This support page seems to imply that you can.

I would also set up your HTTPS site as a new one in Google Webmaster Tools and Bing Webmaster Tools (Bing automatically does it), but set it up in GWT. Once you have done that, make sure your sitemap is added and crawled again. Get GWT to crawl the sitemap again from your non HTTPS account too, so redirects are recorded.

Thank you both. I think we should go for this solution. Marcel