Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I would appreciate any help with the question about link building. If there are only links pointing to the .co.uk only is that a problem for the .com version? What has anyone else done in these circumstances?

Thanks very much.

Thanks Highland.  Th evideo makes sense.

What about links? Do we need to build links to both domains?

Hello a client has launched a website with both the .com and .co.uk

The content is identical. I understand that you should add rel="alternate" hreflang="x" to the code. However, will there be a problem with the identical content? It would be hard to localise the content to one country. I understand why the client has got both domains, particularly the UK one but the actual content is not specific to one country. It is written for English speaking customers really.

Also what about links? In this case do you need to build two sets of links to make them both rank?

Thanks for any help.

Thank you Bruce.

Hello,

A new client came to me with their ecommerce kids clothes website 6 weeks ago. I installed Yoast SEO plugin and set to work changing all their products to proper words rather than codes and optimising titles and descriptions. I did no link building. The domain is new- about 2- 3 months only so has very few links. I added it to webmaster tools and submitted the sitemap. Traffic was good during this time and infact the impressions in webmaster tools and clicks were increasing. It seemed to be punching beyond its weight actually with some keywords on page 1 which I thought odd for such a new domain in such a competitive arena. Then on the 4th October the impressions and clicks fell drastically. The traffic is about a third of what it was.

Now I don't think this was anything Penguin-ish as the domain is so new with no links yet. I know there was a Panda update on the 25th September. Could it be that? All I have done is changed the titles to something more human and I thought Google appeared to like that as traffic was increasing. Could it be that now everything is indexed that it has settled down to its proper position in the rankings which is currently low? We added another way of categorising the products by brand as on the site their USP is their designer brands. I have checked for duplication but as far as I can see this isn't an issue.

Anyone seens this before?

Thanks for your help guys.

Hello,

I can't find the answer anywhere so I wonder if someone here could help?

The ecommerce site I have has Yoast  and Woocommerce installed.

The Post Types tab under Titles and Metas has various options:

Posts, pages, media, products, gift cards.

There is also custom post type archives for products and gift cards.

Should i noindex the media and also the custom post type archives for product and gift cards and if so why?

What about the taxonomies for ecommerce? What's best practise? Noindex?

I  understand the settings for Yoast when its not an ecommerce site but this has kind of thrown me.

Thanks

Thank you for your responses.

Hi,

I am a bit confused. A potential clients website has three versions:

http://www.

http://

http://dev.

In each version they have used the rel=canonical back to each base version. So

http://www."

http://"

http://dev."

I would have expected duplicate content but I see only one version of the content when I check using "....." in Google. Using the site: tool  I see that all three versions are indexed.

When moving through the navigation on them, they all redirect to the one home page - the www version.

Any idea what is going on and what should be recommended?Redirecting all versions to the www. version? Is it a problem?

I had a very similar problem a few weeks back on an ecommerce site and followed the same advice and there has been no problems if that helps.

Sorry Daniel,  I was responding to David's earlier comments about consistency.  To be honest the whole Google local area is much more complicated when you delve deeper and I have much to learn.

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to provide feedback.

It could be confusing like you say.  Google sees the local town appended to the vanity url.  The website meta data is based around the area.  The client wants local results for the area.

Thanks for that.  I will take a look at your suggestions.

Hi,

Thanks for your extensive  help.  The vanity url is Google.Com/mypropertycompanytown

To clear up my confusing query:

The searches we are running do not have "near"  in them.

Property agent +town=local results and organic

Property agent+ area= organic only

This guy has 11 genuine reviews on google +.  The local town is in the geographical  area of search.  Google runs out of property agents to display on the area local search yet lists other types of businesses and not his.

So am still a little perplexed.

Hello,

If a vanity Google+ URL has a local town associated with it, will it show up in the local results for that town only and nowhere else?

My client is on page 1 for an organic search for specific term + area but not on the local results too

e.g. property agent area

But if we specifiy property agent and local town (the one on his vanity Google+ URL) he is found on both organic and local listings. We want him to be found on both organic and local for the property agent area search. His website has address details:

local town (the one on his Google+ URL),

Area,

UK

So you see, the local town is within an area.

Any ideas why this is so? On the local results for the area search, Google lists care homes and other types of businesses etc in the area when there are no other property agents to list- why not list my clients website as it is relevant to that search? Has he narrowed it too much by using the local town in his Google+ URL or is that too simple an explanation?

If you could shed any light it would be appreciated.

Thanks

Thank You Houses! Of course that is the soultion. I had been staring at the problem for too long that I couldn't see the wood for the trees!

What would I do without Moz helpers!

Thanks

Hello,

I had asked my client to ask her web developer to move to a more simplified URL structure. There was a folder called "home" after the root which served no purpose. I asked for the URLs to be redirected using 301 to the new URLs which did not have this structure. However, the web developer didn't agree and decided to just rename the "home" folder "p". I don't know why he did this.

We argued the case and he then created the URL structure we wanted. Initially he had 301 redirected the old URLS (the one with "Home") to his new version (the one with the "p"). When we asked for the more simplified URL after arguing, he just redirected all the "p" URLS to the PAGE NOT FOUND.  However, remember, all the original URLs are now being redirected to the PAGE NOT FOUND as a result.

The problems I see are these unless he redirects again:

1. The new simplified URLS  have to start from scratch to rank

2)We have duplicated content - two URLs with the same content

3. Customers clicking products in the SERPs will currently find that they are being redirect to the 404 page.

I understand that redirection has to occur but my questions are these:

1. Is it ok to redirect twice with 301 - so old URL to the  "p" version then to final simplified version. Will link juice be lost doing this twice?

2. If he redirects from the original URLS to the final version missing out the "p" version, what should happen to the "p" version - they are currently indexed.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Thanks for all your answers.

Hi Andy,

Thank you for taking the time to respond. So basically Rich Snippets are based on Schema markup? - and therefore really the same thing?

In Wordpress there appears to be a Rich Snippet plugin? Would this be used to schema markup various items in a website?

Sorry if this is a daft question but... what is the difference between Rich snippets and Schema markup? Are they one and the same? They seem to be used interchaneably and I'm confused. If someone could give a brief sentence or two about the differences between them that would be great.

Thanks