Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Partial duplicate content can be OK if you provide your own product description. The main problem is writing a product description containing useful, unique content that is not already in the manufacturer's description.

If you have the budget to make these useful descriptions, do it and remove the manufacturer content.

Did launch a quick crawl on your site, these url were not found (but you have several broken links!). These strange URL usually come from bad robots, and may also come from the interpretation of javascript URL or redirects. GoogleBot gets really confused with them.

If you want to dig, check the servers logs.

Hi Jason,

With infos from the latest slideshare of Ian Howells, http://slideshare.net/ianhowells/life-after-penguin, I think some of these links are devaluated, and some are penalizing the site. You may remove them and confess to Google, or start on a new domain, or maybe use a new URL for every page, including the homepage.

This is a though question, penguin recovery is still an unknown process and nothing is guaranteed.

About content re-use, Howells did put the same content on another page, without 301 and it worked. Maybe you can put 404 or remove the content and put it on a fresh domain.

Google can detect same images used with different names on a site. But this not penalized by Google, this would create way too much change in the SERP results!

Of course, you should try to have great, unique images for every complex, user loves this.

Thanks for your answers, I think the first has more importance for Google, as it is for the user. Too bad the study can't be found anymore !

Hi, have you guys an opinion on this point, mentioned by Matt Cutts in 2010 :

Matt made a point to mention that users are more likely to click on the first link in an article as opposed to a link at the bottom of the article. He said put your most important links at the top of the article. I believe it was Matt hinting to SEOs about this.

http://searchengineland.com/key-takeaways-from-googles-matt-cutts-talk-at-pubcon-55457

I've asked this in private and Michael Cottam told me he read a study a year ago that indicated that the link juice passed to other pages diminished the further down the page you go. But he can't find it anymore !

Do you remember this study and have the link ?

What is your opinion on Matt's point ?

Page load time is a very small factor for website ranking, but this could be done :

Regroup CSS in a single file, same for javascripts. Make a CSS sprite for the background images.

Add expires and gzip in your htaccess file if you can :

<ifmodule expires_module="">ExpiresActive On
        ExpiresDefault "access"
        ExpiresByType text/javascript "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType application/javascript "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType application/x-javascript "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType text/css "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/gif "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/jpg "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/jpeg "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/png "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/bmp "access plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/ico "modification plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/vnd.microsoft.icon "modification plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType application/ico "modification plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/icon "modification plus 1 year"
        ExpiresByType image/x-icon "modification plus 1 year"</ifmodule>

<ifmodule deflate_module="">AddOutputFilterByType DEFLATE text/php text/html text/txt text/javascript text/css application/javascript application/x-javascript</ifmodule>

Writing useful comments on well trusted blogs obviously give you some sort of juice, even when the link are nofollow. Google surely recognize a link in a blog comment, I don't think he cares much about the rel attribute anymore, much more about the blog metrics and the comment quality.

Oh this is not worrying me, for sure. I just want to warn the SEOMoz staff about this difference of quality between the site design (and content) and the profile picture. No reason for such bad image quality.

I do agree with you, I did upload a big image, but this should not be the solution to have a sharp looking picture...

Well I posted this after seeing the photo of Hannah Smith on her blog post :

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/information-architecture-faceted-navigation-duplicate-content-oh-my

I have to say that my own picture was taken with very good camera and it looks really bad on seoMoz.

Also I'm on a mac and the screen quality is really good, on regular PC screens this is not the same.

Profile picture are really really ugly, it really as annoying as the rest of the site really nice and professional.

So why SeoMoz use a very high compression rate ? Bandwidth should not be a problem. The site is slow but only for generating the page content, not downloading the assets.

Probably a bug from Google, you should ask them to look manually a it :

http://www.google.com/support/websearch/?hl=en

You may also create a forum post :

http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/label?lid=1d4d2553a95152c2&hl=en

Miranda,

Emails are great for new messages in a question you've responded to, but getting email for every new question is way too much. Daily digest would not be so useful as the majority of questions would already be answered. Maybe a new email for every new question for selected categories.

What would be obviously useful is a RSS feed for the latest questions, really easy to do and useful. Would make the Q&A more popular. I really want those Q&A on my Google homepage instead of clicking on a bookmark.

You won't find any authoritative answer on this, some sort of bounce could be used by Google but you will never know the % for this specific bounce rate.

I agree, this is a bit annoying to have to come back a lot to the website. Moreover the page takes time to display !