Welcome to the Q&A Forum

One sitewide link probably isn't going to hurt you too much. On the other hand it's probably not going to help you too much either.

It is worth pointing out that removing the no-follow from the banner would be a violation of Google's T&Cs regarding paying for links to manipulate Page Rank.

I use BuzzStream to track link building in the way you mention but there are other services out there. Even a simple Excel spreadsheet can do the trick.

They're two different URLs.

If the URL changes but the content stays the same then it's classed as duplicate content.

I feel your pain though - the amount of duplicate pages I've ended up with just because copywriters like to capitalize their words...

Since sometime around 2009 Google will replace your URL in the SERP with a breadcrumb  if they feel it adds a better user experience.

In itself this isn't an issue.

That it takes you to the wrong is odd but I've noticed it happens to a couple of you other pages as well. At a guess I would say that if you complete the breadcrumb so that the last section points to the URL that is being displayed (see this page for more detail) it will solve your problem.

Hope that helps.

Have you recently made any changes to an affiliate program or banner ads campaign?

An extra 100,000 links is actually pretty easy to come by - it could be one site with dynamically generated pages linking to you. I wouldn't be too worried about this but you may want to look into it for your own peace of mind.

With regard to your linking root domains dropping - do you have any records that show what type of sites have been removed? It could be that you had a lot of directory links which Google has removed from the index. If this drop in LRDs hasn't already led to a drop in rankings then, again, I wouldn't worry about it but you may want to look into it further for your own peace of mind.

In answer to question 1 - yeah. Happens all the time. They're spammy sites that are scraping the serps to get some relevant content. There is nothing that you can do about it and personally I wouldn't worry about them too much.

Do your title tags also determine how you link internally and are they inserted dynamically into content on the page?

If not then (and let me know if I'm being dim-witted here) I don't see anything massively wrong with the first set of titles. Could you roll back and do a quick test to see if it works?

I'd say do your best to get the links removed/fixed at the other end but other than that just leave it.

So long as you're returning a proper 404 you're doing the right thing (on paper).

No.

However if all or most of your links come from resources/links pages then I would hazard a guess that you will leave behind another footprint for which you may get penalised.

As a rule of thumb you should try and be on well curated resource pages. So if the webmaster will link out to anyone for a small fee then they're probably not worth getting a link from. If on the other hand it's pretty hard to get featured on their resources list then there's more of a chance that the link will actually mean something.

Unless there are other factors limiting you I would probably bring all of the variables onto a single page and treat size as a variable similar to the way you treat colours.

So you don't currently have separate pages for Burgundy and Caribbean Blue covers so why not do the same for size? You would want to adjust the copy to indicate that the product is available in different sizes and obviously this would require reworking the page but if you're going to create a parent page anyway then you might as well.

Hope that helps.

Hi Sal,

If you look for the referrer column in the report you can see which pages are linking to the broken URLs.

Fix these broken links and you won't be generating so many 4xx pages.

That's the theory anyway. It can be a pretty arduous task but if you stick to it you should be able to get that number down.

If you're paginating correctly then there shouldn't be a problem but you probably want to add some indication of the page number into the title for clarity for users.There's an old post by Rand about it here http://www.seomoz.org/blog/pagination-best-practices-for-seo-user-experience

Although, as you're loading in the new results with AJAX I'm not sure if this complicates matters or simplifies them. I wouldn't foresee there being any problems but haven't experienced it first hand.

Because you are an Australian company with an Australian domain and hosting in Australia you will find it harder to rank on Google.com - especially for competitive keywords.

To be honest after looking at your site I don't think you're quite at your fighting weight for competing on tough keywords in a foreign search engine.

If you really want to rank in the US you might want to conduct an onsite audit to check for issues (example-home link in top nav links to /index) and also invest some time into link building.

Hope that helps.

Twitter. You only need to find one decent copywriter as they tend to hang around in groups.

And depending on subject matter you can also try hiring bloggers.

It's not going to have as much affect as if it were hosted on company.com/blog.

At the moment the bulk of the domain level link equity is being passed to the info. subdomain. If you really want to benefit from it you should move it to a folder on company.com i.e. company.com/blog.

If it's been migrated correctly then you don't have too much to worry about with regards to search engines sending traffic to the blog but if your primary concern is link equity then it's a bit of a silly place for them to move it to.

If your blog title is fed into the H1 then it will make a difference.

I'd recommend having a look at the SEOMox 2011 Ranking Factors Survey which looks at on page ranking factors.

http://www.seomoz.org/article/search-ranking-factors#metrics-6

That being said I think there is an art to writing blog titles/headlines. I'd personally sacrifice having a perfect SEO title for having one that's punchy and attention grabbing.

+1 to notifying Google through Webmaster Tools.

However this may not solve your traffic problem so I'd probably get to work doing a little social outreach/linkbuilding as well if I were you.

If there's a valid reason to have the article on Nipca (as in it adds a benefit to users) then you could use a rel=canonical.

If it's not adding any value for users and is generally a dead page then why bother no-indexing when you could just remove it all together and not have it wasting crawl allowance.

I don't foresee this being a problem.

At all.

And I know what you mean about being scared of your own shadow

I'm assuming that the term you're targeting is "fotograf i odense".

I'd recommend running your homepage through the SEOMoz on page optimization tool.

You're showing up within the top 100 which is a good start. If you can build some links to the site you should quickly rise up to the top 50.

Although I should warn you that until you get to page 1 (and maybe page 2) you won't really see a large increase in organic traffic.