Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Its breaking guidelines but not in order to manipulate a sites rankings. I think this sort of thing might have less of a priority for Google. it's something they can't really control because there will always be ways around this.

Interested to hear an official SEOmoz response to this one though

That's me And yes, I think a competitor ratted me out to Google while I was experimenting with the review stars

I'm up north, Greenwood

Hmm, not sure in that case. Any recent updates to the code perhaps?

And yes, I'm from Perth too

We're they real reviews or manufactured ones? I've seen a lot of Perth SEO sites had em, and Google took them away because they were misleading.

Sounds like you're looking for http://tracking202.com/home

As far as I know, the red rectangles highlight all sections of a page that have the keyword or phrase which you used in your search query.

Is the subdomain data stored on the server as directories?

So for example, is the Moe.123abc456.edu data stored in a folder like 123abc456.edu/Moe

If so, you can simply have one robots.txt on your root domain, blocking those directories

Disallow: /Moe/

Did you reconnect your GA account a few weeks ago? Here's the announcement:https://seomoz.zendesk.com/entries/21081482-reconnect-your-google-analytics-in-your-campaigns

Not saying that that's the problem, but it's the only thing I can think of right now.

This should be exactly what you need: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=1663427

Creating a new sitemap and submitting it should get rid of those errors. And might I suggest you setup a development domain so you won't have these problems again in future?

Assuming that you do not need the development environments indexed in Google, why not simply block all crawlers on those subdomains?

Did someone ever get back to you Brent?

I can't imagine Google wouldn't take notice of a link like you're describing, if they'd come from an authoratative site. An example: http://jguide.stanford.edu/directory/url.lasso?id=1809&lang=en&url=http%3A//www.fashioninjapan.com/

The server header is a temporary 302 redirect though in this case, which isn't as valuable as a 301.

Depending on how many pages your site has, I'd either just add canonicals to the pages, or check if your programmer did indeed not use the htaccess - which you can then always mend.

Also have a read through Dr Pete's post here: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/duplicate-content-in-a-post-panda-world which is probably the only duplicate content post you will ever need to read to fix any problems.

Google are hoping to use rel=author as a ranking factor (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgFb6Y-UJUI&feature=youtu.be&t=57s)

I think that in the (near) future this will start playing a role, and the attribute will become a standard like nofollow is. If you trust your freelance writers, and think they'll be able to created a trusted, authoritative profile, go for it. If you're not sure about the quality of work they deliver elsewhere, for other clients, you might want to consider creating your own profile attached to your site, and use that as the author attribute. That way you'll have a bit more control.

I'd suspect that if you change the date, and ping rss aggregators, they'll publish the content, which then becomes 99.9% duplicate content.