Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Here you are, Rand has a blog post about this today:

http://www.seomoz.org/blog/subfolders-root-domains-linkscape-update-more

Site's down so can't help much. From a site audit standpoint I would make sure you have good keyword saturation on all your pages, unique titles and descriptions, every image has an alt tag and that your site architecture is sound and crawlable. From an off site perspective I would look at your competitors' backlinks in linkscape and see if you can get in on those. Probably some people list adoption type services and you can get listed where your competitors are.

Remove the bad links, make sure they are all gone, then file a reconsideration request explaining why you were penalized and what you have done about it. You should be fine after that, might take about a month or so. You can request reconsideration in your webmaster tools account by going here:

https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/reconsideration

Good luck!

I've only ever submitted my sites to tons of free directories, not the paid ones. I'm thinking of getting into a few paid directories now, but just wondering, anyone had experience with a paid directory link being treated like a paid links an penalized or anything? Has it helped you?

My competitors has a lot of backlinks from paid directories, so I"m thinking of doing the same thing. But if Google thinks of paid directories as paid links, I would be better off just turning him in

IT is absolutely critical to 301 redirect every one of your existing .com URL's to its new .co.uk counterpart. That's really all you can do. I would certainly be using a .co.uk domain if you are in the UK, so that's a good move.

Well this has never happened to me before, so I'm guessing a Google glitch is unlikely, as I use Google dozens of times each day and haven't seen this. Chances are its one of your other two possibilities, although I'm not sure how any type of cookie could cause this. Very interesting find, I would post it on the Google help forums as well to see what any of the Googlers think about it.

You are operating under the assumption of the random surfer model, which weights all links equally. Under the reasonable surfer model, links are weighted based on the likelihood they will get clicked. Therefore, internal links pass a whole lot of that mozRank. There is also no guarantee that all 5.56 mozRank is passed in some form or another. Each link passes a portion of it, but that doesn't mean if you add them all up you will necessarily get 5.56. That's just the most you could get.

Yup, I got one from her, that wasn't today's though. Funny thread from before, hadn't noticed it. Looks like this is a known problem and hopefully something can be done about it.

At least a couple of times a week I have been getting messages from spammers who claim to be interested in me and remind me that color and distance don't mean anything when it comes to love. I keep marking them as spam but it's getting very irritating. Is SEOMoz doing anything to actively combat this or is there not much that can be done? And is this happening to anyone else, or are there really a dozen women in another country interested in me who use the same message to tell me so?

I'm not sure on the DJ passed issue, but the 4.00E-05 looks like some kind of scientific notation which means 4 with 5 zero's in front of it, or 0.00004. The decimal is too long so they anotate it as 4.00E-05. If it said 4.67E-08 then that number would be 0.00000000467. Hopefully that makes sense.

How mozrank passed is calculated is based on the pagerank algorithm that says each link on a page passes juice. So if the mozrank of the page is 5.56, then you look at how many links are on the page and each one passes a portion of that 5.56.

301 redirects will maintain about 90% of your blog's authority. The only way to retain it all is to get the links to point to the new URL, which is probably impossible if you have hundreds or thousands of them. Just set up a wildcard redirect that does a 301 of blog.site.co.uk/* to site.co.uk/blog/* so that every page redirects and is maintained. The worst thing you could do here is not transfer some of your content over and leave a bunch of 404's behind.

I would use your private message to SEOmoz on this one, or contact their support group, as this seems a bit odd. Are you saying the .com.au site has a bunch of 302 redirects that point to you? If so, there's nothing you can do about it if you don't own the site. But what kind of data is the campaign picking up from them? Is it counting their pages as yours or anything?

Yeah let me point you to some resources on this:

http://www.seomoz.org/ugc/new-reality-google-follows-links-in-javascript-4930

Your best resource is from Google here:

http://code.google.com/apis/searchappliance/documentation/68/admin_crawl/AdvancedTopics.html#javascript

To your question though, I do believe Google will execute external javascript files. Ajax stuff I'm not as sure about. They have a primer on this here:

<cite>code.google.com/web/ajaxcrawling/docs/learn-more.html</cite>

The 90% thing I recall from SMX advanced last year I believe. Basically people would try to hide internal links in javascript since using nofollow for pagerank sculpting was debunked by Matt Cutts in 2009. Turned out Google could see most links being created in javascript.

You can read up on that second link there in javascript crawling from Google and it goes into a lot of detail about what they can do, hope it helps.

Google has said they can execute about 90% or so of all javascript at this point, so there is a good chance Google will be able to see these affiliate links, even if they are being done in javascript.

I'm not sure what the deal is with blue flags and report cards, but if you have duplicate pages, you should either use the 301 redirect or the rel=canonical tag. My guess is that maybe you had a rel=canonical tag on a page that pointed to the same page, so maybe the crawling tool took that to be some kind of error? I don't know, but make sure your duplicate pages are either redirected to the original or that they use a rel=canonical tag to specify the original, and don't worry about any reports that are simply notifying you of the purpose of a canonical tag.

Your question does not make any sense. How do you remove a duplicate page? Delete it. If it is being caused by some backend issues, then use the rel=canonical tag to specify the original page or 301 redirect the duplicates to the original if you can do that.

In your example I'm not sure what you are asking. The URL's are cut off in your question as well as on my browser, are these examples of two different URL's showing an identical page? Are you saying there is an internal link somewhere that points to the wrong place, and it is returning a duplicate of the original page or something? Then change the internal link to point to the right place.

Here's what I would do, make the title tag of your home page "Main Keyword | Website Name" and then make the title tag of your blue-widgets.html page be "Main Keyword | Secondary Keyword | Tertiary Keyword" so that both kind of mention the keyword, but don't specifically target identical phrases. This is not a bad thing to do because it is part of how you would get a double listing anyway.

You also won't get meta duplication info this way or anything.

Google will do what Google will do. Just as results change when the query deserves freshness (think how search results for osama bin laden changed dramatically within two hours) so do some results deserve local emphasis, in google's mind at least. If the places results show up after the top three, then getting into those top three is the same as any other top three. If the places results are showing up before any others, there's nothing you can do to get yours ahead of the places results, that's just where google puts it.

some searches even spread the places results out. A search for payday loans brings up A from the map as #1, then no places results again until #4. The key is SEO is SEO, so always have good, unique content and get good links and you will move up as high as you can.

And this is a classic example of how URL structure can be so important. Do you use wordpress? If so, go to your permalinks and try and change them to static, non parameter urls. Then you don't run into that problem. The issue is you cannot redirect one to the other, only rel-canonical it. This should still work the same way and from an SEO perspective you should be fine though. I would still rather have nice urls instead though.

Any link juice to one url that has a rel=canonical tag to another url will not pass link juice I believe. Only a 301 redirect passes link juice from one url to another. the rel=canonical tag has more to do with indexing and avoiding duplicate content than it does redirecting link juice around.

bit.ly links are just 301 redirects. All the link juice that goes to one bit.ly url passes to its destination url for the most part. Like other 301's it loses a bit when it redirects, so always better to get direct links when possible, but sites like twitter might make this impossible for long urls, so take what you can get.

Google knows the original by using the rel=canonical tag. These work across domains as well. If you syndicate content, it doesn't even need to link back to you, nofollow or dofollow. All you need to do is have the rel=canonical tag to the original post and you're good.