Welcome to the Q&A Forum

You need to make each product which appears to be duplicate different or choose the more relevant page to be the canonical.

The other thing which can cause issues is if multiple URLs go to the same page, even tracking can cause this.

The thing to ensure is all pages have a canonical which points to the most relevant content.

In the results pane, add a segment.

Select Dermographic, Country instead of continent and then the country you want to include or exclude, you can add OR for further countries to include/exclude.

As you say I think Google would understand the hidden object in mobile view,

Normally the content isn't what get's hidden it's the images. instead of using a preset class (which is literally a bunch of CSS).

You could create your own CSS to re-position and change the styling of the element.

However Accelerated Mobile Pages is the way to go with unique URLs i.e. 'm.domain.com'

It would be a massive development for you to change but would see a huge benefit in mobile sales.

Indicate the preferred URL with the rel="canonical" link element

Suppose you want https://blog.example.com/dresses/green-dresses-are-awesome/ to be the preferred URL, even though a variety of URLs can access this content. You can indicate this to search engines as follows:

• Mark up the canonical page and any other variants with a rel="canonical" link element.
  Add a element with the attribute rel="canonical" to the section of these pages:

  This indicates the preferred URL to use to access the green dress post, so that the search results will be more likely to show users that URL structure. (Note: We attempt to respect this, but cannot guarantee this in all cases.)

Avoid errors: use absolute paths rather than relative paths with the rel="canonical" link element.

Use this structure:  https://www.example.com/dresses/green/greendresss.html Not this structure: /dresses/green/greendress.html).Taken from the URL I previously posted. https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en

Hi all,

I truly believe that Google has started looking at the traffic on pages of your site, determines what the overall traffic is and then divides that number by number of pages to work out a relevance.

Therefore if have 10 pages getting 50-100 views each (totaling 800 views / 10 pages = 80)

is better than 100 pages getting 20-50 each (totaling 2000 views / 100 pages = 20)

Therefore if you remove your un-intresting pages (least visited) I believe ranking will increase.

What do you think of this theory? (be kind)

Regards

Usually this is can be caused due to case sensitivity or Https and Http mix ups.

Ensure that all URLS both naturally on the site and in the feeds are identical, try to ensure that each page has a unique URL on the site and classify this in a Canonical link at the top of each page.

Use Screaming Frog to spider the site and look for duplicates as another way of finding the duplicates.

Regards

If you keep both domains but 301 redirect URLA.com to URLB.com Google will give you the credit for your old domain.

Also ensure pages are also 301 redirected on the new URL.

Canonical links at the top of the page to say this is the true URI for this page.

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/139066?hl=en

Set up 301 Redirects on pages which are similar. I.E. Personal Trainers redirects to Who's Who page for example.

Once the traffic has started to go to the new site Google will start to list the new pages. And Visitors will start to realise it's the new site. Also put a big graphic on the old site saying we've moved to and link to the new site.

Do a search on a search engine for the old domain and ask sites to change the links,

Ensure that any well ranked pages are moved across to the new site, (if it worked before it could work again!)

Once your traffic has fizzleed out on the old site redirect the domain as a 301 to the new site.

Which is? Help yourself why don't you? Please share.

150 per page is deemed spammy. and a pyramid structure is the best for spiders with links flowing through the site.

Are the video's on a secondary site i.e. YouTube? If so what you suggested about writing new descriptions for te videos would help, ensuring that the videos have their individual own pages unless they're all about the same subject.

Also this way you can use H1 and TITLE tags too!

Regards

Dave

Miss Thumann,

My rule of thumb is to deem all content not to be yours, read up on your subject from more than one site and then write your own informed content.

I work for a large Industrial Products and Services Company and often carry out spot checks on content which doesn't rank highly on Google. I then send emails to anyone stealing our technical content and ask them politely to take the content down as we own the intellectual property rights to the articles. If nothing happens I send an email to our Intellectual property rights company who then proceed to get the domain withdrawn until the changes have been made.

In the eyes of Google new content is good content and it's clever algorithms can soon tell a clone page. Google doesn't care if it's public or not it cares if it's duplicate.

I hope this helps in some way.

I'd always hold out or test a few pages see if they benefit or get hammered.

Steve,

Looking at your source code the black bed doesn't have any itemscope defined?! So Schema not implemented.

White:

| |
|   | |
|   | Rococo French White Bed |

Black: nothing.

Hi,

Install the Moz Toolbar (Chrome Extension) this is a great indicator for the structure of your website.

The <title>for instance is too long and not to the point. The alt text behind your images is a little vague.</p> <p>15 second load time needs obliterating! Mine loads in 2 seconds when it's slow! avg 1.3 seconds.</p> <p>The homepage is returning a 403 Error too! WOW that's not good Forbidden! This could be some external code which cannot load. That would kick you right off the top!</p> <p>Then think about implementing Schema, backed by Google, Yahoo, Bing and Yandex!</p> <p>I hope this goes someway to helping you Good Luck.</p> <p> </p> <p>Dave</p> <p> </p> <p> </p></title>

The only thing I can think of here is: Has the Character set for the site been defined properly?

As if not all of the words would be a similar symbol and therefore duplicated.

I would agree with Miram Ellis, I try to make my URLs as small as possible and then use Google Custom Variables to categorise content on the site for Analytics.

Therefore my answer would be: samhillbands.com/Charlottesville-VA-Wedding-Bands

One thing I would also add is, don't be afraid of linking at all, if the link is relevant, SEO history told us that external linking is bad. This is only now true if what you are linking too has no relevance to the page whatsoever.

Linking to a great source for more information would only bolster your page as you will be giving the visitor a richer experience. If you can supply the information internally without duplication then internal info is obviously going to be more valuable to your site.

Ensure your incoming links are from credible sites with relevant content/articles. We don't spend too much time doing this but should!

WOW! Issues

Lots and lots of .js & .css files! Each time the server has to go and fetch a file it's time added to the load time.

Your load time is around 17 seconds which should be below 1 second for optimal experience.

Lack of content also doesn't enthuse Google.

Schema.org will help with the site too!

Make sure it's on DMOZ.org too, may take a while to be listed.

Fix these and see a difference.

Another option is add a custom variable in Google Analytics and add the snippet to your pages:

ga('send', 'pageview', { 'dimension1': dimension2 });

'dimension1' is the variable which has been setup

dimension2 is the passing variable i.e. 'Blog'

Hope this also helps, the normal GA code will also need to be included, however this will segregate the blog traffic, but include the traffic in your overall view.

It all depends on how you want to view the traffic on the sites.

I also use this method to segregate product groups.