Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Doug. Really an eye-opener.

Hi friend,

Yes, the code you mentioned should work the way you expect without any issues.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

I am sorry my friend. Somehow I missed your response.

It should have been: RewriteRule ^(.*)/$ /$1 [R,L]

So, you missed the /

And it is also used to remove the trailing slash from URLs just like the one that I gave you earlier.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi Sorina,

I can tell you that the index dates shown by Google are accurate but is not the case with the Cache date sometimes as the date shown in the Cache and the copy shown in the cache don't match many times but the index dates are accurate. Send me a private message with the actual URLs under discussion and I will be able to comment with more clarity.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

It should have been something like this: RewriteRule ^(.)/(?.)?$ $1$2 [R=301,L]

But no where to be seen. So no idea.

Hi Sorina,

This is a common thing and it all depends on a site's crawlability (how easy is it to crawl for the bot) and crawl frequency for that site. Google would have picked up that post first on the bad site and then from the good site. However, just because one or two posts were picked up late does not mean that the good site is not crawler friendly. It also depends on how far the resource is from the root. Let us take an example:

A page on a good site: abc.com/folder1/folder2/folder3/page.html

Now a bad site copies that page: xyz.com/page.html

In this case, Google might first pickup the copied page from the bad site as it is just a click away from the root which is not the case with the good site where the page is nested deep inside multiple folders.

You can also give the way back machine (archive.org) a try to find which website published the post first. Sometimes this might work out pretty well. You can also try to look at the cache dates of the posts on both the sites in Google to get some info in this regard.

Hope those help. I wish you good luck.

Best,

Devanur Rafi.

Agree with Felip. Yoast SEO is an excellent on-page SEO plugin for Wordpress. I love the 'Force rewrite Titles' feature as with just one tick mark, all your titles are optimized. Cannot imagine working with WP sites without this plugin.

A quick suggestion to you regarding PPC work. You can charge a part of the total adspend. I know many who charge 10% of the total PPC adspend. I also know people who charge based on the performance of the campaign like, per/lead. Hope it helps.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi, honestly, as long as the page you want to plant your link on does not allow many other doing the same, you should be good. If your content, back on your page gels well or is related in someway to the content of the linking page, it would be even better. To put it short, you should plant links on a clean site which in this case is and it does not matter how many such links you have. Such links will definitely have a positive impact to your SEO campaign.

Another suggestion would be, you should take enough care about your link profile and make sure it looks natural with links coming in from different quarters rather than only from a single source (type).

Good luck friend.

Best,

Devanur Rafi.

100% agree with Alan here  as the purpose of rel=canonical implementation is to hint Google about the non-preferred pages (the duplicate or near duplicate pages of their original versions or the preferred ones) and not to index them.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

You are welcome my friend. A good website navigation can really help in this regard. The more easier for the Google bot to crawl your site, the better for Google to show site links in SERPs.

Wish you good luck.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi, those are sitelinks and are currently automated. There is no way you can force them at Google.

Here you go for more:https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/47334?hl=en

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi, while I do not know why Yelp uses 303 but all that I can say is 303 does not pass the link juice and it is not recommended to be used in place of a 301 as 301 is the best way to pass on the link equity to the destination URL.

Here you go for a small experiment that proves 303 redirection worthless. Hope this helps my friend.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Brother, I am sorry  but I don't see anything that says 'Right' or 'Left' in the current Google cache. Please copy the following and paste it in Google to find out:

cache:www.billigste-internet.dk

Let me know if you were able to see 'Right' or 'Left'

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Absolutely..we can also use the Fetch as Google feature to expedite the crawl..

Hi friend, the Google cache date is from 28th October and at that time, you had this in the source code:

# Forside

So now that you have changed the source code, you need to wait for Google's next crawl update for the page and you won't see those things in the cache.

Hope it helps.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi Greg, we have done something similar in the past. Here is what we did:

We had few images (flow charts and stuff) and some of them acquired some decent links. So, we came up with pages that had content highly relevant to those images. We redirected all those to these new pages via 301. After few weeks we saw great results both in web and image searches. And yes, the link juice flows to the new pages though not that much which used to flow in the past but most of it will. Hope this helps.

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi Andrew,

The server on which your website is hosted is throwing a 500 server-side error. You better contact the hosting provider and get the issue fixed. You can use the HTTP header status checkers online like, web-sniffer.net and put the URL, http://www.interconnect.org.uk

All the other tools like W3C validator, http://builtwith.com/interconnect.org.uk etc gave the same result:

500 Internal Server Error

Best,

Devanur Rafi

Hi,

Here you go for an excellent write-up regarding local SEO: http://moz.com/local-search-ranking-factors

Best,

Devanur Rafi