Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
It depends a bit on what is causing the self-referrals; normally when you check analytics it gives an indication what the source of the problem might be.
You could check this article https://threeventures.com/how-to-fix-self-referrals-in-google-analytics/ or this one (http://gatipoftheday.com/use-the-landing-pages-report-to-isolate-self-referrals/) on how to fix the problem.
Hope this helps,
rgds,
Dirk
Adding geography in the url might help - but probably not the way you're trying to do it. My guess is that most people will not look for "audit service spain" but rather on a more detailed level (like 'audit service Barcelona'). Agree with Matt that country targeting is a much better way to target English speakers based in Spain.
Just a small note. Not sure if you gave these url's just as an example, but you might want to double check them with a native speaker - "bookkeping" is written like this: "bookkeeping" (same applies for the texts on your website)
rgds,
Dirk
If performance decreased dramatically between the old & the new site it can have a very strong impact on search results. You're in a competitive area, and most of the jokes published on your site also exist on other sites, so the content is not really unique. It's difficult to say post-launch if it is the only reason why your site dropped. I assume you redirected all the old pages to the new one & did a change of domain in WMT?
Did you see changes in google analytics (like increased bounce rate, lower time on page, ...) the moment you changed the site?
Page speed improved - but Time to first byte is still quite high. You might want to check out this article on how to optimise your WP site: http://www.webpagetest.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=13520
rgds,
Dirk
I guess that most of these people just heard that SEO is all about link building. As the price is extremely low, most of these customers will probably reason they don't have much to loose and a lot to gain if they try the offer. They are probably completely unaware of things like Penguin & manual penalties.
An easy road to success is what a lot of people are looking for, the same reason why crash diets & get rich schemes are very popular, even if they seem to good to be true...
rgds,
Dirk
I have very good experiences with physically inviting people (who have the same profile as your target audience) to the office & ask them to visit the site to do some basic tasks on the website (like search for a product, buy a product,...etc). Observe what they do in order to complete the task (even better to film it). We had 10 people doing this - and already after the 3rd or 4th person we noticed some fundamental flaws in our redesign (For the test, it's best that people who where involved in the redesign are not present during testing - they can only observe from a distance in order to avoid interference with the test persons).
rgds,
Dirk
Hi,
There seem to be some technical issues with your site:
site speed - even though the webpagetest result is not that bad - every page I visited on your site seemed to load very slow (http://www.webpagetest.org/result/150423_8J_1E1E/). Screaming Frog indicate that 30% of your pages needs more than 3 sec's to load (and Screaming Frog is normally very soft in judging site speed)
Google insights for speed: again the score is not great but not really bad either - but if you see the number of blocking .js & .css files it's a bit terrifying (https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fchokeonajoke.com%2Fjokes%2Fbest-jokes%2Fgood-jokes%2F&tab=mobile)
most pages call a css file that doesn't exist: http://chokeonajoke.com/wp-content/plugins/all-sub-categories/catstyle.css?ver=4.1.2
on some pages example http://chokeonajoke.com/jokes/best-jokes/good-jokes/ (same for /jokes/death-humor) I was unable to load them in Chrome - in Firefox I got the message: non-responsive script: Script: http://chokeonajoke.com/wp-con…/jquery-2.1.3.min.js?ver=2.1.3:2\. Checking w3c validator indicates line 1627, Column 8: Stray start tag script. (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fchokeonajoke.com%2Fjokes%2Fdeath-humor%2F&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0)
6% of your content is >10 clicks from the homepage
If I were you I'd hire a good css/html/js programmer & ask him to clean your code. For a rather simple site you seem to use an awful lot of javascript. Cleaning the code & working on performance will probably solve most of the problems. It can take sometime however before you regain your initial search traffic.
rgds,
Dirk
Just one small thing - I googled the phrases in the offers you mentioned. Your question which was posted 45 minutes ago on Moz is already outranking all the offers promoting these services. Guess these powerful links, link wheels & backlink pyramids aren't as powerful as advertised...
If it's sounds to good to be true, it's probably not true...
Honestly - stay away from these kind of offers. You'll probably end up with thousands of low quality links to your site which could temporarily boost your site, but before you know it you'll be hit by a Google Penguin penalty. Buying links is and remains a violation of Google webmaster guidelines.
Quote:
"Any links intended to manipulate PageRank or a site's ranking in Google search results may be considered part of a link scheme and a violation of Google’s Webmaster Guidelines. This includes any behavior that manipulates links to your site or outgoing links from your site."
Source: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66356
rgds,
Dirk
Hi,
Not really a great coder myself, but I am building a smaller site as kind of hobby project, trying to incorporate all the best practices of RWD. My first approach as my skills in CSS & HTML were quite limited was to buy a template on Themeforest. I noticed very soon however, that modifying these templates is quite difficult to do, and it's even harder to understand exactly what each element in the css is used for (there was no documentation inside the css)
When I ran some checks with external tools, I noticed that for all the templates only 30% of the css was actually used. Load times were pretty mediocre, mainly because the huge number of external javascripts used for all the fancy stuff on the page. Maybe I bought the wrong template, but my general impression is that these templates are developed based on frameworks which are already quite bloated (Bootstrap, Foundation) - and then they add a lot of additional jquery plugins for things like sliders, responsive menus, ...etc.
If you just need a temporary fix - you could try one of these templates - they are cheap & functional, even if they do not fit your needs for 100%. For the final version, it's probably better/cheaper to find a great designer/coder to build your code from scratch rather (or based on a very light css framework) than to clean the code in the template.
rgds,
Dirk
Not too many options available:
Screaming Frog can detect whether the tag is available on all pages - but this is only a very basic check
Google Webmastertools lists the errors under Search Traffic > International targeting
Deepcrawl can probably do the trick - but it's not exactly a cheap solution (https://www.deepcrawl.com/knowledge/best-practice/hreflang-101-how-to-avoid-international-duplication/)
Alternative would be to use the href lang generator (http://moz.com/blog/using-the-correct-hreflang-tag-a-new-generator-tool) and compare the results this tool generates with your current code.
On Moz - you can also find this practical guide on common mistakes - but you probably already have read that one.
Hope this helps,
Dirk
According to Google webmaster guidelines - a sitemap for users still has some value:
Offer a site map to your users with links that point to the important parts of your site. If the site map has an extremely large number of links, you may want to break the site map into multiple pages. (source: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35769?hl=en)
I agree with Patrick that now most people don't bother to consult sitemaps - if they need to consult it to find their way on your site you probably have a UX problem.
For SEO purposes - it still can have some advantages:
Sites like Linkedin.com still use these HTML indexes (although they are not called sitemaps but member lists) - as you can check when you visit the site in "Incognito" mode in your browser.
rgds,
Dirk
Read this, it's obvious 
If you are selling to B2C customers in the UK you have to include the VAT in the price your list - it's a legal obligation (this is the case all over Europe)
Quote: Any <abbr title="Value Added Tax">VAT</abbr> due is already included in the price of something you buy in a shop. No tax is added when you pay.
Source; https://www.gov.uk/tax-on-shopping
rgds
Dirk
Hi Eva,
The setup you describe is quite a standard approach in countries with multiple languages - and should work just fine, even without the hreflang attributes. Check this article from https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/182192?hl=en. I live in Belgium - as we have 3 languages most sites have this configuration. On first visit -the user is offered a choice of preferred language, which is stored in a cookie. On subsequent visits - based on his previous choice the user is than redirected to the chosen language version
Adding the hreflang can help, but can also introduce new problems - you can check here how to avoid them -http://moz.com/blog/hreflang-behaviour-insights
Hope this helps,
Dirk
I've seen these a few times the last couple of days. Guess it's related to the changes they're doing on the site to make it responsive.
One of the sites we acquired syndicated content to other parties (when we bought them last year, we changed the policy, so all syndicated content now has a canonical url pointing to the original article). Some of these sites were better positioned for our content, but apart from that, we didn't see any penalties for doing this. If these small business owners don't need to rank for the content and they get if for free, it should be easy to ask for them to put the canonical. In our case, discussion with these sites was sometimes difficult as we were paid for providing the content.
Dirk
I don't think you get penalised for syndicating content like this (it would be too easy - you just take the most interesting pieces of content from your competitor, post it on some anonymous domains and wait for his ranking to drop).
The main problem is that you loose control over which site is ranking for the content. Suppose one of the dentists in your case would be quite famous, because he's appearing quite a lot on television, or he treats famous stars and blogs about it on his site. By doing so, his site is quite popular, and get's a lot links from well known sites. In that case, it would be possible that his site is outranking the original site for this article.
For this reason, canonical url's were "invented" - so you can continue to syndicate content, without running the risk that this syndicated content is going to outrank the original site.
rgds,
Dirk
If the external links to these pages are ok in terms of quality, and you don't have a similar page on the new site, I would redirect these pages to the homepage. It would be a bit of a waste to loose good links to your site.
For the ones that have no (quality) incoming links - you could put a 404 (or in your case probably better a 410 - The requested resource is no longer available at the server and no forwarding address is known. This condition is expected to be considered permanent) - see also this video of Matt Cutts on this topic. As Patrick indicates - a custom version is more user friendly compared to a standard one.
rgds,
Dirk
It will not affect the normal search - most sites use stockphoto's, and you see the same pictures appearing on hundreds of sites.
For image search, these new sites will compete with the existing site. If you're current site looks like iStockphoto or similar, these new sites will probably outrank the existing one as the textual context of the images will be much richer than the standard tags you find on a typical stock photo site. This is not necessarily a bad thing, if you manage to get your potential customers to the main site to buy the images.
You could also consider to integrate the new content as a blog on the main domain. It's better to reinforce an existing domain with new interesting content, rather than to start different new smaller domains and this way you won't have any traffic cannibalisation.
Hope this helps,
Dirk
Hi Donna,
Didn't forget your question - however the first reply I got was a bit too generic (Drupal can do everything that Yoast does, and even better, but sometimes several modules are required).
Would it be possible to indicate for which Yoast functions you would need a solution - so I can be a bit more specific in when asking info from them.
Rgds,
Dirk
Hi,
If you look at the API pages it puts April 30th as date of next update (http://moz.com/products/api/updates)
rgds,
Dirk