Welcome to the Q&A Forum

You misunderstand the meaning of that article.

"...that when you do block thin or bad content, Google prefers when you use the noindex over 404ing the page..."

They are talking about the walk around the problem of blocking pages INSTEAD of removing them.

So, if for whatever reason you don't want to delete a page and just put a 404 status on it, it's worse than putting noindex on it. Basically, what they're saying is:

• if you have thin content, DELETE it;
• if for whatever reason you don't want to delete it, put NOINDEX on it.

P.S. My suggestion still stays the same. Delete all bad content and, if you really want, put 410 gone status for that deleted content for Google to understand immediately that those pages are deleted forever, not inaccessible by mistake or something.

Hope this makes sense

.

hi there.

Of those pages, only about 10% really produce out of search. There are old sections of the site that are thin, obsolete, discontinued and/or noindexed that are still on the sitemap.

Have you considered removing those pages/sections, rather than altering the sitemap? It would make more sense I think.

Hi there.

I think you might find this q/a helpful https://moz.com/community/q/how-does-indeed-com-make-it-to-the-top-of-every-single-search-despite-of-having-aggregated-content-or-duplicate-content

Hi there.

No, you won't. Archived campaign is not included in total number of campaigns in your account, since none of the metrics of archived campaign are being recorded.

Well, I do see the ones you mentioned on that list, but not it-it or de-it.

Hi there.

I think people are forgetting that GMB and G+ is pretty much the same. As far as I understand, Google is actually moving from personal G+ to Business G+ and changing the name of the network. So, assuming that my thought is correct, I look at this: https://support.google.com/plus/answer/1057172?hl=en

And it says:

Tip: We recommend that you choose a photo that's 1080 x 608 pixels. The smallest photo you can choose is 480 x 270 pixels, and the largest photo you can choose is 2120 x 1192 pixels.

Hope this works.

Interesting. Google search doesn't return anything on this locale.

Are you sure that locale exists?

Honestly, I think there is no really an issue with what's happening on your website. It can be a bit awkward for users to see different urls from expected ones, but most "standard" users don't look at browser's address bar anyway.

P.S. No, don't redirect ?page=2 to POST request.

Hi there.

I assume you're tagging for local image search results? If so, just make sure that Google understands those geotags (i guess by googling your tagged images and seeing if they come up). If Google does read those geotags, then it wouldn't matter what program you use.

Cheers

Hi there.

I found this list of all available locales, if locales you're trying to do are in this list, then go ahead, otherwise it won't work.

P.S. List might be old and updated by now, but i don't think so.

• af-ZA
• am-ET
• ar-AE
• ar-BH
• ar-DZ
• ar-EG
• ar-IQ
• ar-JO
• ar-KW
• ar-LB
• ar-LY
• ar-MA
• arn-CL
• ar-OM
• ar-QA
• ar-SA
• ar-SY
• ar-TN
• ar-YE
• as-IN
• az-Cyrl-AZ
• az-Latn-AZ
• ba-RU
• be-BY
• bg-BG
• bn-BD
• bn-IN
• bo-CN
• br-FR
• bs-Cyrl-BA
• bs-Latn-BA
• ca-ES
• co-FR
• cs-CZ
• cy-GB
• da-DK
• de-AT
• de-CH
• de-DE
• de-LI
• de-LU
• dsb-DE
• dv-MV
• el-GR
• en-029
• en-AU
• en-BZ
• en-CA
• en-GB
• en-IE
• en-IN
• en-JM
• en-MY
• en-NZ
• en-PH
• en-SG
• en-TT
• en-US
• en-ZA
• en-ZW
• es-AR
• es-BO
• es-CL
• es-CO
• es-CR
• es-DO
• es-EC
• es-ES
• es-GT
• es-HN
• es-MX
• es-NI
• es-PA
• es-PE
• es-PR
• es-PY
• es-SV
• es-US
• es-UY
• es-VE
• et-EE
• eu-ES
• fa-IR
• fi-FI
• fil-PH
• fo-FO
• fr-BE
• fr-CA
• fr-CH
• fr-FR
• fr-LU
• fr-MC
• fy-NL
• ga-IE
• gd-GB
• gl-ES
• gsw-FR
• gu-IN
• ha-Latn-NG
• he-IL
• hi-IN
• hr-BA
• hr-HR
• hsb-DE
• hu-HU
• hy-AM
• id-ID
• ig-NG
• ii-CN
• is-IS
• it-CH
• it-IT
• iu-Cans-CA
• iu-Latn-CA
• ja-JP
• ka-GE
• kk-KZ
• kl-GL
• km-KH
• kn-IN
• kok-IN
• ko-KR
• ky-KG
• lb-LU
• lo-LA
• lt-LT
• lv-LV
• mi-NZ
• mk-MK
• ml-IN
• mn-MN
• mn-Mong-CN
• moh-CA
• mr-IN
• ms-BN
• ms-MY
• mt-MT
• nb-NO
• ne-NP
• nl-BE
• nl-NL
• nn-NO
• nso-ZA
• oc-FR
• or-IN
• pa-IN
• pl-PL
• prs-AF
• ps-AF
• pt-BR
• pt-PT
• qut-GT
• quz-BO
• quz-EC
• quz-PE
• rm-CH
• ro-RO
• ru-RU
• rw-RW
• sah-RU
• sa-IN
• se-FI
• se-NO
• se-SE
• si-LK
• sk-SK
• sl-SI
• sma-NO
• sma-SE
• smj-NO
• smj-SE
• smn-FI
• sms-FI
• sq-AL
• sr-Cyrl-BA
• sr-Cyrl-CS
• sr-Cyrl-ME
• sr-Cyrl-RS
• sr-Latn-BA
• sr-Latn-CS
• sr-Latn-ME
• sr-Latn-RS
• sv-FI
• sv-SE
• sw-KE
• syr-SY
• ta-IN
• te-IN
• tg-Cyrl-TJ
• th-TH
• tk-TM
• tn-ZA
• tr-TR
• tt-RU
• tzm-Latn-DZ
• ug-CN
• uk-UA
• ur-PK
• uz-Cyrl-UZ
• uz-Latn-UZ
• vi-VN
• wo-SN
• xh-ZA
• yo-NG
• zh-CN
• zh-HK
• zh-MO
• zh-SG
• zh-TW
• zu-ZA

Just dug a little more.

Yes, my #3 thought seems to be correct. Basically, there is ajax or js which intercepts request and does its work.

However, I think that for rankings you actually would want ?page=x to rank, because if js is disabled in browser, then post request url might not work, you won't be able to bookmark and, if you change backend filtering, it won't exist.

Hi there.

I see some issues:

1. you say you use rel=next and rel=prev. When I go  to provided url and look at the source code, i see only rel=next and ALL of them are linked to ?page=2. Definitely look into that.
2. when i hover over page numbers, it shows me url structure as ?page=x, not the post request, so, there might be some miscommunication in the code. At the same time, ?page=x are existent and not redirected to post request pages (I assume that's what you want to be happening). So that might be an issue as well.
3. It seems to me that what's happening is if i click on pagination button, i get to ?page=x, then internally from page the post request is being sent and it changes the displayed URL. If this is true, then ?page=x will be displayed in SERPs, because POST url change is happening after page is accessed.

Hope it's not super confusing

Hi.

Never had that happen to me, just checked my emails, received from linkedin, they are http. Whenever you're sending those emails, are you using full path? Like http://www.website.com/blabla.html? Or you doing website.com/blabla.html? Maybe that'll fix it.

Cheers

Hi.

The way to fix the problem is to know where it's coming from. When you are using browser's network tab, you can preserve log and see where 302s happening. Also you can see those pages in moz and other tools. I clicked around and found that it's happening in product categories and when you click on products. Obviously, since most of the website pages are product pages, you get 45%+ 302 redirects.

Now as how to fix it. Honestly, I'm not gonna be able to tell you, because I don't have your website's code. But find where those redirects are happening (by the way I don't even see any url changes, so maybe this is a problem as well), see how it's setup to work. It can be plugin errors or WP settings.

As for htaccess - I believe https rules should be before any other rules, all "R" should be R=301 and RewriteEngine on should be only one time.

Hope this helps somehow

I know it's too obvious, but what about just creating a segment, filtering out that campaign traffic?

Yaikes! Will you guys still pay for it if it's removed? If so, then combining below comments with my thoughts - I'd delete it, since it's old and not time relevant.

But I still miss the point of paying for the content that is not accessible from SE

• "paying"?

Is my understanding right, that if I would set canonical for these duplicates, Google has no reason to show this pages in the SERP?

• correct

Good point! News gotta be new

It means that either the code (or file) was removed or your google account is not linked to that property. Just verify it again, if code is there, you won't have to do anything, but click "verify" button.