Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Dot, Do you mean you are looking for an individual to build and manage these citations for you? If so, I would recommend that you consider Nyagoslav Zhekov of NGSMarketing.com. He is a friend and colleague who is highly respected in our industry in the area of citation building. If you decide to get in touch with him, you are welcome to let him know that Miriam Ellis referred you. If you are trying to find something other than this, can you please explain? Thanks!

If your content is the same for the web and for mobile; and you're looking to simply "provide a mobile optimized design" for the display of your content, I'd recommend you use a custom style sheet for mobile traffic. You won't need to dramatically modify your subdomain this way. http://perishablepress.com/the-5-minute-css-mobile-makeover/ If the mobile version of the content is dramatically different than the "desktop" version of the content,  in my opinion, using the "m." subdomain is a much more logical, common, and user-friendly approach than using the "/m/" subfolder. The folks at Google have addressed this issue here. A very common question we see is: Does it matter if the different types of content are served from the same URL or from different URLs? For example, some websites have www.example.com as the URL desktop browsers are meant to access and have m.example.com or wap.example.com for the different mobile devices. Other websites serve all types of content from just one URL structure like www.example.com. For Googlebot and Googlebot-Mobile, it does not matter what the URL structure is as long as it returns exactly what a user sees too. For example, if you redirect mobile users from www.example.com to m.example.com, that will be recognized by Googlebot-Mobile and both websites will be crawled and added to the correct index. In this case, use a 301 redirect for both users and Googlebot-Mobile. If you serve all types of content from www.example.com, i.e. serving desktop-optimized content or mobile-optimized content from the same URL depending on the User-agent, this will also lead to correct crawling by Googlebot and Googlebot-Mobile. This is not considered cloaking by Google. It is worth repeating that regardless of URL structure, you must correctly detect the User-agent as given by your users and Googlebot-Mobile, and serve both the same content. Don’t forget to keep the default content, the desktop-optimized content, for when an unknown User-agent requests it.

To be a tad more specific I have a site that is a simple calculator utility that allows visitors to look up tire variations that are close to their current tire size.  The site was created in 2007 and has some back-links including some references in wikipedia. My goal is to build a simple calculator that encompasses the core tools into a widget that other "car" sites can use at their sites.  My hopeful out come is to build 5-15 new inbound links from sites that will use the calculator on their sites.

No, but they might write to it, modify it, or do all sorts of other nasty stuff I've seen hackers do when they get a hold of any writeable file on a system.

I'd add on a make sure your WordPress & all plug-ins are up-to-date. I had a problem with this and it was due to a security flaw in an old version of WP.

Hi Ryan, A lot of people have gotten much more worried about dates since they heard about the "Freshness Update" late last year. Unfortunately a lot of people assume that it is a factor for all keyword terms & niches, but that is not the case. It is quite easy to find out whether it is a factor for your keywords. I gave a detailed explanation of this in this Q&A thread in November. As is mentioned in the Quora thread you quoted, there are much more reliable ways for search engines to determine freshness (timestamps & previous crawl data). I would agree with Brent and EGOL that the significance of year to your user base makes it reasonable (more likely expected) to include the year. However, I would take it a step further and suggest that you consider leveraging the intelligence of the bots a little. We know that  bots are now smart enough to help assess relevance. In fact it has become the centerpiece of their day to day work.  For me, that should mean that using words like "wine" or "vintage" would signal to the search engine that this URL and its content might reasonably include date references in the form of 4 digit and/or 2 digit year information That decided, I would build my site infrastructure accordingly, placing individual pages within directories using a reasonable and natural naming structure that includes the appropriate words. Depending how you prefer to approach it, a couple of possible examples might be  grapesinyourtoesexample.com/07-vintage/2007-cellar-pod-viognier-adelaide-hills/ or grapesinyourtoesexample.com/red-wines/2007-cellar-pod-viognier-adelaide-hills/. Hope that helps, Sha

This SEOmoz webinar should be exactly what you're looking for

You would figure that if Google, Bing & Yahoo get behind a new standard for declaring what snippets of information mean through schema.org then at some stage soon, they will either be using those tags to hone in on specific parts of content more relevant to a search query or present more information to the viewer during a search. The new section, article and heading tags of HTML5 would also seem to come in to the new richer data model for a web page. There has been a lot of work standardising these tags, so it would be a logical deduction to consider they along with personalization factors will become more prevalent in future.

I'll be honest in saying I had a couple of sites affected by the panda/farmer update but saw no changes in image search so I really don't think this has anything to do with these updates.  Additionally many have said that if your query drops were not on these update days then you should be looking elsewhere. Have you seen anything that indicates any loss around the dates shown in my original attachment?  I have a few other similar niche sites which both more and less content than the above described one which saw no changes which additionally says to me that this has nothing to do with the farmer updates. If anyone else has noticed losses in image search I'd be very interested in sharing data.  And the same for anyone who's simply seen a loss of "image search" queries at anytime.  This is a first for me and I'd love to find someone who has been in the same boat (the image boat).

The site does not have any duplicate content and does not have overly excessive inbound links.  Anchor tags on the inlinks are reasonable distributed.  As to what took place before acquisitions I don't really know but the entire site is in the index and now I'm working hard to improve relevancy for valuable search queries and to increase conversions.