Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey RedSweater, Thanks for your in-depth response. So firstly I wanted to ask with regard to the pop up modals for each star sign are you saying if we use the AJAX instead of the javascript to pull in each additional sign like you were saying would this be a better way to optimize the page for spiders to see, also how we currently have them creates the duplicate content effect? Another question I might ask is, why are you archiving all the daily horoscopes? Are you seeing visitors to old horoscopes, or are you holding onto them for your own records? No, we are not holding them for any records at all, not that I see or know if there is any benefit in doing so.  We currently do keep backup copies offline. That way, you could have a permanent "Daily Cancer" page with a more refined meta description that ever changes, and every day you just go in and edit that sign. Same for all the other signs, and same for the weekly sign pages. Anytime people link to these pages, they would keep that value - and I think that might help your rankings. Right now, with every horoscope being on its own separate daily page, say 2 people share that link on Facebook. Those links go straight to say the Cancer horoscope for June 1, 2015. That means they're kind of frozen in time. If instead you had a "Daily Cancer" page and they linked there, and then a week later they shared it again because they liked the new horoscope, you'd have 4 incoming links to the same page. I think I see what your saying now: So if I'm correct in my understanding I can create a separate page for each star sign, and every day while updating the dailies I can go in and replace the old with the new this way the links are staying the same etc the only thing I would be tweaking is the meta tags des now and again and the content for each star sign. Is that correct? Thanks for you in-depth look into it really appreciate it. Justin

I do assessments of existing articles by looking at their traffic.  If they are pulling in very little traffic I look at their optimization and see if I can tweak them towards better keywords.   I also look at traffic growth over time.  For my sites a new article might not start drawing representative traffic until it has been on the site for at least a year.

Hi Patrick, Thanks for your response, all sites have sitemaps, I submitted all 3 domains below to through WMT https://www.zenory.com.au/sitemap_us.xml https://www.zenory.com/sitemap_au.xml https://www.zenory.com/sitemap_nz.xml so that they would not be overwriten all top level domains are on the same server.  After this I still have no idea why they are not showing up correctly.  I have limited all the cross referencing from each site to try and better defensiate each site so google could pick up that each one was relevant to the country specified.  For the au it says 74 were submitted and only 2 were indexed. Any advice around this would be awesome Thanks in advance

Hi Patrick Thanks for your response.  I have done a search and found that most of the pages that had these articles up run to a 404 error.  The original author owner of the content has offered them to me as she is part of my site.  But she wanted to give a heads up and say 5 of the articles she gave had already been published and previously taken down as the owner of that blog wanted to renew things... So before I posted I wanted to make sure that it wasn't going to harm my site and against googles rules.  Thanks for your in depth response Patrick, always great getting feedback from you! Thanks

Hi Justin While it won't show you what is converting, check out SEMRush. It's a great tool that will show you what competitors are ranking for, the estimated traffic they are getting for that keyword, as well as the landing page. The beauty with this tool is that you can research from both a SEO and paid perspective. You can learn more about the features and tools here. Hope this helps a bit! Good luck!

Hi Alick300 Thanks for your update! This is great and helpful advice, I ran a few campaigns in early January ~ over 3months to find exactly what you were talking about, I took these results based on reflecting targeted keywords for our organic search, most of the searches and click throughs were coming from NZ, I just find it hard to believe that its quiet low in NZ.  So I'm not too sure whats going on there, and trying to figure out how to go about really digging into what keywords i should be targeting and really digging into.

Awesome response Dirk! Thanks again for your endless help!

Hi Justin Tom raises a lot of great points here - if you are doing well for the areas you are targeting, let the good times roll and keep doing what you're doing, you're in a great position! Keep it up! Did you take advantage of the country targeting for each site and hreflang tags / language tags that were mentioned in previous Q+As of yours? Congrats on your hardwork so far! Good luck!

Hi Christy, Just wondering if you were able to give any feedback on this, it seems that the issue is still showing up Would appreciate some advice around this Cheers

I did not, it was only one page so I used fetch as Google.

Thanks Martijn this makes sense now!

Hi Luis, Thanks for your response! So I managed to update all urls with the correct hreftags and submitted a new sitemap also have used google fetch to index the pages - I went to do a search in australia and it is still showing the new zealand meta tag description can you take a look?  Or something I'm doing wrong here?

Understand what you mean - to be very honest I don't think that this content snippet is generating duplicate content. However, I don't really understand the mechanism: https://www.zenory.com/horoscopes/taurus/day -> I would expect to find the daily horoscope for Taurus - when I click on Capricorn I would expect to go to https://www.zenory.com/horoscopes/capricorn/day - however I remain on the same page & the horoscope is shown in a lightbox. I would rather put it on a separate page (if all horoscopes of all signs are present in the HTML of one sign these pages become quite similar when you look at the source code.  Sounds a bit confusing, but I hope you get what I mean. rgds, Dirk

Hi Mark, I took a look just now - and the co.nz site shows PA: 21 and DA: 10 with 1438 backlinks the .com shows DA: 1 and PA:1 with 1563 backlinks the com.au show DA: 1 and PA:1 with 252 backlinks Does this make any sense?

Hi Dirk, Sorry i only just picked up your message! Thanks again for your response! I will try adding what you have suggested, when you /folder_to_be_removed/ - can you explain what that means?

Thanks for your response Patrick! This has helped alot!!! So clear! Thanks for going into more details about the canonical tags - as this part was confusing! lol Thanks I have set it to www as the preferred With regards to the canonical tags - should I use this for ALL pages? or just the category pages? Or just pages I feel have similar content? Would it be just safe to add it to every page?

WOW thanks again Dirk, your feedback is beyond! Thanks for informing me of these changes and sending me those links! I will work on getting the above sorted asap with my developer Cheers for all your help!!!! Justin

Hi Bob - no worries at all! I will definitely be asking more SEO guestions! But thanks for your response once again

Hi Justin, It depends a bit on where these links are & on how your site is build. In general - if these links are in the navigation, footer, ...etc (elements which are called on each page) - you probably only need to change them once and then it is ok for the full site. If these links are inside articles, you will probably have to update them manually. It sometimes is possible to do something like 'find/replace' - so you could replace (as example) all references from zenory.com to zenory.co.nz (for the NZ version) - but again it depends a bit on the platform. Check with the one who has build your website - changing links manually can be a very annoying & time consuming job (depending on the number of links that need to be changed). A programmer can sometimes find a solution to automate part of it. rgds, Dirk

Thanks Thomas for your clear instructions, this definately helped alot! A question - with regards to the **Taxonomies **I checked all that you referred to, however I seem to have an extra one for ad groups? Under XML sitemaps - I see tags and categories under this section do should I un-check this area also?