Welcome to the Q&A Forum

What evidence is that based on John? Nobody uses my iPad and I haven't changed any preferences I never really look at the bbc sport page that it suggests, if I do look at the bbc site it will be the football section and my search would be for "bbc football" Many of the sites that I visit regularly never get suggested

Hi Edward, Schema tags are intended to a) indicate with more granularity what a given element is on a page (e.g. 'review', 'recipe', 'video file', etc.), and b) this information can sometimes be used by Google for rich snippets in the SERPs. So whether you need to include these tags in the mobile version of your header will depend on what they are describing. If the code for the header is different for the desktop and mobile versions, but you do have the same element and you do want the schema tags to be there, you'll need to include them; if the element which you're marking up in the desktop header isn't present in the mobile header, don't include them. There aren't currently (to my knowledge) specific Schema tags which indicate a 'mobile site'. (The ones that Robert mentioned seem to be for marking up a page featuring a mobile app). If you had a separate URL for mobile visitors, such as m.domain.com, you would need a mobile 'rel=canonical' tag to avoid duplicate content but that doesn't sound like it's the case for your site. It sounds to me like you're using dynamic serving, rather than a pure responsive design. (pure responsive only changes the CSS whereas dynamic serving keeps the same URL but serves up different HTML based on user agent). If this is the case, you'll also want to include a vary HTTP header based on user agent. (the Google guidelines for how to do this are here.) This indicates to Google that you are serving a different HTML based on user agent, and not cloaking. Hope that helps!

Unless you can create an account and link into their google analytics, I'm not aware that you can. Head over to SEMRush and open a free account there - you should be able to get some stats on your competitors that way.

Why are you using more than 1 site map per domain? the answer could be so many things but I think it's this you're using more than one site map per domain Google gets confused and does not index your entire website. Your server could be too slow if it's e-commerce are probably not speeding up your site fast enough to have Google actually index the links properly. Remember the faster your website the deeper Google goes when indexing the site. E-commerce sites with more than one site map on possibly slow hosting it sounds about right that Google would not actually index every single one of the pages that you have submitted over and over again. Clear out the multiple sign-ups then pick a single site map if you're using plug-ins choose just one if you're using generated choose just one. Add it to your website remove the other site maps then submit the site map to Google webmaster tools when it says index this one page or all pick all and if that doesn't work you can use fetch with the Google bot to get your individual webpages crawled then have them submitted by hand. I would use a content delivery network if you're using e-commerce make sure your site speed is fast. Check out  your site speed using this http://www.webpagetest.org/ then use the tool below to figure out why and what you can do about it. http://torbit.com/site-optimizer/ I strongly suggest you invest in a content delivery network

I don't know why they would outrank but the simplest solution would be to add the hreflang tags to make each search engine see the right domain - that should give /uk a better ranking on google.co.uk and /es rank better on Google.es Getting the correct hreflang setup should help you on all the different Google variations.

I gave G a call. It's not possible to delete them. Seems odd

Excellent, glad you have a sitemap.  Sorry I didn't look at the robots.txt for the sitemap to begin with. So in looking at your sitemap I can't help but pay attention to your post frequency/or lack there of.  In addition to the newness of the URL, just over three months. I always feel that post frequency plays a major role in how quickly your site is indexed, so if your updating the blog every 2-3 days you can expect a quicker indexation time.  Especially if you do this for a long period of time. In your case I see some pretty long times in between posts.  They average out to about 12 days between posts.  Even though recently you've posted more frequently, you haven't really set a precedent to warrant Google coming back every two to three days. I realize that dedicating resources to write content can be tough, but if you want faster indexation I have to recommend that you increase the post frequency. Hope That Helps!

I had the same question. After some digging. I found the tag assistant plug in for chrome. It checks the site and lets you know if it is working properly. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/tag-assistant-by-google/kejbdjndbnbjgmefkgdddjlbokphdefk?hl=en On a side note the script should be right after the body tag; unless you are adding datalabel scripts (I am still wrapping my head around.)

Thanks for the replies. I created a sitemap for each store last week. I added the links to the robots.txt and also submitted them to Google. The SEO Moz site crawler now crawls the full site content, but the pages are still recorded as 302 redirects. The GWT figures are completely wrong where it displays the number of indexed pages.. lmQc

Thanks for the links.. some new bedtime reading

I believe it's because of the itemscope="itemscope" call, which is saying that the area is another item. Leave out the ="itemscope" part. Example: [Blue Denim Castaway Flip Flops](/shoes//xsl:value-of select="translate(/page/subCategory[Name = $subCat]/Name,'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ ,','abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz-')"/>/blue-denim-castaway-flip-flops/300) £30.00 [[image: mens-blue-castaway-flip-flops-mtfmcabu.jpg]](/shoes//xsl:value-of select="translate(/page/subCategory[Name = $subCat]/Name,'ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ ,','abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz-')"/>/blue-denim-castaway-flip-flops/300) Hope this helps!

Hi Edward, I currently have the same situation where "half" of our site is html 5 and the other is still using div's and such. The html 5 tag's have been slowly being added to the site for about 3 months now and we have seen no negative impact because each version of the code is still considered valid. The only thing you may want to look out for is making sure that your site renders properly in older browsers. -Brent

"A hyperlink in word can easily be stripped out by someone and then it is not clear what the link was to or what words it was on." Personally in my opinion this is the nature of the beast... If you give good relevant links that help the authenticity of the article, then the poster, will not have as much inclination to remove the hyperlink... But if it is obviously trying to be an SEO Anchor text link, then you run the risk of it being removed as this is not the aim of a link in a press release... A link should be informational and not self serving (or not seem self serving w00t!