Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I agree with Federico, as long as it's readable to the search engine then you should not have an issue. You could try seo-browser.com to see if the menu is visible to search engines.

Yes, this will be totally fine. Google ignores bookmarks (#) like this, so Google will just see a redirect from http://www.mysite.com/shoes/red/description to http://www.mysite.com/shoes/red#desc. Good luck! Kristina

As Marie says, doing this isn't likely to throw a penalty your way due to the way Google handles duplication (and you're unlikely to be doing this on page after page after page of your website). You always want to link to the source of the quote, with the (very likely) assumption that the source is not linking back to you (and if they are via a trackback "comment", that link is probably nofollowed). If you're quoting something like the author is in this example, you've taken quite a hefty chunk of text from the source, but you're providing a LOT of original commentary, linking back and providing a blockquote tag (which is not "necessary" but probably sends a good signal).

I like what David and Samuel have to say here. There is and always will be room for press releases when it comes to spreading PR and information. Businesses will continue to put releases out there and often link back to themselves, but they should be sure to link with brand terms, generic words ("find out more", etc.),  or URLs (similarly to the way people generally build links now). You wouldn't put out a press release linking back to yourself with "car insurance" and spread it to 150 different sources now, if you knew what was good for you. News stories and releases are always going to get picked up and spread, but what Google is looking for when it comes to actually hurting sites with links like this is a lack of a natural pattern. Does the site receive next to no media attention, but suddenly has 500 links from an identical piece of copy, whilst also receiving no new social media attention, no additional coverage (e.g. no one has taken the press release and written their own story about it nor conducted an interview with a company representative)? The pattern there is unnatural and warrants further investigation. Is the company regularly being cited, mentioned and written about? Does it put out a release about a real new product or development and have that release picked up by real news sources, some of whom put their own thoughts on the web about the company development? This is natural-looking. I hope this makes some sense. Essentially the goal is to spread information in the way you would if Google was not an issue, with the resulting coverage being beneficial to your SEO efforts nonetheless. Putting out press releases about nothing and expecting links back from newswires, etc. isn't a brilliant idea but using press releases for PR can be very beneficial for SEO when done properly.

Check out the page cached in Google and go to text view. Fetch as Googlebot in Webmaster Tools Web Developer Toolbar with cookies and javascripts disabled. User agent switcher with your string set as Googlebot so you can determine if different content is being shown to users than bots. Browseo.net

It really depends on what you define as blackhat. On-page trickery (cloaking, redirects for search engines bots, etc.) can be discovered by browsing as a search bot, digging into code, viewing caches, etc. Danny Sullivan and Rand uncovered a large amount of cloaked (and stolen) content on stage at SMX Sydney a few years ago. It was quite entertaining at the time Some people are basic enough to use tactics like hidden, white-on-white text, as Martijn says. I'm yet to see that tactic actually working post-2004 though If it's links they're using, the easiest way is to use a tool like Open Site Explorer, Ahrefs or similar to check the links out. Sneaky people can block the OSE / Ahrefs / MajesticSEO bots from crawling the sources of their backhat links if they have access to the linking sites. You can block the bots either in robots.txt or by rejecting the visits to stop the bots from noting that the links exist. That way, the backlink analysis tools will never see that blackhatsite.com links to rankingsite.com, and so forth. It takes a big network that the spammer controls to block link research tools' bots' access to every link you build, however, so this isn't too common. Whether all big brands / well ranked sites are using blackhat tactics pretty much depends on your definition of blackhat, but it's certainly true that it is very hard if not impossible to rank top 3 for competitive terms (car insurance, poker, credit cards) without parting with money that results in links being built. This doesn't mean that they're all buying links, but they're definitely investing in marketing that results in links, and the whitest of the whitehats will say that this is technically not organic, natural link development. It is, however, what we do - marketing.

Why not just 404/410 those pages?

some great answers you can also find a list of all the robots here & here   Depending on your site you can also for example hide the rest of your site behind a login screen or a form which bots won't fill in.

Robots.txt exclusion is definitely the easiest way to go. The URLs within the site might still be "indexed", but they will not be crawled and if they ever showed up in a search, they would look like something like this: http://i.imgur.com/xU6mDYA.png

Hi, If you want those pages to be indexed and rank well, and there is a possibility of duplicate content between the secured and non-secured versions (or other content), you should implement the tag. Google crawls HTTPS pages (a simple search for inurl:HTTPS will show the extent of this), although if the pages are behind check-outs or log-ins, blocked by robots.txt, etc. and otherwise not available for crawling, there is no need to use the tag.

Great idea using Screaming Frog first then :- Then use Google Web Master Tools > Crawl > Fetch as Google to see what Google sees

The two responses above are good - we advise not doing redirects unless they are truly necessary due to some people's experience with ranking problems that are hard to fix (i.e. redirection shouldn't be carried out "just because", for aesthetic purposes that aren't important, etc.). However, if the redirection is necessary and it is done properly (check out those resources TrentonM11 linked to) you should be able to complete it with very little problem, as Anirban says.

A few years ago I added a location finder which then auto generated product content for ERIKS. This generated 1000's of URLs overnight, the problem was Google thought I was spamming it's indexes. Google does follow all links on a web page/sitemap however it's what it does with them that counts. The ERIKS Hose Technology Site http://www.eriks-hose-technology.com relies on this type of coding using Classic ASP. I have a number of other sites which also rank highly on Google You'll find Revolvo by searching for 'Split Roller Bearings'. So it's also not as bad at ranking as some people may tend to think. I would agree however that English URLs are better than coded. The main issue here is to make sure that your main keyword is in the URI to ensure that Google knows what your page is about.

There is also a Fetch as BingBot tool in Bing's Webmaster Tools which will confirm Bing's crawler can also index your page. Too many people forget about Bing, but it's often the source of 30% of a site's organic visits, so not a good thing to ignore. Paul

Andy's correct. The answer is most likely yes.  So if screaming frog find these pages, most likely the Google bot will as well. Also, as long as the spider can find the page, it doesn't matter if it's static or dynamic. However, If you have multiple parameters, Google may decide it's not a useful page and won't index it. Make sure to include a sitemap with all these url's as it may help in getting them indexed in case your site architecture is poor.

Hello, since most of the hosting providers use CPanel, I will just point you to a tutorial on redirects on CPanel. http://docs.cpanel.net/twiki/bin/view/AllDocumentation/CpanelDocs/ReDirects So what you would do is redirect your domain.us to domain.com.us following the steps provided in the above link. That's it! Since you are trying to shift your entire domain, make sure you will be adding a 301 (permanent) redirect. Cristian

Yes, it can probably read the content of that particular page, but the not necessarily every page on your website. Crawlable is not the same as indexable. For example, Google crawls pages that contain the noindex tag, but don't index them. Also, even if a page is crawlable, it doesn't mean that Google understands it correctly. Are the meta tags correct? Does it contain correct mark-up/structured data? I recommend spending some time reading the Webmaster Tools help pages, so you'll have a better understanding: https://support.google.com/webmasters/?hl=en

I'm using a tool called GSiteCrawler at the moment, I'm new to it, however it will list all crawlable pages and create a sitemap.xml for you too!

You may find the following helpful if you want to use them for something other than blackhat seo http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=174992 and https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/faq#whereinresults. You will also see the second URL has some examples.

SEO there is no huge benefit but lets look at it a different way : user experience - at the end of the day that what we are all aiming to make great, if you have a great website that's great to use people will want to use it and fingers crossed share it. Dynamic sites are great because they fit into the users style depending on what resolution they have or how they have their window it lets them use your site as they want to. now that sounds great but obviously it can take a bit more time and knowledge to create a dynamic site but its worth it in the longer run. Best of luck !