Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Sure Christy, I'll do it and include some screenshots if I can. Thanks for your continued support and caring!

206 means partial content, which is what your Website/Server is delivering to Facebook's request. Have you tested the "Fetch as Googlebot" under Webmaster tools to see if Google can get the files? https://www.google.com/webmasters/tools/googlebot-fetch

If you get an error there, then it must be something IP related with your server, as my test returned a 200 and a test using Googlebot as the user agent also returned 200, which means that the IP wasn't blocked (nor the user agent excluded), basically telling me that if Googlebot is unable to access your site (nor facebook) it must be something IP related.

Hope that helps!

Hi Rob,

I personally wouldn't go the way you are heading... that could be seen by Google as a technique to manipulate search engine results (which you stated it is).

But to respond to your question, why don't you use the "definitive" version of the page as the canonical? If the one including "near downtown" is the most accurate (and complete one as I guess the hotel IS near downtown) then you should go with that and noindex the alternatives... although I know that's not your intention, that is the way it should be done.

Hope that helps!

Hey Victor,

You summed up with your last phrase: "I guess we just want to know if it is okay for these paid ads to not have nofollow."

Paid ads, then a nofollow is a must. ALL paid links should be nofollowed. Any link that you get by giving something in return as a "compensation" are paid links, and should be nofollowed (affiliate links, paid links, paid releases, etc).

Hope that helps!

Hey Christy,

I still experience fairly regular issues with the login too.

It has become something I am just "used to do" = relogin when going from the Q&A to a profile (ie).

That's probably a GWT glitch and it should be fixed soon. You can report it in the Google Webmasters forums if you like.

But why don't you open the group using facebook as a person instead of using it as your page?

Yup, noticed, it works only if opened via a facebook call. Try this: https://www.facebook.com/about/groups

There's a green button there "Create Group" that opens that exact page I sent you on a lightbox.

I suggest you download your "latest links" from Google Webmaster tools to verify if the report is/isn't an OSE issue. If Google also shows all those new links, then you might want to look a much closer look and if those are spammy backlinks, start disavowing before getting any penalty.

They almost never tell the "why" and "how", because spammers will eventually find a way to overcome it. Cutts at pubcon simply said something like "the roll out of Google authorship opened the door to anyone that can implement a Google author tag.  In the coming months Google will finish up a plan to look at social factors around google authorship and award higher priority to author’s that are truly authoritative on a topic and that have published social conversations on that topic."

watch?v=K7JhnWHbwnE

Google announced about a month ago that they were going to remove some rich snippets from SERPs and they were going to start showing them only for the most trusted authors. This might be the result of that exact update.

To get the picture back you only need to keep building and creating content while you continue establishing your online reputation.

More info: http://www.seroundtable.com/google-rich-snippet-reduction-17579.html

Try: https://www.facebook.com/ajax/groups/create_get.php?ref=bookmarks

I think Moz already tells from where is the link that points to that 404 page.

Another way is to use GWT, they list the 4XX errors and if the links comes from our site, click on the error and see the "Linked From" and "In Sitemap" to see if your site is linking to that particular 404.

And as the last resource, you can use some of the online tools available for free to find broker links, example: http://www.brokenlinkcheck.com

Hope that helps!

I have personally done this in the past, it didn't affect at all my rankings and it could even be seen as a benefit for your users.

I guess you are going with an Apache web server, make sure to set 301 redirects from the .php versions to the [no extension] URL (via the .htaccess).

Even if the user types index.php, you should create a rewrite rule to remove that .php and set a 301 in the process.

Hope that helps!

What do you mean by "search engine simulators"?

I tested crawling your site with googlebot as the user agent and it worked just fine.

Google and other engines are capable of running javascript and ajax just fine that shouldn't be an issue.

What I would suggest is to look over your pagespeed. Your homepage loads a TON of external files, about 50 requests for JS and CSS files. You should really consider putting all those codes into a single JS and CSS file instead, making over 50 calls (+ the extra ajax calls) are WAY too many!, not to mention the hundreds of lines you have of inline JS and styles...

http://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecigexpress.com%2F&tab=desktop

Yeah, they offer free and paid hosted versions too. But I found the server side version much simpler to setup and control.

I have been using xml-sitemaps (paid version) for all my sites over 5 years and they work like a charm, scraping and indexing what it needs to be indexed ans scraped, plus it consumes really low resources. 100% recommended (they have nice plugins too for extra sitempas (video, news, images, etc).

Hope that helps!

There's nothing "against" doing it, however, what's the added value? If it's a company profile then the author is the company and not actually a person. Authorship markup was introduced for people, not companies.

No, Google is smart enough to determine which content shouldn't be duplicated and what content is most likely to be the same in all sites (exactly your situation).

As a side note, if you are adding the content in HTML, plus providing an extra value, you will probably rank higher than those that just display the product specs as a downloadable PDF.

The problem is that plugin you are using, "Wordfence". It is probably picking up the crawls from Screaming Frog and Moz as DoS attacks because of the amount of requests from the same IPs.

You could either see if the plugin IP whitelisting or why don't you just remove that plugin and use CloudFlare, which is free and offer an even more robust security option + an included CDN.