Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
Let's start with the basics. There's a tag there that does not exists: "fb:ids", I guess what you wanted to use here is "fb:admins".
Now, the debugger is actually using the content in your meta tags properly. I tested also posting it to facebook and it also shows the appropriate data as you have specified in the tags, see the screenshot.
Perfect and true.
We received a manual penalty, took about 3 month to clean up the backlink profile and 3 reconsideration requests to have the penalty revoked. Even now, 2 month later, we barely see any organic traffic change.
It could be that it will take some more time, more good earned links or that our site still has an algo penalty, probably panda...
One doesn't relate to the other.
I personally wouldn't go with the noindex,follow if the duplicate content is on other sites besides yours. If you are having duplicate content issues within your site, that's a different story.
If your content within your site is unique, then do not add the noindex (keep the prev/next). Just try to make your pages stand out from your competitors.
On the other hand, if you are getting duplicate content warnings withing your own site, then you could perhaps use the noindex or find another solution to avoid duplicate content.
Hope that helps!
Here's an article we published on the differences of marketing to men or women, perhaps you can find some valuable information in it: http://www.fulltraffic.net/blog/84385/marketing-to-men-women-differences-in-internet-usage/
ONLY in the terms of speed. If you are targeting New Yorkers, you probably want to serve them as fast as possible. An offshore server will deliver slower that a server in Virginia (Amazon AWS) for example.
Using a CDN can probably eliminate that issue as almost ALL CDN providers have multiple servers across the US, still the dynamic content will be loaded from the main server, but that is usually the smallest amount of data (while CSS and JS files are usually what slows down loading and rendering).
Hope that helps!
Completely agree with Chris.
What's the point now a days of a directory? Even paid ones (and good ones) like Yahoo's... People don't search in directories...
Unless of course you are listed (naturally) in a directory that only lists "Ducati Parts" if you were selling Ducati parts, and still I'd ask for that link to be nofollowed.
For the tags, easy: noindex them, those pages don't offer any value to search engines.
For the categories you could perhaps go the same way, or use another approach and only use 1 category per post.
Have you read the post? First he was talking about ALL guest blogging. Then he retracted and fixed both the title of the post and added a note to it.
FYI: This wasn't a video. It was a blog post on Matt's blog.
And just minutes ago, Cutts changed the post title and clarified he was referring to "guest blogging for the sole purpose of SEO"...
Today, Matt Cutts published an article on his blog saying pretty much "Guest blogging is dead". Seemed a little harsh to me, but what happens now?
Is GOOD guest blogging still allowed or will it be seen as spam too?
I even picked up a chatter on Twitter about YouMoz: https://twitter.com/rustybrick/status/425374254465445888
No. It only counts the +1s on the Google+ Page and on Google+ widgets installed on a site that are using their Google+ Page as the SRC.
Check here: https://developers.google.com/+/web/+1button/
You can put that code in any page and it will +1 the page that it is on. However, if in the "Advance Options" you input Moz's Google+ Page, then even installed in your site and clicked will be "+1ing" Moz's Google+ Page.
Those are the +1s made to their Google+ Page. Either by clicking the +1 right on the page, or on a widget on other site.
Thanks for that.
Yet, if he caches the pages serverside, that would avoid the re-request to the DB.
Then there are also the certified partners that have "railgun" running automatically with CloudFlare hence making the requests between CloudFlare and the host much faster, as it actually only sends what has "changed" on a page.
By the way Hugh, if you think the broken link reported by Moz isn't actually there, then you can contact them about a possible glitch here: help@moz.com
Thomas, if he is using lots of JS and CSS files, that will be fixed by CloudFlare. Also, if he also uses a cache plugin that cache pages instead of going to the DB every time, CloudFlare will also cache those pages and serve them from the cache, just like the JS and CSS files, plus compressing and minifying everything.
If he uses the appropriate plugins to build the cache, all the stuff you said about bluehost wouldn't change a thing, as CloudFlare will even serve the "dynamic" (now seen as static by CloudFlare) from its cache.
Right? Or am I missing something?
Andrew,
The site in question has low authority compared to the ones showing up in the first page. Google is somehow associating your brand with a software called "Free Studio" and sites with almost impossible to beat authority are ranking above.
Google, compared to Bing (and Yahoo! that serves results from Bing), uses different ranking mechanisms.
In order to "claim" your brand's name, I'd suggest you establish several business listings pointing to the site, such as:
Try to put your company out there, expose its name as much as you can without purchasing any "featured listing." Once you have all those steps completed, compare results and see if the brand name starts to show up.
Another approach would be to "extend" the brand name, removing the FS and using the actual significance of those 2 letters ("FS" means?). It should be easier to compete with other sites instead of the ones that are currently returned by your brand query: "FS Studio". Softonic, CNET, afterdawn are not easy targets.
You're welcome Emily.
Moz has a list of recommended companies here: http://moz.com/article/recommended
I haven't heard of any site affected SEO-wise because of the use of CloudFlare. All the cases I read online are actually related to other issues.
Unlike MaxCDN (and I use both) is that CloudFlare automatically minifies and compresses content while other CDNs just cache your content on their servers to serve it faster based on the user location. CloudFlare does exactly the same while minifying and compressing PLUS you get a basic DDoS protection (and best of all, FREE).
Give them a try, all you have to do from your end is changing your Nameservers, and if you see any negative impact, you can always roll back by only switching again your nameservers to their originals.
ALL paid links are going to hurt you eventually. You can probably get an immediate boost, but then, the penalty you could receive, will take far more to fix.
Regardless of the "related content" those are paid links in a link scheme network apparently.
If your SEO company is recommending you purchase links, then my suggestion is CHANGE YOUR SEO COMPANY!
Wordpress can be a great advantage on a SEO standpoint if it used well and not filled with plugins that can slow it down. Plus, if you have a large DB, it is recommended to tweak the code according to your needs.
As for your Website, I run it through Speed Test and it got a 65/100 score.
The main issues are:
To start solving the speed, I'd suggest you sign up for the free version of CloudFlare. They will automatically compress, minify and act as a CDN for any static content (in the configuration, put aggressive catching).
Once you have that set (it takes 10 minutes tops, plus the DNS propagation) try running the test again and it should give you a score around 80+.
