Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi Martijn, I checked my FIrefox, and not seeing any plugins or addons that would cause that issue. It is strange that it is only that one page. None of my other similar pages do that... Did it happen on your computer? Any other ideas? Greg

Anybody else have ideas or suggestions about this question? Happy New Year! Greg

Thanks Roman. I am good with doing redirects, and it is not many pages, so making coding mistakes that cause chaos is not really the issue (though it is always good to avoid). My question is really about using some of the "link juice" being directed to useless outdated images to improve the ranking of some deep but related pages on our site.

Thanks everybody! It looks I need to "sort of" consider them in my analysis

I'm not sure. But just an observation, you have more linking root domains nofollow or not for the first three specific generic anchor text money phrases than for branded terms. That seems a bit unnatural to me 1. because of the brand vs. generic contrast for 3 highly related terms and 2. because its exact match for high traffic generic and then the number of linking route domains for related anchor text terms drops off significantly instead of a smoother curve I'm not saying its penalty level unnatural. But in the context of the well known brands you're competing with, of which most of them above you I recognize, they likely beat you out on the brand metrics. Additionally, your first money terms are much more competitive from what I can see in terms of search volume than your second terms. Like clothes drying rack is getting 4000+ searches a month while the umbrella one is listed as 30. And trends confirms that contrast:  http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q="clothes drying rack"%2C"outdoor umbrella clothesline" I don't really believe in getting rid of links unless I'm walking into a clients site already penalized. Maybe one or two if I have control over them over time. I think you should pivot into brand building and testing different content assets for deeper links, video maybe? If they don't perform naturally at all, cut them or revise/enhance them. That will insulate you better from the risk of aggressive link building that's been done and help raise all phrases over time. And nofollow does matter. A lot. As well as nofollow vs. follow break down across brand vs generic anchor text in the context of your industry. A strong natural link profile example in your industry would be hard to find because your so niche competing with conglomerates. But being extremely natural (ie. not trying to have any control over the anchor text of sites linking to you at all)

It really depends what the content is like, but I'd recommend using Wistia as a rule for anything very product focused. YouTube is more like a social marketing channel than a video hosting platform and you have to ask yourself "is this content relevant for a YouTube audience". You can qualify this by using the YouTube keyword tool to get some ideas about what people are searching for and also look in your YouTube analytics to see how many of your views are actually coming from other youtube.com pages, rather than referrals from Google or other sites. If the content isn't relevant for a YouTube audience, then there is no benefit to having the content on the platform. Additionally, YouTube.com pages can outrank your own site for branded queries, which is suboptimal. The only other thing to bear in mind is that contrary to popular belief, YouTube is not normally a good source of referral traffic. People don't often click from Youtube videos back to your site, so don't rely on this as an option if you're trying to drive traffic to sell products. Your best bet is probably using Wistia, getting rich snippets for pages on your own site and driving all the traffic to your owned resource, rather than Youtube.com... since your audience can't buy from YouTube, so you're just adding a step into your conversion funnel unnecessarily.

It's good practice, especially if you are operating a CMS that can create accessible URLs that cause duplicate content problems, create "junk" pages, etc. For example: http://www.asos.com/robots.txt Google dislikes search results pages being indexed, so you can block those off, e.g. http://moz.com/robots.txt You can disallow the archive.org bot if you don't want old versions of your site appearing in its search engine, and as others have said you can point to your xml sitemap. It's not a bad resource to have at your disposal for site hygiene / maintenance reasons, but it's not an absolute necessity either.

I personally get phone calls/emails claiming to be Google and to "confirm" business information for rankings.  [...] Likewise, if they receive a call/email from "Google" and choose not to respond because they are used to spammers, they would be unfairly dropped lower in rankings even if they have great CS. I get calls like this all of the time.  They make me angry because I believe that they are spammers calling.  But could they be from Google? ** If there was an official setup like that, the two could get confused and people taken advantage of.** Yes, how can Google discover who takes care of their customers and who does not?  The small company selling nationally often can't afford the feedback and ratings systems that google can monitor, or support for their website and Google Plus. I can't put myself out there to do tech support for all of the third party sellers on Amazon, WalMart, Sears, ebay and dozens of other big brand sites that sell my product.

You can try to focus two KWs on that page, so the two you provided. It might take some trial and error to make it work but I know that it's doable.

I liked. Some of the info is a little dated, but overall it's worth the money.  You can probably find most of the stuff on the internet, but it's nice to have it all arranged in one place.  If you have already been doing SEO for a while, you will probably already know most of the info, but if you can get a couple of key points from it, then it was worth it. In a nutshell, I recommend not only buying it, but reading Neil's QuickSprout blog regularly.

I see you on page 2 so at least you're moving up. Here's what I would suggest. Take out clothes drying rack out of your meta title and save that for the other page. That shouldn't be there anyway. You sell "laundry equipment that is handsome and strong," and your home page supports that with wringer washers, clotheslines, clothespins, etc., and not just drying racks. Also it appears to me that you are focusing on drying racks on your home page. Your reviews are about drying racks and you say "We are very proud of our laundry drying rack and other products." Why not just say "we are proud of our laundry equipment." If you're afraid of losing the rank you have, I wouldn't. You are on page 2 behind Target, Bed, Bath and Beyond, Amazon, etc., etc. What do you have to lose? At least test it. You can always put it back. BTW: There is a typo in one of your reviews: "clothes frying rack." I'm not sure as it stands it's a good review. I see this all the time with home pages cannibalizing subpages and have my own discussion going at http://moz.com/community/q/home-page-cannibal. The solution to yours seems a little more obvious than mine. Let's hope!

I tend to agree with James in terms of bounce rate. Google tries to segment the most relevant result by country, so a low bouncerate outside your target market hopefully wouldn't hurt you much. That said, you can specify a target country in Google Webmaster Tools. Instructions are here: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/62399?hl=en Using this setting doesn't ensure your website wont appear in foreign results, but it does give a "hint" to Google that the content isn't targeted for that region. Hope this helps! Cyrus

Hi Gregory - Yes, as Frederico mentions you do not have to put the rewrite cond. before every rewrite since it the htaccess is on your root its implied. You might need to do this if you creating multiple redirects for www to non-www etc. Also Frederico is right - this isnt the best way to deal with these links, but I use a different solution.  First I get a flat file of my inbound links using other tools as well as WMT, and then i run them through a test to ensure that the linking page still exist. Then I go through the list and just remove the scraper / stats sites like webstatsdomain, alexa etc so that the list is more manageable. Then I decide which links are ok to keep (there's no real quick way to decide, and everyone has their own method). But the only links are "bad" would be ones that may violate Google's Webmaster Guidelines. Your list should be quite small at this point, unless you had a bunch of links to a page that you subsequently moved or changed its URL. In that case, add the rewrite to htaccess.  The remaining list you can simply contact the sites and notify them of the broken link and ask to have it fixed. This is the best case scenario (instead of having it go to a 404 or even a 301 redirect). If its a good link, its worth the effort. Hope that helps!

Thanks Rick. Unfortunately these are articles and blogs. None of them are actually FORUMS. I'm really looking for other SEO related forums where the members ask and answer questions for eachother, like here at the Moz Q&A Forum.... Any other suggestions?

Hi Gregory, It can be a real pain, and the short answer is it depends on the doctype you are declaring and the browser version you are viewing it in. Check this page for some more details (seems odd to be referencing wikipedia here, but it is a pretty good overview). Putting this code into your head will force IE to use the highest mode available (not quirks mode in other words): Hope it helps!

Well, the way I see it is it gives you two bits of info: It tells you if the homepage is the strongest URL on your domain. If it's not, you have a big problem. It tells you which pages Google thinks are most relevant as a search result for your domain. This is basically useless.  However, if you add any keyword to it, now it is 100% relevance for that keyword. site:mysite.com keyword That puts the pages on your site in order of SEO strength (for the most part.)  The list by itself acts (more) like: site:mysite.com mysite.com

Logging out, clearing my cache, and logging back in seems to have fixed it.

It's a cool thought, and it very well be an improvement over today's situation. The major reservation that jumped out at me was that it would hurt fresh content. I'm guessing 100 was a number you just threw out there, but whatever the number, once a site hits that number of quality links, they wouldn't need to produce anything else. Well, at least in terms of link building, they wouldn't need to produce anything else. Also, different size sites would need different numbers. For example, 100 really high quality DA of 90 and above links would take my site a long time to get, but, Moz, for example, probably already has that. If you decide to make the number really high, 10,000 high quality DA of 90 then it might take Moz awhile to get that, but since neither myself, nor any of my competitors will ever reach number, it's not much of a deterrent for us to get fivver, comment links. Ruben

Hey Gregory, Thanks for writing in. It would actually be really helpful if you could send this over to help@moz.com with screenshot examples of what you are seeing so we can investigate further and send it over to the correct engineers. I look forward to hearing from you there soon. Chiaryn