Welcome to the Q&A Forum

It's not a problem, just fix those as soon as you can. And yes, it does affect crawl rate from what I've seen.

I am using prerender to cache/render static pages to crawl agents but MOZ is not able to crawl through my website (http://www.exambazaar.com/). Hence it has a domain authority of 1/100. I have been in touch with Prerender support to find a fix for the same and have also added dotbot to the list of crawler agents in addition to Prerender default list which includes rogerbot. Do you have any suggestions to fix this? List: https://github.com/prerender/prerender-node/commit/5e9044e3f5c7a3bad536d86d26666c0d868bdfff Adding dotbot: prerender.crawlerUserAgents.push('dotbot');

The term "canonical" comes from maths. It means "the standard form to present something in". So, if you have two or more things that are very similar or identical then you might want to say "this is the canonical version - the standard thing we will refer to". For example, if your CMS is a bit old-school and creates two versions of a page - one human-friendly like example.com/blog-post and another horrible one like example.com?id=12397863294862395 - then you want to point search engines to the nice one and say "this is the standard, canonical version - refer to that one". So in this case you should definitely use on example.com?id=1239786329486239 to give search engines that instruction. If you also add this to example.com/blog-post then that's fine - all you are saying is "this is the standard version of this page" which is perfectly valid. But from your question, this doesn't sound like your plan. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your plan sounds like you will tell the search engines something along the lines of "you see that blog post there, and that one there, and that one there, and that one over there? They're actually all the same thing, and the standard, canonical page you should refer to is this category page". That wouldn't be a good idea, because all of those articles are different things. So, I wouldn't add a hard-coded canonical URL into your template. Instead - as long as your CMS allows it - add the canonical tag to the of each article and link to the search engine friendly version of each blog post.

As already stated using the Moz API for such purposes is probably best, there are also some alternatives available which you could use from inside Google Docs so you don't need to develop some tools yourself but can just retrieve the data yourself. If you need any help with the Moz API let me know, it's quite easy.

Correct, it is a pita to do, but if you do things correctly and have an array that you can draw meta information from, it will get indexed. That is what we all want, instead of making a category of "red ipods" you can just have the search for "red pods" indexed, while disallowing anything from ?search=other term

Spammy domains have been known to overuse the Hyphen... but using Hyphens does not make you spammy Matt Cutts had previously stated that Google recognizes the Hyphen as a separator and the Underscore as a connector... i.e. "red-wigdets" gets read as "red widgets" while "red_widgets" gets read as "redwidgets". For keyword purposes, a hyphen is technically better but the difference is likely negligible. Also keep in mind the EMD update. If your core term is "cheap red widgets" and your domain URL features "cheap-red-widgets" then the EMD has made the previous positive name correlation into a less powerful signal. Matt Cutts 2011 Underscore vs Dashes in URLs video http://youtu.be/AQcSFsQyct8 Matt Cutts 2009 Underscores or Hyphens in URLs video http://youtu.be/Q3SFVfDIS5k Matt Cutts 2005 Dashes vs. Underscores blog post http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/dashes-vs-underscores/