Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The on page grade helps you ensure you've done everything on that page to help it rank. We have some F grades ranking well, too. But that's mainly because competition is low. There's a lot more to take into consideration, however.

Just a cursory look suggests you should focus on links. When I looked, neither Google nor Bing were showing external links pointing to the domain or the two pages in question. Some work there would pay off tremendously.

Also, you should create a Google Webmasters account and submit a xml-sitemap. When I've done that with a new site in the past, nearly all my pages received an initial crawl very soon after.

Along with the sitemap, you'll want to evaluate your internal linking. You're using navigation to link to your pages internally, but you may also benefit from linking to important pages within the actual content, as well.

One thing the on-page grader does not measure is semantic page structure. You have H2s above H1s. That probably won't hurt you a ton, but my eye kinda starts twitching.

In general, I'd suggest you move away from a keyword-centric strategy and start thinking of your content in terms of themes. Google is pretty good at picking up on themes. And we're getting less and less visibility into keywords. With that in mind, I would probably pick a phrase or two as my core targets and then sprinkle in variations throughout the content.

For example, you could pick data capture software as the theme for your whole site because of the volume there (See attachment). It's broad enough for everything in the site to relate to it. Then use your research on specific terms to inform your choices about page titles and other elements.

A hierarchy like this may work:

• Software/Technology - main theme

• App - pages about your mobile applications

• Tools - feature pages; the 'tools' are components of or shortcuts in your software (See the "Screen Sharing Tools" heading on our page

If pages are extremely similar, I would combine them. Your links will be more concentrated that way. And you can outrank competitors with quality content, even when they have more content.

You could also try to target universal results on some of the more competitive terms.

8zsSAB8.png

Has Google notified you of the need to disavow links in Webmaster Tools? Usually, there's a message about unnatural links on the Manual Actions page.

I've never preemptively disavowed links. Maybe that's wrong. But then again, no single site is giving us 23,000 links.

Could you model your approach after other subscription sites? Take, for example, the online version of the Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/home-page. They present enough content in preview mode to be relevant to both users and Google. You know from the blurb what the story is basically about.

Once someone logs in, they get the rest of the content. But I don't think they get a separate URL.

I wouldn't do the duplicate HTTP/HTTPS approach. In the future, you may want the whole site to be HTTPS, so you'd have to face this issue again.

N6NejML.png

Linking to your homepage with "Home" as the hyperlink text isn't the best way to do internal linking. You would probably be better off having your logo double as the home page link. That's a very common practice, so it's unlikely folks would get confused. A logo with a really good _alt _tag would beat a text link that simply says Home.

That said, you would be even better served with a text-based logo that said "Kemp Ruge". With Google Fonts, you can make it accommodate any design for free. And it would be a better signal than Home.

Also, before I looked up your site, I thought you were talking about the browser tab. The text there is modified by changing the <title>tag. You could improve your title tag by including the brand name: <a style="font-size: 14px;" href="http://www.kempruge.com/">Kemp Ruge | Tampa Attorneys</a>, for example.</p> <p>Also, since nobody searches for "Welcome to ...", you would do well to rewrite your <h1> tag. </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <br> <br> <a download="xAfXb9r.png" class="imported-anchor-tag" href="http://i.imgur.com/xAfXb9r.png" target="_blank">xAfXb9r.png</a></title>

That seems like too much work. I would do this instead:

1. Add rel=canonical on the non-/ version
2. Use htaccess to force the non-/ version
3. And update the sitemaps

My daughters have those owls on their bedroom wall.

I am seriously considering reducing the number of pages in a section of our website. We currently have 39 webpages. I'm considering reducing it to 6.

The site architecture would make more sense giving recent design changes. And we could focus more attention on improving conversions from these 6 new pages. But I'm considering doing this mainly because I think it'll help us do a better job of communicating to and converting our audience.

The new pages would be longish. The existing 39 pages are by no means stubs, but these new pages would be longer.

Anyway, what I want to put out for discussion is the SEO impact.

• What are the good SEO reasons for reducing the number of pages?
• Can 6 well-done pages out perform 39 pretty-well-done pages?
• How many queries can one page rank for well?
• Is this SEO suicide?

Honestly, there's a part of me that cannot believe I'm saying this, but I think my heart is in the right place.

That's not ideal.

If you're trying to do this programmatically in a CMS, perhaps there's a way to do something like:

alt="Photo {Some Property}"

alt="{Some Property}"

alt="Photo"

Using "Null" is worse than leaving it blank, I think.