Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hey Autoschieber, There's no manual refresh unfortunately. The Reclaim Links report refreshes with every MozScape index update. So you'll see those changes reflected in the report when MozScape re-crawls the site at the beginning of November.

Hello David, This is an issue for many sites at the moment, I think. I just finished diving really deep into another site having the same problem, and we ended up - after fixing everything that "could" be wrong - deciding that Google has probably tightened the reigns on rich snippets displaying for product pages. Whether this is based on page-level authority metrics, number of reviews, trustworthiness of the reviews, etc... I do not know. It is not guaranteed that a page will display snippets in the SERPs even if the code is implemented correctly. That is about all we can know at the moment. The same goes for rel author thumbs and other enhanced SERPs.

It resolved itself in the next week with no further action taken. Site verification wasn't a problem - in fact, I couldn't find anything that was causing it. Normally it's less than 24 hours for our sitemaps to be processed and indexed, this one just took a few days.

Hi David, I'm not really sure how you would get to this page from let's say the homepage but besides that there could be a couple other ways that Google found this page: via a sitemap, via a link on another Web site or via social media. In all cases would Google be able to view the page and be able to index it. It really depends on what kind of form you use but I've seen some cases where Google was able to use select boxes etc.

It's a known bug that the disavow tool does not always give you a confirmation message after you submit.  Around the 6:50 mark of this Webmaster Central Hangout John Mueller confirms this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoQxHeD-jZM As Dr. Pete said, as long as you see that your file is in place, you just need to trust that the tool is working.  When you submit, you'll see a notification within the disavow tool that says, "You have successfully submitted a file with xxx domains and xx urls" to show you that your file has indeed been submitted.

I would organize reviews by most recent as it would show visitors what the latest thoughts are on the product and they can better learn what they are looking for, especially if the products have changed in anyway such as new formula, packaging, etc. A sampling would be fine for a testimonials-like page but might obvious to customers that it's not entirely truthful if they are all only good-great reviews on the product pages.

David Without more data it is hard to answer this. I will ask a question and it is simply to check for the info - is the link in any way a footer link? sidebar? etc.? If there were a way to look at the link we might could help, but I can understand if not.  Best.

Nobody has any experience with this?

Hey David, Tom brought up some good points and he's spot on with the fact that Google is always difficult to compare anything against.  They have so many more details that we can't replicate even with incognito windows such as Region, IP Address, Time of Day, etc. I took a look at your account and compared a handful of keywords.  You definitely have some volatile keywords that fluctuate often.  This makes it harder to keep the reports up to date with the daily rankings since we run these reports weekly.  You may want to utilize Rank Tracker to check keywords a bit more manually if you want more control over your comparisons. If you have more questions about your keywords and reports, the help team is always happy to investigate specific situations to give you more details about the comparisons.  Feel free to email your examples to help@moz.com and let us dig in for you more.

Don'worry! It will take time. Google isn't lightning quick with drop requests or URL removals. They take time to filter out. Give it time and monitor it weekly to see they start to diminish Cheers!

Were you requiring reciprocal links for a link in your directory? If so, I'd burn the whole thing to the ground and ask for removal of links where possible. If you really think it helps users, you could add nofollow to the links instead. Without knowing more about the directory, how it was run, and your link profile, it's hard to give solid advice.

Safest bet, set up canonicals that point to the page minus the parameter so even if Google does read the session IDs it will understand that they relate to the canon link. Honestly, I'm not 100% sure if Google reads those sessions IDs or not either and have seen conflicting information. I know they read other parameters as separate URLs... I had a few issues with the way one of our sites handled products (sometimes it was ?model= and sometimes it was ?prod_id= and some old products also had ?sku=). But adding the canonicals will solve this problem if it exists and if the problem doesn't exist it won't hurt having a self-referential canonical sitting in the code in case someone scrapes your site.

It won't hurt to disavow positively known spammy back links and your rankings drops may in fact be due to penguin, but don't yet be 100% sure you were the one hit with the penalty--like I said the way it looks know, it appears more like one/some upstream link(s) got whacked and you're feeling the effects of less link juice.  Time will tell.  In the mean time, focus on creating content that your audience can use and share and work your social media channels.

I have the same query. Here is what we did : Kept the category title on h1 . Then a one liner description , which is same as meta description of that page as h2 . Then 3-4 lines about the category in simple words, without making it look too promotional. I guess, we are on the right path.