Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I'm glad to hear you've been sorted out Lawrence Neal. I find it interesting the the other Lawrence saw something similar, and I'll ask around to see if it was a glitch that other people have noticed too. For anyone reading this wondering what Mr. Neal was referring to in regard to rel canonical / href lang conflict, there's a good writeup of it over at Dejanseo.com and Gianluca Fiorelli mentions it in his comment on Dr. Pete's Rel Canonical uber post here on Moz.

Hi Lawrence, That's a tough question to ask, but in my experience, it's not a major thing. I would say it is a bigger issue for user experience. If you're geo-targeting your website within webmaster tools and also through href lang then you should be ok. My advice would be to go with the GeoIP option purely to give your users better quality of information.

Hi Tom, It was one of my colleagues that asked the question on my behalf. To clarify, we are actually aware the text is crawlable, what I was wondering is whether the text in title tags on thumbnails would be treated (in terms of exact match keyword weight) the same/grouped together with copy between span tags, for instance. We have a category page with 75 instances of 'example' and 'examples'  including title tags on thumbnails, anchor text and sales/seo copy (and 325 instances of the keyword in the source code) So the question is, would we be better to make the thumbnail text uncrawlable to avoid over-optimisation penalisation?  Just a thought Thanks for you reply.

Hey Lawrence, Campaigns have a 95% tolerance for duplicate content. This includes all the source code on the page and not just the viewable text. So if a URL is at least 95% similar in code and content to another URL, this warning will appear. You can run your own tests using this tool: http://www.webconfs.com/similar-page-checker.php We don't know what standard Google uses, but it's safe to say they are a bit more sophisticated than us - so you might be okay in this regard as long as you have a couple hundred words of unique text and some unique coding per page. Google won't say how much duplicate content is too much, so we like to be better safe than sorry. I hope this help. Let me know if you need further assistance. -Chiaryn

I infer from what your saying that the amount of people with javascript disabled in 2013 is probably less than negligible. This is a very good point. Looks like we're perhaps trying to fix the engine of a car we should have got rid of a while aqo...!