Welcome to the Q&A Forum

thanks.

I understand that this is considered best practice.

But do you know about a case or heard about a case where this really was the likely reason for panda?

I noticed that some very big ecommerce sites such as zalando with top-notch SEO, actually publish color variations with near-identical product descriptions and without canonical or noindex. I was wondering, maybe google is more understanding in terms of content duplciation when it comes to product variations on ecommerce sites as it is generally not done for manipulative purposes.

Would like to add 300 products to ecommerce site of which 150 products are just variations in different colors.

In this particular case there are some reaons for:

• Not writing partially unique product descriptions for each product variation
• Not setting them up as variations on one product page

So I would have several product pages with nearly identical product descriptions (proprietary description written by us), just name of color in title and description and EAN in description being different, as well as over time different user generated content showing up. Also different product images used.

I would not mind if google  would not index some product variations.

Do you think I should be concerned about Panda? Do you know any website which had a Panda problem caused by product variations?

Thanks

For  a partial keyword match domain name what would you recommend as ALT tag to internlink country domains (different CCTLD)?

Option 1) 
DOMAIN.com DOMAIN.de DOMAIN.co.uk

=> I am a bit concerned about this option in terms of potential penalty for keywords in ALT (since partial match domains)

Option 2) 
UK
DE
FR ...

Option 3)
English UK
Deutsch Deutschland
Deutsch Österreich
Francais France

=> concerned here about mixing lots of languages in ALT tags in each page, which may confuse google language detection.

thanks.

understand your doubts.

indeed it was expensive to create and especially to update great part of the content every year.

Have chosen on purpose a lower search volume example.

I have  destination pages with  facets of different leisure activities possible at the destination:

golf hotels USA

tennis hotels spain

while the above certainly have search volume, where to draw the line if you have detailled content on facilities of leisure activities at the hotel.

Excellent. We have lots of proprietary content,

I am getting a bit side-tracked now, but if you have a minute I would really like to hear your opinion, as your comment touches my principal doubt, which I posted here a week ago, but did not get any good response.

Shall I provide facets of  category pages for as many facets as I can provide unique content and benefit for visitor?

I plan to launch about 30 facets for each destination page. All unique content. All useful for visitor, but I am not sure if I should limit to less facets. Is 30 facets OK as long as they are unique and provide value? If I should cut out facets based on low search volume, where to make the cut?

To give an example, for a good ranking hotel site, should I create (among 30 other facets) facets like "hotels boston table tennis", "hotels new york table tennis", if I have unique proprietary content for these pages, despite relatively low search volume?

EGOL, thanks a lot. Again excellent advice.

Do you think new pages could harm ranking/indexing of my existing destination pages?

Would you launch the first 60.000 pages on one day or rather stretch time period?

New pages are mostly just 2 clicks from my index page. 
Also have to clarify that we have have about 30 language versions in same domain, so under 10.000 pages finally per language.
Domain authority is 58 with 358 linking root domains (without any link building).

Frankly I doubt we will get in a natural way  lots of deeplinks as in the past 95% of our links were going to our index page, but will now consider to plan some active link building after launch.

Jonatahan, Tommy thanks for the comments.

To clarify. Pages are destination pages for travel related ecommerce site.

Faceted navigation type sub pages for existing destinations, but with lots of unique content for each facet.

My concern was that I did not want to raise any kind of alarms with google where triplication of number of webpages under one domain  from one day to another may raise flags for appearing unnatural or manipulative.

We are going to launch about 60.000 new web pages under one established domain (google pagerank 6), which currently has about 30.000 web pages. So web pages will triple.

New pages contain keyword variations of existing pages with pages targeting specific niches. All pages with unique and useful specific content for visitor. All pages heavily interlinked among each other.

Would you recommend to stretch launch of new pages over some time period, or do you see no problem to launch them all on one day?

In about 3 months we plan to launch another 180.000 new web pages.

Thanks.

excellent.. will do so.

Takeshi, thanks  for the advice.

thanks.

I am not concerned about ranking of my facebook or google plus page in google.

I plan to publish same posts on facebook and google+.

As they are in 10 different languages, I would rather not make modifications for facebook and google+ respectively.

1. Do you see any problems with this?

2. Do you think it matters whether I first publish on google+ or first on facebook?

3. Any problem if I publish posts on one social media account which I already published in another social media account for another company of mine some months ago?

thanks

Very good point relating to credibility of review and great relief  that I do not have to perform spellchecks of thousands of reviews. Thanks.

Still may follow also Cristinas suggestions as poor spelling in user review may also reflect on visitors perception of website's credibility.

Christina, excellent idea integrating spellcheck upon submission. Will have a look at google spellcheck API. Thanks.

We have a lot of user generated reviews on our key landing pages.

Matt Cutts recommended using correctly spelled content.

Would you perform a spellcheck of all already published user reviews or would you leave already published reviews rather intact and only perform spellcheck for new reviews before they are published?

Since reviews have been marked up using schema.org, I am not sure whether posterior editing of lots of reviews may raise a flag with google regarding manipulating reviews.

Thanks.

some doubts about implementing rel=author:

1. I have no google+ account so far and I have no intention to start activities in google+. Shall I still add rel=author and create a new empty google+ account (without google+ activity but using gmail) or would you recommend rather not to add rel=author in this case?

2. I have 2 sites ranking in top10 SERP for my targeted keyword. One online shop and on another domain a non-commercial site with information on the topic. Would you rather associate same or different google+ accounts (from different people) with these two sites for both rel=author and rel=publisher?

thanks.

thanks. Marc.

interesting links.

Still my doubt remains. If I have two synonyms which are both very important key terms, would you build 2 seperate optimized pages? I see that google is getting better at recognizing synonyms in some occasions, but still detection does not seem very consistent.