Welcome to the Q&A Forum

It can be done yes, but it would not have a good effect. The reason being is that authorship was meant for articles and good content, not for just general content like thousands of product descriptions. Also, this is not the correct use of authorship, this is something that you would use publisher for instead.

If you ever had decided to blog or post articles any where else, you would be hurt as well. From the best that everyone understands right now Google ranks authors by the content and the sites they write on. Having loads of low quality content like the product pages will drive your authorship ranking in the ground and hurt the ranking of your blog posts I would bet.

As for the rich snippets, you can have product snippets without the review. I also would like to point out since open cart is template based all you have to do is add the snippets to the template page and it will work on all of the products.

I personally would not worry about it. The content on the other sites will dilute the bio content enough that everything should be fine. Plus with a bio you want consistency.

That is just the way it is, that is how moz works. If you are only monitoring one domain in your account, I think you should be ok setting up multiple campaigns with the same domain and monitoring more competitors that way. I haven't tried this, but it seems like it would work.

Totally reasonable, I didn't really know that existed, but it is changed. Sorry for the confusion. Also, like I mentioned I am just a company that uses the product, not someone at the company itself. I do contribute on the blog every now and then too. But as for some links for reference, here are a couple

Magento's forum closed

http://www.magentocommerce.com/boards

Magento Closing products

http://techcrunch.com/2014/07/03/ebay-owned-e-commerce-platform-magento-shuts-down-services-aimed-at-smaller-retailers/

Like I mentioned above I am just mixing the on the record facts, with what I have heard from some insiders. It could be wrong, it could be right. I know because of the nature of is talked about here we all have to do a little bit of speculation because we are generally discussing systems and companies that we have no direct control of.

But like I mentioned above I can totally see how my name and the posts created a misleading environment and I have changed my name.

Those two errors are generally generated by mod_security. Can you check to see if it is enabled on your server. If it is disable it and see if you still get the error.

That was actually the first thing I did when I was going to answer, but I didn't feel educated enough to answer the question. The correlation I could find is there is a company that publishes a news paper by the same name (the other companies name is an exact match on their domain name) that has written articles about Myanmar, but I don't know if that would influence anything since they do not have links on the page. If so, this is an area of SEO I haven't explored before.

The images on Wikipedia are actually Wikimedia images and covered under the creative commons rules. You can read more about the required attribution here, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Credit_line

I would be careful with it, I would pick good quality links over anything else personally.

What platform do you use? It is a little more difficult than just embedding it on to a page, you also have to pass the variable of the product(s) that were ordered.

I generally write them by hand unless an application generates them. They can be quite complex and a lot only work on certain configurations. What exactly are you looking to do?

If you are thinking your site has been compromised what I always use to check a site is https://sucuri.net/  I would advise you to change all logins and passwords as well as update any cms you are using to the latest stable version as well.

I honestly don't put as much stock in duplicate content penalties as a lot of people do. I would weigh the content that you are wanting to add against how much content is on the page to begin with. If you are sitting around 5-10% I would not worry about it at all. If you have no text on the page where you want to put the reviews, I would consider doing them in an image.

Also you might editorialize the content as well. Like say the original site lists the reviewer as "Janet Johnson" You might list the review as "Janet J." Also you might cut it down as well using periods. Like "Janet J. says, Great service.... I would recommend them to all of my friends". You can do that as a legitimate way of beating duplicate content without changing the point or message.

It is, that is how a RSS feed looks.

I do. I have found it works really well actually. I beta tested the version out for Prestashop actually. The guy behind it, Omer is a great guy I have had a little contact with him. The only thing that worries me about the plugin is, what do they do with the information.

Other than that, it works flawlessly.

From my understanding you can use both. I would, Google likes it when people use Google's products and idea's. But at the same time Bing does not work with Google data highlighter, so I would try to use both.

Great, good luck with things. You might be able to use the time stamps on the files in conjunction with the server logs to determine when the modifications were made and how they were made.

I think Yelp does work in a positive way a lot, I know many businesses it has helped, but at the same time I think once you get to know the system you realize it is rigged. Maybe it is on purpose, or maybe it is like the early days of Google before the algorithm was perfected, I don't honestly know.

It is interesting how they do their moderation though, I figured you would still be able to see everything, just the post would be hidden from the public view.

My best course of action would be to take it to social media, maybe a few posts / tweets yelps way might get them to respond.

From what I have personally seen with Moz is that it calculates DA based on the whole domain and passes the same DA to all of the sub domains of the site. So that would explain why the DA is the same for both urls, since www is considered a sub domain.

For the PA what it means is that more than likely your site is accessible from both the www and non www urls. This creates duplicate content, but at the same time it splits the page's authority as well. The reason being is that Google will see them as two different pages, but they have the same content. Then also some users might enter with the www and some without. Then those people might want to link to your site, some will use the www and others will not use the www. So you are basically creating two different link profiles for the site.

I would add a canonical tag to the site if you are going to keep it this way, then it will be known to search engines which site is the preferred one. Ideally, you should put a redirect and choose to go with using the www. or not using a prefix at all, but not both at the same time, then add a canonical tag too for good measure.

Oh, it works nice. What platform are you using it with?

The social aspect is that it gives users the ability to post their reviews to their facebook or twitter accounts. I am pretty sure they just added rich snippets a bit ago as well.

I will shoot of an email in a few and ask Omer about the sending back dated emails. I know that was something they were working on and they were also working on using unique coupon codes as well. Because coupons are great to send that way.

It very well could of been because penguin 2.1 was released this weekend. What day did it happen on? https://twitter.com/mattcutts/status/386231794883780609