Welcome to the Q&A Forum

The title and meta tags that you yourself post are only suggestions to Google—what is actually shown in the search results will depend on what query the searcher used to get your listing. Google tries to make the results as useful for the searcher as possible. (Try for example "3V Dental Associates, hours" and you will see the hours in the description.) Here is a Yoast post that talks about this (scroll down a bit).

I have never used it but seems like a risky thing to do, even if it does give some short-term bump (and it's not clear that it does). This is black hat. Do a few searches and read comments about it, then decide if this is something you want to risk.

You can't make Google do anything :-), but submitting a new sitemap with the new structure should help. You can also submit some of your key pages to Fetch as Google in Webmaster Tools, sometimes that can get pages indexed very quickly.

You don't need a special tool, just go to whois.net and check the domain.

All pages on your domain have the same domain authority. Each page has its own page authority.

The page authority of the home page can be the same as the domain authority, but it does not have to be.

For example, the page authority of moz.com (homepage) is 92 (looking at the moz bar) and the domain authority is 93. For www.macys.com (homepage) the page authority is 90 and the domain authority is 87.

It sounds like you might be selecting the campaign settings, rather than the ad group settings. Try this. When you are in Adwords, look at the folder tree to the left of your Adwords screen. You can see the ad groups indented under the campaigns that they are in. [Sorry if this is too elementary--sometimes it is hard to explain things online.]

Click on the ad group you want to adjust, then on the settings tab, then on the devices sub-tab. [You will know that you are in the correct place, the ad group rather than the campaign, because there will be no ad group tab.]

That is the other thing that might be causing your problem--you have to make sure "Devices" is selected, otherwise it will try to switch you to the full campaign if you have "All settings" selected. If "Devices" is selected, you should have no problem adjusting the mobile bid specifically for that ad group.

Yup, just click on the error URL in the list and you get a popup window with two tabs—Error details and Linked from.

Yes, many sites have repeated information in sidebars, footers and so on--that is not a problem. I would wonder about the testimonials, though. Not from an SEO viewpoint but from a user viewpoint. If I read two testimonials that were identical except for the name, I would not give either one much credence. (But that's a small issue.)

The on-page grader lists the pages that rank in the top fifty for a keyword in one of your campaigns. In other words if you are seeing a phrase, even if the associated page is graded an F, it is because that phrase brought up that page in the top 50 search results.

In general the rule is one phrase per page, but it is not uncommon for a page to rank for a group of related long-tail queries. However if a page is an F for a query, you may have to make a lot of changes for it to grade well for that query, which would likely have a bad effect on the query that is is meant to rank for.

It would probably be better for you to figure out what elements of the page caused it to come up for the phrase it got an F for, and make a new page keeping those related elements and adding content relevant to this phrase. [The letter grades are not supposed to be the final word on the probable success of a page, btw.]

As far as whether your client is causing significant changes in Google's behavior, I would think not or else a lot of SEOs would be spending a lot of time typing in strategic search terms. [Though perhaps if they are very low search volume terms and bringing up results on the fifth page, it might not be impossible that that is what Moz is picking up. But it still wouldn't be important.]

The root domain does not have the same data as the homepage.

The domain authority takes the entire website into account and the homepage page authority takes only one single page, the homepage, into account.

Look at Moz again as an example. The homepage has 342,922 links from 11,650 root domains. The root domain has 15,899,372 links from 46,201 root domains. So they are not the same.

I do not know the mysterious details of how the authorities are calculated, but they are taking different data into account and one is looking at a single page while the other an entire site so it is not at all surprising that they can be different.

Yes, you will have to wait a bit to see if that changes anything. But in the meantime, take a look at the source code of one of the pages that is reporting a zero bounce rate and see if the Analytics code is on the page twice. (Here is an article on bounce rates that has additional information, if that is not the answer.)

The first one is more ambiguous. Is it fruit cake and bread of some type, or is it fruit cake and fruit bread [the ampersand generally being a joiner]?

If you do the searches, you will see they are all somewhat similar, with the second two being obviously more related. [collinstreet.com is going to wonder about the strange impressions data in their Adwords campaign...]

An ampersand and the word "and" are mostly the same in Google & there are some who feel that a special character in a title can attract more attention & so is a good thing.

Open Site Explorer updated yesterday, so that might have something to do with it. Domain Authority can change, depending on the index. [If you look back over old questions, you see that this comes up every so often. http://moz.com/community/q/domain-authority-drops#reply_209933 ]

Just to elaborate a bit on the canonical part, people often put a canonical pointing to itself on all pages to avoid duplicate content in the case of session ids or other parameters being appended to the basic url.

This would not hurt your backlink situation, in fact it could help. If by chance there were backlinks to alternate versions of your base url, you would reclaim the link authority which would otherwise have been lost if Google dropped that page from its index seeing it as duplicate content.

There is nothing wrong with using commas in title tags.

The issue is, will these titles look appealing to searchers when they see them on the results page.

If yes, they are good titles. If no, they need fixing.

(Here is a previous thread that touches on this.)

You can get monthly search volume through Google Adwords Keyword Planner, where you can filter by date range. You can even compare to the previous month or the same month last year. (You have to have an Adwords account, but it doesn't cost anything to get one if you don't already have it.)

Yes I have done it and yes it seems to be working.

The daughter of the owner of the company I work for published an article on her site which we reprinted on ours, using the rel=canonical tag to indicate that her site had the original.

When I search for a string from the article, her site comes up and ours does not.

When we create meta descriptions in our headers, those are only suggestions to Google. It will show what it decides is most relevant to the searcher and what it shows will depend on the user's search term.

For example, I just searched on: "thuman agency homepage" and saw:
Thumann Insurance Agency | Commercial Insurance Dallas, TX Blog · Contact ... An Independent Insurance Agency in Dallas, TX ... Our agency specializes in commercial insurance for Texas, ranging from business owner ...

And "thumann agency dallas tx" brought up:
"Thumann Insurance Agency | Commercial Insurance Dallas, TX Get the most competitive rates & exceptional customer service from the Thumann Agency in Dallas. Specializing in all commercial & personal coverage's."

That search brought up several sitelinks as well. ["coverages" should not have the apostrophe, btw] You can also see that the words I used to search were made bold.

‎

If you create high-quality, unique useful pages that are well-optimized and also engage people and encourage linking then yes, they will tend to rank well (how well depends on the competition) and help your website rank well. But it is unlikely that simply optimizing on-page SEO for high-volume search terms will be enough to get the result you want. There is a lot of competition out there and many people know SEO basics. (There are many who don't as well, but I wouldn't depend on that as a strategy.)

I am not sure what you want to work around? Having the canonical tag on the canonical page? That is not a problem. Here is Matt Cutts on the topic: http://youtu.be/U8eQgx-njk4

I think Bing used to have an issue with it, but it is such a common thing to have a situation like yours where canonical tags are automatically put on pages that even that stance has softened, I believe.

[They are also handy to have on pages in case someone steals them outright--they will still give credit to the home site.    ]