Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Here is a nice article on the subject: http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-recommends-using-xml-sitemaps-rssatom-feeds-optimal-crawling/118364/

"Google explains the differences between the formats by saying that XML sitemaps describe a whole set of URLs within a site, while RSS/Atom feeds only describe the most recent changes. As a result of XML sitemaps containing more information, they are typically larger than RSS/Atom feeds. XML sitemaps are also downloaded less frequently.

As a website owner, which format should you use if you want your website to be crawled to the best of Google’s ability. Google recommends using both, explaining how the formats compliment each other."

They offer a $75 USD credit online (with a $25 purchase): http://www.google.com/ads/adwords-coupon.html

When you say page rank, do you mean Google's Page rank or do you mean Moz's page authority, from Open Site Explorer? If you mean Moz's page authority, that measure should go up, though I don't know how long that would take. You might need to wait till there is another crawl.

You can recover page authority from a 404 page for a surprising amount of time--I once did a 301 redirect on some pages that had been 404 for a couple of years and they quickly gained rank. What was the thinking behind not redirecting old pages? Were they poor quality? You don't have to redirect all of them at once--you can start with the best pages (and at least some of them must have been good since you had traffic to lose).

Google has expressed a preference for https, so if it makes no difference to you otherwise, that would probably be a good choice.

The on-page grader grades the pages that rank in the top 50 for a keyword in one of your campaigns, so even though you didn't optimize for those particular keywords, that page is ranking for them anyway.

When you see a grade of "F" for a search term that doesn't apply to that page, you don't need to worry about it. Sometimes pages do rank for keywords other than the ones we are optimizing for.

Using the page title as the H1 is bad form? I thought that is pretty much the best use for it...

I have to amend my answer--I have now seen a survey. It was for a Google Maps search. First they asked what I was using Google Maps for, and then they asked about my satisfaction with the results.

Have you tried submitting a new sitemap without those pages?

In general, 404 errors (assuming that this is what is happening) are not a problem as long as they are not causing major user disruption. Also, you should check that your own site is not linking to the discontinued pages.

You can create content experiments in Google Analytics  https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/1745147?hl=en

I didn't end up using it (we got Optimizely instead) so I cannot attest to its ease of use, but it might be worth taking a look at.

A few years back Moz had such a list of directories. They took it down, planning to make a new version that was up-to-date and useful but as far as I know they never did (the old link still redirects to a mostly empty page). This makes me think that Moz does not see a lot of value in directories. (Though personally, I am a fan of DMOZ, for old time's sake...)

Do you check Google Webmaster Tools? Under Search Appearance > HTML Improvements Google will list duplicate titles and descriptions among other things, which might be a help to you.

Apparently Google thinks the http://simplycrowngreenbowls.wordpress.com/ site is more relevant. (I see that this is also your site.) Google cached the .wordpress site first, so it might just be holding on to that because there is no overwhelming reason not to.

You have a line in the content of that .wordpress page instructing people to go to simplycrowngreenbowls.co.uk, but you do not actually 301 redirect the page. As Shawn said, you should do that.

If you do a Bing or Yahoo search your site simplycrowngreenbowls.co.uk comes up first, and as I mentioned I can find your site with the site: operator in Google, so I do not think it is a case of your preferred site not being findable. (I also took a look with Screaming Frog and didn't see any glaring errors.)

I can see your site indexed in Google. When I do site:simplycrowngreenbowls.co.uk in a Google search bar, I see nine pages from your site come up.

If you are using it in a normal way, for good usability and not to be deceptive, you should be OK. (Matt Cutts on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsW8E4dOtRY )

Yes, I tried this as well and didn't see any survey.

Similar questions have come up a few times. I am not sure there is a clear answer, but you may want to look at this thread: http://moz.com/community/q/612-home-page-banned [Or search on 612 in the forum search.] Good luck!

Are you just looking for an explanation of what C-blocks are? There was an excellent explanation here a while back:

http://moz.com/community/q/linking-c-blocks

"It refers to the part of the IP address that's different. The same class C address means something has the same third octect in the address. In the following, the first three IPs are in the same class C, and the fourth address is not.
192.168.1.1

192.168.1.2

192.168.1.3

192.168.100.4
The reason we care is like what searchpl says -- it's a hint to Google that the sites are all related to each other and on the same server, and that the links may not be very natural since there is the good possibility that the same person set them up." (from Keri Morgret)

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 ]

Anything you type after your domain which isn't an actual page will return a not found error; it doesn't mean the page exists somewhere. [Try entering yourdomain.com/anythingyouwant and you will get a 404.] Or am I misunderstanding the question? In any case, 404 errors are not necessarily bad for SEO, as long as they are not harming the user experience.