Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Hi. I think you misuse or maybe misunderstand what canonical link is. It's basically to say to search engines that the page, which canonical link is pointing to is the original page for a given content. So, if you have on fr.domain.com canonical link which will point to www.domain.com, it means that you are saying that all content on fr.domain is duplicate (or should not be considered separately) of www.domain.com. This will mean that all the ranking juice from fr will go to www. I believe what you are looking for are hreflangs, which are for telling search engines which subdomains/domains are for which country. Hope this helps.

Before answering, it is me having a question for you: why the hell do you need to put spanish content under a french subdomain if you already have it in the spanish version of the website? Is this nothing but complicating everything :-)? Said that, as Steve said, the hreflang itself solves any potential duplicate issue, so you don't need to cross canonicalized any url. Simply remember to use the correct combo of hreflang ISO codes. In the case of the spanish version of the french subdomain, the hreflang should reference the fr.sudomain.com/es/... and have as pair these: "es-FR", so to target only the spanish speaking people in France. This way you are not going to messed up with the same kind of URL in targeting spanish speaking users in Spain ("es-ES") or in Great Britain ("es-GB") and so on. However, it would have been more logical to have only one spanish URL for the videos, and have their hreflang set up as "es" only, so to target all users speaking spanish in every country.

This same question has more answers at this URL: https://moz.com/community/q/international-url-paths. so I close this thread for not having split them.

Hi Matt, You can get your app featured in the 'app carousel' if your device is in Google Play, but a knowledge graph box links to a website by its nature so I don't believe it's possible for it to link to an app instead.

OK... I know your site.   In that wasted white space at the top you should be offering everyone an opportunity to subscribe to breaking news and get links to breaking stories by email as soon as they are posted.  Allow them to subscribe by team, or league, or trades, or salary, or coaches or goalies, or Stanley Cup. Back to your original question...  Start experimenting and keeping records.  You have the advantage of a strong site and a relevant site and a site that is quick with the news.  It could behave differently in different situations.

I see that they're duplicating their indexing as well. I'm curious if they're getting the same error. qGgfWah

Hi Matt! Did Martijn's response help? We'd love an update.

Yes, in your example it WOULD affect the ranking, as the first URL no longer exists. Ideally the 1st URL should 301 redirect to the 2nd URL, the updated one. In most cases, timing is everything--and getting a URL crawled and indexed quickly means a lot when it comes to rankings. Keep in mind, though, that you're getting a good ranking, but you then essentially ignore it and get rid of that ranking when you change URLs.

+1 for Egol here. A canonical is just a request to Google - a 301 is a directive Google has to respect. I don't really understand why your technical team is making such a fuzz about it - enforcing the trailing slash (or not) is just 1/2 lines in your .htacess file. Check Stackoverflow Dirk

Well - go in SearchConsole and reevaluate site from scratch. As long as you return 404 to hacked pages its' OK for you and for Google. But what they told you in "reconsideration request"? Because "this site may be hacked" isn't helpful for your CTR. PM me site please.

Yeah, they don't explicitly mention 301s. But similar to a 404, a 301ed page is technically also not an "existent URL with good content." It's a permanent move, i.e., that particular URL no longer exists, though the content does exist at a new URL. Dr. Pete wrote a good post about rel=canonicals a couple years ago that's worth checking out—numbers 3, 7, 9, and 10 in particular. As far as the lack of consistency in the results, if you're treating all the URLs the same way, it might simply be a time lag. I could see how using 302s for a long period of time would end up showing the vanity URLs in the index. The only way I think you could consistently get a particular URL to display for a result would be to establish it as the official, "canonical" version of the page, whether you do that with 301s or rel=canonical.

Well, testing is the best way. But if you want your video to show up in the serps (which almost never happens anymore) you can limit yourself to 55 characters. (the lenght of the title tag). If you focus on Bing go for 45. But any other motivation based on your own platform is OK as wel. If you consider the amount of characters that is read on twitter (the first 45) you could try to limit it to that (be concrete for your customers)

Hi there. Upon request to sitemap.xml run a let's say sitemap.php or .js or whatever, which would read the directory for new files, then update sitemap.xml. If you're using CMS - then it should have automatically generated sitemap by default. If not - the same idea, just instead of reading directory for rhysical files, read database. Cheers.

Wordpress tries really hard to be a CMS but it's really not much more than a blog with some page management thrown in. The only advantage WP has here is that it's free. If you're a professional photographer then you need a photographer website. Don't try to cut corners. if you were a woodworker I would tell you to buy a circular saw over a hand saw. Get the professional website that is built to showcase your talent.

Agree with James & Gary that you've done the right things and it may just take time. That being said, I've had a LOT of success in the past with adding a link to your sitemap in a G+ post. Now, correlation is not causation so it may just be Google getting around to the earlier suggestions - but I've seen it help even when I didn't have WMT access to do a fetch in the first place. So I would definitely also link to your site &/or your sitemap on G+ and create a link that way. As James said "try building some links" - that would be the first one I try.

Oh here's an example http://time.com/3852287/these-are-the-5-facts-that-explain-the-surprising-uk-elections/

Hey Matt, I'm not sure without researching if Blogspot has this, but one thing you might want to consider is a cross-domain canonical tag. Dr Pete has done a few great posts on the different was to use rel="canonical" that might apply in your situation. See http://moz.com/blog/6-extreme-canonical-tricks and http://moz.com/blog/rel-confused-answers-to-your-rel-canonical-questions Hope that gets you started!

Hi There This seems like a way to do custom 301 redirects - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/24795465/use-301-redirect-in-google-blogger-blogspot - is that method possible for you?

Hi Matt, How long ago was "recently?" I've often seen Quality Scores get reset when I change the destination URL, but then time will get them back to what they were before. Best, Kristina