Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Tom - that's very useful - appreciated - and thanks also Clever PhD re: the robots.txt tester info - Luke

Sounds like a good plan, Luke! Good luck with the work, and be sure the calendar is crawlable

You're very welcome, Luke!

I wonder whether anyone has carried out any research into this issue? Are there any stats out there?

Many thanks again CleverPhD, and thanks for your input Martijn - much appreciated. I guess one issue may be the mass alteration of title tags acting as a spam flag, as I have hundreds of pages to deal with - most of the website :-I - I am advising that the changes are implemented gradually so we don't upset Google - is my caution justified?

Many thanks for your advice - yes, it seems like the logical way forward, so I'm following your recommendations

Very much appreciated CleverPhD!

thanks Moosa - it does

Bryan isn't wrong, but I had a quick look and I don't think Trip Adviser is using rel next/prev on those pages. They don't seem to be using rel canonical or any robots meta tag, and I didn't find the pages in the robots.txt file. I think this is a case of a big brand getting away with things a smaller brand probably couldn't do. Happens all the time.

Yes I agree Andy - many thanks for your response - can't see any logical reason - I took a look at Tripadvisor, out of interest - and although they're not using canonical tag oddly like the site I mention above, they were using the same title tags for each page of reviews (on same hotel) - which, again, doesn't seem logical - surely better if they simply add page 1, page 2 and so on to Title Tag?

From an SEO standpoint, I'd say that the URLs generally follow the same principles. Unfortunately, now that Google directly caches and displays your images, image SEO isn't worth quite the effort it used to be. In most cases, if images are on subdomains, it's for technical reasons unrelated to SEO. People might do this for load-balancing or because they run a 3rd-party CDN, etc. There are more sophisticated ways to do this so that the images all live on one subdomain with the content, but they can be more labor intensive and more costly (and some platforms just don't support them natively).

My thought make all links NoFollow or using this meta tag : Place between and  page you put links. For example : yoursite.com/tables.html

Hi Luke, Just make sure that your robots.txt file located at https://www.example.com/robots.txt doesn't block search engine spiders. Of course there may be some folders or filetypes you want to block but it certainly shouldn't look like below which would block everything: User-agent: * Disallow: / Hope that helps

Thanks for your input Andy - some good commonsense there Luke

Many thanks EGOL - some excellent points.

As mentioned above, some CMS's will do this and if the site isn't configured correctly, like editing the .htaccess to take care of it. then it will just sit there. It is unlikely to be causing problems, unless there are multiple homepages being generated (/home, /index.html, etc). Ideally it should be redirected to root if for no other reason, than to bring it up to date. -Andy

Thanks Tom - that's incredibly helpful - much appreciated Luke

Fully agree - would definitely ask for nofollow links.

Totally agree with Dirk.  If the links offer value to the visitor and if grouped are tightly and obviously associated with the theme of the page then they should always be left as is.  If there is a hint of paid for they should be no-follow, but in essence having no-follow means you don't trust the page/site so why have it there in the first place (unless there is some commercial interest in having it there).

Hi there, IMO the two pages are near duplicates and I have seen pages that have been indexed in such cases (on one of our own projects). Then we have taken in consideration the canonical, and issue was solved. This is why I have recommended it, but I am opened to other solutions also. Gr., Keszi