Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Matt Cutts has stated before that a dash - in a URL is interpreted similar to a space while an underscore _ is interpreted as a connector. http://youtu.be/AQcSFsQyct8

In your case, if Co-matic and Comatic are synonymous then I would choose whatever the actual Brand name is. Odds are Google will understand 1) that the brand is Co-matic and 2) that "Comatic" is "Co-matic" when looking for machinery.

Also, "Comatic" has the dictionary definition "of, pertaining to, or blurred as a result of a coma" which I don't think would be advantageous to have associated with your site.

Most people NoIndex their blog archives to stop duplicate content errors. So tag archives, month and year archives, etc. should be set to NoIndex,Follow.

As for pagination issues, rel="next" and rel="prev" were created to show pages in a series so those might need implementation if they haven't been already.

This happens far more frequently than you probably assumed. I do however find it amusing that one search will return my page with the correct title and then a similar search will return my page with an altered title. Seems almost silly that a synonym can completely change how my site's information appears in the SERPs... but it happens. On a positive side though, sometimes that may actually help to make you more relevant to a search you didn't think of while not hurting your positions for the terms you're trying to rank for.

The only potential value in blog tags is for the sake of usability. The SEO values are negligible at best and most wind up noindexing Tag archives anyway in order to save themselves from duplicate content issues. The value of relevant tags on a blog is that they help tie together other relevant articles on a subject to make them more easily accessible and tie all the posts together with something akin to an overarching theme. Use them for the sake of giving human users another way to find related content that may keep them on site longer.

I've never had the opportunity to see Roger in person... but when I do I expect a hug from him.

Could be, I suppose. But it's been happening on and off for months now. I just mostly stop caring after a bit, clear out the errors and get annoyed when I see it pop up again. Its one of those things that doesn't actually cause a problem but I can't help feeling irked by its existence. All in all, I'm perfectly fine with the solution being "Google is wrong, leave it alone"... that's basically what I've been doing anyway.

Sorry, I wasn't getting email notifications that people had answered. I checked with our remaining coder who said that was there on purpose (much like Highland stated) and he's going to take a look deeper into it once he has the chance but doesn't know why its showing up like that.

Try plugging the URL into Open Site Explorer. There's a good chance that if Mozbot crawled it and found the 404 that it would also list the inbound links for it in OSE.

In some cases, the capitalized version and lower case version of a search won't return the EXACT same results in the SERPs (sometimes a result will shuffle a bit [though not by much from what I've seen]) but Google does understand that "Example" and "example" are the same word much in the same way that it knows a singular and plural of the same word are related, i.e. "Shoes" will show up for a search of "Shoe" and vice versa.

If you also take into account the regular shuffling of the SERPs every time Google so much as blinks, there is the possibility that when the rankings data was pulled for your terms they were done so in a fashion that shows two different numbers that were both correct at the times they were pulled. Plus, in the past week (week and a half?) there was a decent bit of volatility in the SERPs that lead people to believe there was an algorithm change happening so for all you know that may have put an odd hiccup in the numbers as well.

Worse comes to worst you could always do a bit of testing to see if maybe you stumbled on a previously unknown traffic/rankings difference. Shouldn't be but with 500+ algorithm changes a year, you never know.

We use CSS Hidden content behind a clickable "Read More" on  pretty much all of our sites in places where we want certain things viewable above the fold (mainly for aesthetic reasons). We've never seen any issues with Google not giving proper weight to the hidden content or flagging it as cloaking.

In your case though, I'd be concerned that having the transcripts for 12+ videos hidden on one page will make it less likely that each video will be found as easily as they should have. E.G. A video that would be perfectly relevant to a search may not appear in the SERPs for relevant terms because it is overshadowed by one or more of the other 12+ video transcripts. IMO, It might be more search-friendly and user-friendly to instead have a hub page linking out to the individual pages hosting the video and its related content.

I've found that people like bullet points... gives them quick information without needing to read the rest of your content. Of course the problem arises of duplicate content when you use the same bullets over a large amount of products or all you do is change a word or two between every page. If the bullets are all the same then what's the value of them to the user? Bullet points (like all content) should be relevant and fresh. They should highlight the specific advantages of that product, i.e. what makes it special/different/unique/important/worth buying?

I've never actually had any errors listed for non-indexable content in the HTML Improvements section of WMT. So I'm not 100% sure what would set off that notification. Though the sites I work on do have a number of pages that are NoIndex and/or NoFollow. So i guess the issue would be caused not by purposefully blocking the page but some other means that makes your page unable to be crawled properly.

If you copy a string of text on the page and paste it into google search, does your page show up in the results? If so, then its being indexed despite the second robots tag. If it doesn't show up, then its not being indexed. So importance would rely on whether you want that page to be indexed and whether or not it is being indexed. Either way, you should look into cleaning that up at some point.

Not that I know of... but even if they did it would only be an approximation of what they could gather were search volumes based off of trends. Whereas going through something like Adwords would give you the data straight from the source (more or less). There are also other tools out there to help with that data as well such as Wordtracker (like BeardoCo mentioned) and SEMrush which offers some organic keyword volumes along with the rest of its data.

You can get some relative search numbers using the Google Adwords keyword tool.

The page is being linked from only internal pages on the site not from any outside websites or scraper. Some of the pages WMT says the incorrect page is being crawled from are listed above.

Okay, so this is driving me nuts because I should know how to find and fix this but for the life of me cannot. One of the sites I work for has a long-standing crawl error in Google WMT tools for the URL /a%3E that appears on nearly every page of the site. I know that a%3E is an improperly encoded > but I can't seem to find where exactly in the code its coming from. So I keep putting it off and coming back to it every week or two only to wrack my brain and give up on it after about an hour (since its not a priority and its not really hurting anything). The site in question is https://www.deckanddockboxes.com/ and some of the pages it can be found on are /small-trash-can.html, /Dock-Step-Storage-Bin.html, and /Standard-Dock-Box-Maxi.html (among others). I figured it was about time to ask for another set of eyes to look at this for me. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

It is usually better to redirect one to one instead of redirecting from a redirect. Where possible it should be avoided because eventually, if you chain too many redirects to redirects, Google will stop caring. There will be no negative impact from changing an old redirect to point at a more relevant page. You may want to double-check that the level of traffic and inbound links pointing to the page is worth going through the trouble of the 301 instead of letting it 404. Sometimes it can be better to just let a page die if no one is clicking through on it.

From what I understand, when combining open graph protocol and meta description it needs to look like name="description" property="og:description" content="My meta description copy."/>

Best I can tell, its a lot of crazy speculation. I've seen comments and articles where people are stating its a Penguin refresh or their traffic is all over the place or pages that previously ranked position 3-10 dropped to 50 while ranks 1 & 2 stayed safe.

Looking at my own analytics data... just another normal week. We'll get more info as the days go on.