Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Social signals can lead to a decent boost for a website. With the "downfall" of linking, many have looked to signals from social media sites as the new natural expression of a site's worth to their user base and as social proof of authority. It won't necessarily make you rank better in search results but it can be an integral part of the conversion funnel.

The difference is literally that one involves liking a page and one involves sharing a page. They are two separate functions that can be done independently of each other, i.e. I can Share your article without having to Like your website & I can Like pages on your site but not choose to share them. A Share is the use of the Share Button to share/post a page, article, etc. to a person's timeline, a friend's wall, and/or the timeline of a page that the person's account is associated with as an Admin. Whereas a Like is someone clicking a Like button associated with a page, article, etc. stating that they like/enjoy it.

Are you able to place 301 redirects on the Old Domain pointing to the new one? If so, 1-to-1 redirects of pages from the Old Domain to their most relevant counterpart on the New Domain is a good step.

The Canonical will basically act like a redirect for bots only (its not really but for this explanation it makes things simpler). So the bot will arrive at 1099solution, see the canonical point to 1099pro, and will pass equity to 1099pro if it deems the canonical relevant. A canonical is a suggestion, not a directive, so there is the chance that they won't honor the tag. Unlike a redirect, Users who go to 1099solution will stay at 1099solution. If the tags are honored, eventually the 1099pro versions of a page will replace 1099solution versions in the SERPs.

I think what may be happening is that you said you're looking in Google Analytics for it but the steps say to check Google Webmaster Tools.

Glad you're back up and it wasn't anything worse. I know the disruption was annoying me this morning and threw off my regular schedule.

Anything from Google? A million dollars!

But seriously, I second Keri's post. I would very much like my keywords back. I can manage without them myself but management doesn't exactly like that I can't magically turn [Not Provided] into actually provided. I'd also like the previous AdWords Keyword Tool back. Its not that the current Keyword Planner doesn't work fine... it just feels like they've cut out a bunch of functionality for no good reason.

And from the more personal and non-search/marketing/etc. side of things... I would like Google to send me a free pair of Google Glasses except I want the earbud attachment on the left side because I have impaired hearing on my right.

First off, just to be certain.... are you sure they aren't currently missing because of the service disruption Facebook was having for a good hour or so today?

Also, Did the email account(s) associated with the Page as Admins receive any notification of the page's removal?

Well if everything is correct in the header then technically you don't have any problem. So you're not really waiting for something to clear up, you're just waiting for Moz to catch up. If you could post one of the URLs here I could provide a second set of eyes to double-check your canonical.

Occasionally I've had issues where Moz doesn't seem to recognize the canonical right away (or sometimes randomly forgets the canonical is there when its seen it before) and reports duplicate content to me. Its ultimately always cleared itself up though. Double-check your canonicals are definitely written correctly, in the right spot and pointing to the right URL. If they are, I'd say wait to see if Moz fixes itself next crawl.

Had you received an unnatural links warning at all? Usually people suggest not using the Disavow Tool unless you've received that warning. What does your link profile look like? And have you worked on gaining more relevant links and social signals in the time being? If it was an algorithmic penalty in July then it was possibly Panda related but, as I don't have any more information to go on, that's just speculation. Assuming it was Panda then your main issue was likely thin content not links. How does your site look concerning duplicate content, spammy content, and thin pages?

1. Assuming the pages are 100% exactly the same except for the URL, you should bounce back without a problem.

2. If i'm getting this right... Page 1 is the Old URL & Page 2 is the New URL but Page 1 accidentally redirected to Page 3. Now you want to know if Page 1 should be correctly redirected to Page 2 like originally intended? Yes.

3. While its always best to try to redirect as soon as possible, a 24 hour period of the page 404ing prior to redirection will not kill you.

Also you may want to update your Sitemap to swap the old URLs for the correct new URLs (if necessary), submit the updated sitemap to Google & Bing webmaster tools as needed, submit the new pages in Bing WMT & do some fetch requests in Google WMT to potentially speed up the crawl & indexing of the new pages.

My favorite answer... Canonicals. If your trade partner's site places rel="canonical" tags pointing back to the original source of the content on your site then there shouldn't be any duplicate content issue. Of course Canonicals are suggestions not directives so the search engines reserve the right not to follow the tag if they deem it irrelevant. Using the tag in this way will essentially pass all the equity to your site and rank your page instead of your trade partner. Your trade partner would basically get no benefit of having your content as far as Search is concerned. The better option for everyone would likely be to write unique and relevant content.

Yup, you're right. For some reason I was thinking I was hitting a 503 but in reconstructing the error just now it sends me to an Improper Redirect error page. Hopefully now that I've logged out and back in I should be fine. Thanks Keri!

Technically Page 1 would contain the subset of Page 2's superset except that Page 1 is likely older, ranking better and the page you want to keep so would take precedence. In which case Page 2's content would be considered as duplicating Page 1's superset of content and Page 2 should be canonicalized to Page 1. Of course, Rel=Canonical is a suggestion not a directive so the search engines reserve the right to not listen to it if they feel the tag isn't relevant.

The real question here would be why are you reusing all of that copy and would those pages be better served with more unique content instead of continuing to reuse and canonicalize?

I've been occasionally getting 503s here. I'll follow my bookmark to the Q&A but when I click into a question it tells me I'm logged out. I click to Log In but it takes me to the Moz homepage where it shows I'm already logged in. If I then click on the Moz Analytics button, I wind up hitting a 503. I've found if I log out from the dropdown while on the Moz homepage and then Log back in, I can then get to analytics fine after that's happened.

This makes me want to tell the story of Maille Ohye of Google talking about Canonicals at SMX East 2012. (I really like canonicals and probably talk about them too much on here)

She gave a hypothetical about having a fitness blog and taking over Matt Cutts fitness blog. Where canonicals came in was that she stated one of the primary uses for a cross-domain canonical was in passing equity from one site to the other site that will eventually be replacing it without causing confusion for users. So in the hypothetical she took over Matt Cutts' fitness blog, placed canonicals from his pages to their relevant counterpart on her site, moved content over as necessary, and placed a notice on the homepage of the Matt Cutts blog that it was going away but will be rolled into the Maille Ohye blog. This gives people enough time to switch over their bookmarks without bouncing from being redirected to somewhere they didn't expect. The canonicals would move equity to the main site, eventually pages would begin swapping out in the index, and eventually you would 301 redirect everything to their relevant counterparts on the main site once enough time has passed.

Following things that way I would assume that should be considered completely White Hat.

Cross-domain Rel="Canonical" does work but unique, relevant content where possible is always best.

I see one of two things happening with that... Either your prior homepage 404s which will hurt you even more or your prior homepage will redirect to the new one and nothing will have changed.

I'd have to assume the changes in Magento broke your site because adding Re="canonical" tags wouldn't have done anything like what you're describing and with such intense speed considering you did this the other night.

Also a 200 HTTP Status is the Response Code for OK... which is what live and functioning pages should return.