Welcome to the Q&A Forum

As long as you create a 301 redirect which works correctly, and it still links to related content which is similar to before, it shouldn't be an issue in the long run.

However, you may notice a slight dip when you first make the changes, whilst the search engines adjust and re-add your new, correct URLs.

As long as you can avoid 404 errors (page not found) from happening at any time, that should reduce the risk massively. It's when a page changes and a good link goes to a 404 that you will run into ranking issues.

The same rule applies with the images. If someone clicks an image on Google images, and it goes to the wrong URL and lands on a 404 page, it could lose it's ranking. I can see the new platform uses Wordpress going by the wp-uploads/ path, so you might be able to rely on a plugin to ensure this doesn't happen, such as a redirection plugin.

Don't use both - just use Yoast and add %%page%% to the Archive title, and it will add the page number, therefore removing the duplicate title tag issue as nothing will be the same.

Hi, when you click on the error, it should list the URL of the page which has one title, and then underneath that, the other page(s) that have the same title.

Very important. We do this ourselves and have seen true results from image file names, even when they are on a page with no relevant keywords and a different title element. It's the file name that always wins in the SEO, ie celebrity_name.jpg.

You can use a number of seperators, such as -, or +, but our favourite has been the underscore. I tend to avoid using spaces as the %20 part that fills it in the URL is attached to the keywords, which may harm the SEO. The seperators indicate them as seperate words.

No problem, remember to also add %%sep%% so it adds a seperator, so example:

%%term_title%% %%sep%% %%page%% %%sep%% %%sitename%%

would appear as:

category name - Page 2 of 50 - domain name

of course, domain name and the final seperator are optional.

Be sure to create your sitemap so that one individual URL has it's own content, and there is not another URL on the domain which has 100% of the same content.

You can set it so that Ajax loading pages have their own URLs and change as they load, and also have their own page title. This is used by sites such as USA Today. Click any news article for an example:

http://www.usatoday.com/

Is that the kind of loading mechanism you mean?

I don't believe this is the case. They used to be active on my Feedburner feed posts and there did not seem to be any ranking difference from it. We use a custom short URL (smt.io hooked up to bit.ly) and this seems to work fine. I think the focus of a short URL should be to show your relevance of your website. ie, mash.to, buff.ly, nyti.ms. You know what those companies are and therefore trust those links more. Goo.gl links can link to anything and might not be trusted as much.

Remember back when short URLs first came out with tinyurl, and everyone was using it to mask out shock sites etc via MSN messenger? Nobody trusts them unless they look reputable in my opinion. Would you click a bit.ly domain in your email, what about one from on.mash.to?

As long as the products you are promoting fit with the feel of your site and are not straight up advertisements, they will unlikely mess with your customer loyalty.

When a user clicks on a 3rd party link, they get a cookie on their computer. How long that cookie exists for depends on the program. Amazon is only 24 hours, but others can be from 30-90 days. That means that a user could come back within 30 days and buy the product (or related product depending on the program) and you would still receive credit for that purchase. However, if the user clears their cookies, you will lose that affiliate lead. That's why in my opinion the 24 window is ideal, and that is probably why Amazon sticks with it, being one of the most popular programs.

There is endless material to read online, and Keri's suggestion is a good place to start. Put some hours into it and you will understand affiliate marketing inside out in no time. Some famous blogs using this type of approach include ProBlogger, and they have some nice tips etc on there for beginners.

Hope I helped.

Hi, I assume the 118,000 links are from 118,000 pages which feature the footer-wide link?

I have read many times that these links are "bad for SEO", but in all honesty all major content networks have to do this, because how else will they link to their parent company, or other sites in their network.

It does of course help if the other sites are on the same domain, and just subdomains or subdirectories, but I understand in most networks this would not be the case.

Many large publishers do this, especially in the UK, with companies like Future plc, Newsquest, Immediate Media Co etc. They all have footerwide links on all pages.

Whilst they may be rather saturated in providing link juice, they should provide a better user experience and not be bad for SEO, but I always read conflicting information about this kind of thing.

Your title is too spammy, shorten it.

Have a much higher quality image for the slideshow on the homepage, and this can be something assignment related to help bring in image search traffic also.

It's very hard to say how long it takes to reach the first page of Google, but there are many things you can do in order to boost that timeframe, such as regularly creating original and fresh content, ideally on a daily basis through the means of a blog or new pages.

Ensure your sitemap (http://www.makemyassignments.com/sitemap.xml) is submitted to Webmaster Tools and you are keeping an eye on it for any errors with crawling etc.

I notice you are giving people the opportunity to purchase through you also, so in that case I would recommend you switch your site to https mode instead of http. This was recently discovered to be a ranking factor:

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2014/08/https-as-ranking-signal.html

Hello. I keep seeing stuff popping up about CognitiveSEO's tool which detects Unnatural backlinks and generates a disavow file which you can submit directly to Google, making the process rather easy.

I have already contacted many webmasters and got some links removed, but many spam sites obviously don't respond or don't have a means of contact.

Is this tool worth using? Has anyone had any luck with it and is it very accurate at detecting the right types of links etc?

Thanks

Sorry, but this isn't particularly a true statement. They were indeed hit by some rankings drops for their category based pages which featured automated results, however their item pages and pretty much everything else still completely dominate.

This is due to a combination of relevance, age of the domain (1995 or so? almost 20 years!!), and the fact that they have such a diverse, huge amount of content on a high authority domain.

Hi,

I am confident it does not matter whichever you use. If I search for my site in Google for example, searchbuzz, it comes up with items for "Search Buzz" that are not related, so it can easily see that it is two different words sometimes instead of just one, which my site is.

Also, if I search for search buzz, I get one that comes up for a site called Buzz Search where the URL is bold because it has picked up buzzsearch, the opposite of above where it has successfully compressed two words into one.

So I do not think it matters if you include dashes or not, but I wouldn't go more than 3 words with it, ie latestbreakingnews. I wouldn't have one of my articles named "Riots in MIssouri Are going crazy", as domain.com/riotsinmissouriaregoingcrazy because I doubt that Google will be able to understand the words within that, but if it was domain.com/riotsinmissouri it would likely pick up Riots in Missouri as a keyword.

Ash

In my experience it varies massively, but sometimes our titles have helped us secure massive traffic for breaking news etc.

The classic "How to" is a perfect example, because it matches the query that people are physically typing into search engines.

Both your titles are fine for a homepage, but it's the pages within that you'd focus on those keywords, such as Red Lollipops, or How to make your own lollipops etc etc, stuff people are typing with their fingers on those keyboards. That's what you should focus on. The homepage in my opinion can have whatever title as long as you are a multi-page website with regular content being added. ie, mashable just have Mashable.

It doesn't really matter as long as it is high authority sites. Getting your news quoted by another major news site is always a big plus. We once got quoted on Yahoo which not only brought us a buttload of traffic, but also gave us a solid link back which boosted our authority.

With news sites, its all about the content, and I have to say with 3 editors, you should be popping out a lot more than 5 articles. That's a pretty low amount for a news site. I can work alone for an hour a day and do more than that.

On a side note, if you'd like to write a summary of a news story in 150 words, and submit it to me, I can put this on the relevant SearchBuzz Media website that I run, and have you listed as the original source - it's a completely genuine link back. Email me if interested - info@searchbuzzmedia.com

I don't know the entire answer, but for this part:

"I'm asking because the crawler is reporting 50k+ pages crawled, when in reality, this number should be closer to 1000. "

I had the same issue, and it's quite deceiving. Basically it means that your limit on that campaign has been set to 50,000 pages of a possible 50,000 pages, and that's not the number of pages that have actually been crawled. It will likely be closer to 1,000 and that should be reflected in your issues, ie around 1,500 issues taking into account multiple issues per page, and nowhere near 50,000 issues.

Here is the answer I got when I asked the same question last year:

http://moz.com/community/q/i-have-50000-50000-crawled-already-but-what-about-the-rest

is it in Webmaster tools or another link checking tool? Try using another tool to check for these errors with a new scan of your site's pages. If the page is genuinely inaccessible then I wouldn't worry about it and you should be able to mark it as fixed in your webmaster tools account.

Downloading a list isn't possible, but if you log in as a page admin, and click "See All" on the new likes box you can endlessly scroll down to view all of your members names.

Hi, sorry but Google have not updated PageRank for quite some time, and it is widely believed they no longer pay attention to it and it will likely be removed soon.

I've never received emails about it. I always have to log into Webmaster Tools to be able to read the current notifications. It would be ideal if it was set up like Google Alerts, but then that system doesn't email me anywhere near enough in comparison to how much it should for the queries I have entered so it probably wouldn't even work anyways.