Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Did you get the incapsula error message when you tried to click Post Response in Q&A, or when doing something else?

Unfortunately, there's very little you can do to stop Google from rewriting titles. In some cases, if a title is too long or poorly matches frequent queries, tweaking it can help, but that's often not the case with them adding your brand name. I'm with Bill  - I'd try to pin down if Google is pulling this from another source. If it's just coming from your domain, though, there may not be much you can do. There's no directive to tell them to stop rewriting, unfortunately.

The menu is on ALL pages. Is this a problem? I feel that the link is relevant for any new user coming to the site. Will not seem spammy, i think.

Rasmus, what makes you think the bots are clicking on these links? Is there something in your log files that suggests spiders are following those links, or are you just getting really low conversion rates from clicks to affiliate programs? Affiliate links should also be nofollowed, which would make it even less likely that they would be registering as a click from search engine spiders.

I would post this on a PHP coding forum for a better response.

Hi Rasmus, You can try what Emanuele mentioned before and if it doesn't work please let me know exactly which are the different alternatives of the URLs that you want to rewrite and the output URLs that you're looking to get so I can help you. Thanks!

As long as you are not building it to target exact match anchor text, I would be cool with the idea. Just a lot of times people build these widgets to get specific anchor text. Especially since those links most likely go site wide, can be a major no no

Yes, in that case I would go for separate pages indeed!

Definitely no follow. You have nothing to lose and you protect yourself. You can be penalized by having so many dofollow links, nofollowing them completely protects your site and doesn't change your page juice or anything negative by nofollowing them.

And another question. If i have a file named filename.php I can not make and use a css file named filename.css. The names clash in some way.

Thank you. I have done so. No need to not get the juice

Using a cross domain rel canonical should fix any issues with this and mean that you as the original author get the link juice. Rand explains the usage of cross domain canonical links in the following whiteboard friday:- http://www.seomoz.org/blog/cross-domain-canonical-the-new-301-whiteboard-friday hope this helps

And how much search does 'ekpert tips' get? You might find you get a EMD boost, connect this with a little link building and I wouldn't be surprised if you got the 'ekpert tips domain' up to position 1-3. I would then either direct the traffic through to a page on your main site which went into much more detail on the tips and try and get some social sharing going which will benefit your main site or run the EMD for 6 months also focusing on social sharing, getting links back, after the EMD has built up some moz auth redirect it to your site. That's just me.

My pleasure. I'll do almost any thing to get a thumbs Up! Im so close to the magic 200 (again). This link http://scratch99.com/website-management/make-money-online/smart-pricing/avoid-smart-pricing-show-adsense-only-to-search-engine-visitors/ This is basically doing the same thing and should show you a decent example of how to do it (except they are doing it to tailor adverts to search traffic). looking over the code on that page, they use an array of values, you could simply replace the values with values such as Google, Yahoo, Bing (ot an exhaustive list by all means!).

I'm not seeing any signs of indexation problems or issues with true duplicate content (duplicate URLs of the same page, essentially). I'm also not seeing many direct links to this page, so a link-based penalty (just on this page) is very unlikely. Unfortunately, we often don't report deep or low-quality links in OSE, so it could be that there are links we're not seeing that look spammy. The other possibility is an anchor-text penalty, if you were hitting "bet365" too hard, but again, I'm not seeing evidence of that. Even across the whole site, your anchor text is fairly diverse. I'm seeing you at #11 for "bet365" on Google.dk for this page: http://www.betxpert.com/tvguide/bet365 Realistically, it's got a shorter URL, hits "bet365" in headers and text, and seems to have higher Page Authority. I think your internal links to that page might be stronger. I think your just making that page look stronger to Google. It's really dangerous to try to de-rank a page - you can end up harming it in other ways. You could tone down the on-page cues a bit. You could also link this page directly to the page you want to rank. Currently, though, you're sending Google subtle cues that this page is stronger. You could also just try to build a few inbound links to the desired page - since neither page has many, a couple of links can make a difference.

So! Have now made some changes. I have removed the large number of links at the bottom and a single widget on the right. It seems to have lowerede the level of noise on the page. We brandish our articles with keywords (but mostly new ones since the feature is new) such that only relevant articles are linked (in a widget which appears when relevant articles are found). This change should cut it, right? -Rasmus

Often times folks overlook the drop down links in the navigation. These count as links and are important not to ignore as it's easy to go overboard on these. On your site I counted over 100. But to answer your question... If I understand correctly, does SEOmoz count links pointing to on-page anchors as links? I believe the answer is yes. In most cases, there are few enough anchors it doesn't present an issue. But in your case it might inflate your count and make it seem like there are more out-pointing links than there are. The big question is, does this influence how Google or other search engines treat the issue. I'm not sure anyone knows the answer to that. I suspect Google is more than sophisticated enough to note the anchor (they use these when generating sitelinks in SERPs, determining semantic relationships and other reasons) but don't count it against your crawl allowance. So, to summarize, if it's only on-page anchors causing you to have an inflated link count, then you probably don't have much to worry about. But if you have other, real links causing this, you may want to trim down your top-heavy navigation links.

Hi Rasmus, There is a mod for SMF (Simple Machine Forum) that allow you to tag a topic, then use those tags to produce the related posts (http://mods.simplemachines.org/index.php?mod=579 ), maybe you can work it out in your forum.

Very helpful, thank you! I will look forward to the update with the upmost anticipation. Hopefully giving a lift to the DA. Fortunately the fall in DA does not seem to be equivalent in Google rankings where the site is performing okay.