Welcome to the Q&A Forum

You can make as many changes as you like per day per page although any on site change has the possibility carried with it that it will affect rankings. Generally, anything that has to do with improving site speed: optimizing images, compressing code, leveraging browser caching, optimizing css delivery, etc tends to have a positive effect--both in rankings and for users.

If your copy changes and title changes stay comparable to the original content of the page (i.e. your Otter page doesn't become a Moose page) you'll be fine making any number of changes there as well. Ultimately if you've concluded that your page needs to change, change it and start working within the context of the new page.  Cheers!

Within Moz Analytics it's currently three per campaign.

Or it could be the same day.  In general it varies quite a bit due to both how competitive a term is and how much domain / page trust & authority you're working with in the beginning. There's no hard fast rule I know of that says a new page or site can not rank at all for X period of time. Plus it makes more sense for Google to be as responsive as possible based on searchers' expectations. Just look at the recent news on indexing Twitter for proof of that: https://www.stonetemple.com/how-does-google-index-tweets-today-how-the-new-twitter-deal-will-impact-seo/

Cheers!

Hi Mark. Nope, Google can be much faster than 6/10 months. You'll see especially strong increases as well when you're dealing with topically fresh searches as Google realizes that there is a much higher demand suddenly for terms that were previously not as popular. This spurns on a different look at its indexed content and can change the serps pretty dramatically. EGOL has some great experience with this.

Also, links that bring in a lot referral traffic tend to generate some substantial serp climb as well. Basically something that goes viral does well in the near term and then tends to be stronger in the long term.

Power Mapper is another one with several visual options: http://www.powermapper.com/products/mapper/maps/visual-sitemaps.htm

http://slickplan.com also has some visual options.

Another useful visualization is to run some Analytics reports in the same was as you would say the skyscraper format in Power Mapper using pageviews by pages in site content. That way you can visualize which pages are most popular.  You can do the same via search visitors as well.  Cheers!

Possibly, but the search of "plumber" is going to be a much more varied result than "city name plumber".  Google knows that people typing just plumber could be looking for plumber training, plumber how to's on youtube, plumber photos, definitions of plumber for their first grade school report, and so on.

Hi Charles. I don't work for Moz, so my recommendations are my own.

Also, I pay for a pro subscription here as well, and also combine resources from multiple sources when I'm really trying to get into the minutae of each and every back link.  Ultimately it's a lot cheaper than creating my own crawler and index to try and duplicate Google. In your example with clients on local, you were likely involved in developing those links so why not keep track of them in-house versus 3rd party tools?  Personally my only need I have for trying to get 100% of backlinks reported is if I run into a situation with a manual action client and need as robust as a disavow list as possible.  Often times you can find these sorts of links via Google searches alone due to repetitive exact match keyword usage.

The most value I get out of OSE is when I'm comparing the back link profiles of my sites versus those of the competition that are appearing in the rankings. I can usually come up with more than enough work to keep myself busy when using the tool in this manner.

If you're specifically trying to manage local listings, Moz Local may be a better tool for your purposes. Cheers!

Hi Morgan. The example that you just posted is working fine, i.e. when you try to go to http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com/author/pnkspikchik/ you're redirected to http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com/ and now when you try to go to those old Wedding 404 pages it goes your current wedding package page.  Seems to all be in order. Cheers!

It's likely they used 301 then if that's what they said. You can check using an HTTP header tool. Uppercase in the Google results is odd as well. You'll want to double check this stuff and get the sitemap changed to help prompt the use of lowercase instead.

Google Custom Search has quite a few customization features, to the point where you should be able to make it look exactly like other pages on your site. See: https://www.google.com/work/search/products/gss.html, and, "Match the look and feel of search results to your website by using your own logo and color scheme." For example.  These options come via their paid solution, but could be worth it from a usability and CRO aspect if it makes navigating and purchasing easier.

Great update Miriam. There are a lot of things site owners can add to these types of pages to help with unique content: drive time to the nearest branch from City / Neightborhood X; mobile service schedules in City / Neighborhood X; Images of service radius; highly localized testimonials, etc. Will be interesting to see the impact with franchisees..

Possibly due to 302 vs 301 redirects. Those pages still load. Mozscape didn't update those pages from their previous crawls yet. Fixing the sitemap will help, further internal and external links pointing to the lowercase URL versus the uppercase will help too.

Hi Charles. It could be that due to Mozscape going after a wider diversity of domains, they're not crawling as deeply where your clients have local links. Here's Rand's explanation from the Jan 27 update:

The second is that we crawled a massively more diverse set of root domains than ever before. Whereas our previous index topped out at 192 million root domains, this latest one has 362 million (almost 1.9X as many unique, new domains we haven't crawled before). This means that DA and PA scores may fluctuate more than usual, as link diversity are big parts of those calculations and we've crawled a much larger swath of the deep, dark corners of the web (and non-US/non-.com domains, too). It also means that, for many of the big, more important sites on the web, we are crawling a little less deeply than we have in the past (the index grew by ~31% while the root domains grew by ~88%).

Bolded for my emphasis.  If you cross link from your client sites to their local review listings to help / prompt users to fill out reviews you're likely to see more of those pages indexed in OSE.  However, they could still be not counted if they're not considered important enough for that domain, i.e. if they're not in the top 1000 Yelp pages on yelp.com (numbers are just for example purposes of the idea... not accurate).  Make sense?

Google however still likely knows about the links and is applying the related associations. And feel free to use other tools (GWT, aHrefs, Majestic) when trying to create a complete backlink profile for clients. Cheers!

Yup. Update the site map with your current and accurate URLs and you should be on your way.

It sounds like your host didn't implement the 301 redirects were correctly.  When I try to go to one of the pages listed above it tries to send me to this page instead: http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com**//**2012/11/04/a-new-product-addition-to-weddings/

See where I bolded the // after .com?  that should only be a single /. If you get that changed it should work correctly; however, it doesn't look like the page http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com**/**2012/11/04/a-new-product-addition-to-weddings/ exists anymore either. So if no such page exists and you wanted the old pages to point to a page discussing your wedding services send the redirect to: http://www.morganlindsayphotography.com/packages/  (Your wedding packages page).

It certainly could. You'd also want dev to use 301 redirection when applying a change like that. The sitemap isn't a hard fast rule for what you want indexed in the search engines, rather an aid to help them crawl your site. If it's in error they'll still be able to crawl and index more than what's listed on the sitemap. Ideally though, your sitemap is an accurate reflection of the pages of your site.

I would double check the sitemap file to see if it's still accurate or if the site has changed and the URLs in the sitemap no longer correspond to the structure of the site.  My guess is that the root domain is the only one of the 111 that is correctly listed.  Cheers!

If the entire page where you're writing is about content marketing, on a site that is related to content marketing, chances are the link would line up fine.

Yup. Take it with a pinch of salt though as he hasn't put together the full report on it. Rand's WBF on this very topic though is definitely worth the watch.  Cheers!

Rand recently did a WBF on this, and one of the comments by Matt in the post has an interesting back of the napkin result for his tests that were similar to what you're describing above here: http://moz.com/blog/are-on-topic-links-important-whiteboard-friday#comment-325645, mainly, "Category 3 (Off Topic, Strong Links) actually started taking sites DOWN with it. If we had a strong but off topic/spammy link, it hurt the site more than helped. We tested a few "generic PBN" sites that had decent effect on some sites, negative effect on others. It seemed to stem from relevance with what went up & down."

If it's not something that's likely (high percentage chance of interest) to help a user visiting the page, I'd avoid it.  Cheers!