Welcome to the Q&A Forum

thats why i said the bit about using non-www in htaccess too

no trailing slash where you've got say .php or .html at the end

As far as I am aware that is not how canonical tags are designed to be used. That use would imply that the category page itself is where the original detail is found and this is not the case for most shopping carts, which are just "lists" of products and are not product details.

This use would just confuse matters further as it is saying "don't rank this product, rank the category page because that's where this info is from" which is not what is needing to be done here.

a link from one PR to the original is a good way to go, not all PR sites allow it though as they all of course want original content for their site - an exclusive if you will.

In terms of SEO pointing to the original means the original will be highlighted more and as the content is so similar / the same the original will appear higher in search rankings - of course this assumes the two PR sites are equally ranking.

and ... mmm there is usually one of us floating around to answer questions fairly quickly, we may not always be able to help but we will 99% of the time be able to point you to a blog or other website with info that you need.

spinning the article is an ok idea, better still completely rewrite it.

if you don't want to go to that fuss just point a link to the original content making clear that this is just a copy.

I think what EGOL means is that switching the domain to your hosting provider means you loose control of certain things within that domain which can be very important to seo. What could be a good compromise here is that you look at putting the shopping cart within a folder on the domain (not a subdomain as this would be a bad move), this means the work you've done on the domain would continue to effect the static info on there and the shop within the folder.

it may not be possible, it depends on your shopping cart provider - if it can't be done then move the domain across and ensure you have redirects in place from old domain links to new ones (eg your about pages redirect).

Hope that helps clear things up

it sounds more like a warning about something that is easy to fix and won't be harming your rankings.

I'd suggest that until the webmaster responds you add a 301 redirect including the "broken" link space to your htaccess file. see http://perishablepress.com/blank-space-whitespace-character-htaccess/ for info

I agree, canonical urls are the way to go with this - unless of course you can draw them into unique urls without variables which may also solve the issue - though not entirely

best way i've found is to use something like facebox to draw in information from another page using javascript, google just see's it as a link to that page.

you can also do a similar thing without the pop up box, im sure someone here can remember it's name / method.

twiddles thumbs look here they come

maybe better with Yoast SEO - just my experience it tops most other plugins

found the problem I think.

Malware found ona  few pages on your site

http://sitecheck.sucuri.net/results/www.top-10-dating-reviews.com/

In addition to those 301 rules stick this in your htacess file

DirectoryIndex index.php index.html site-down.php

it tells the browser and bots which page is the default for your folders and root.

Also ensure your non-www forward to www. using this code

RewriteEngine On
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^www.
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://www.%{HTTP_HOST}/$1 [R=301,L]

bit odd that you see that complaint in all honesty. I wouldn't worry too much about it, just take a look at where that "broken link" points to and make sure its not going to a 404 on your site.

Just looking around your site, the code seems ok - to a large extent.

But you are missing a sitemap (handy to point to all urls) and a robots.txt file

Also just clicking around i don't see 400 pages? is there a subdomain or folder you aren't linking to from the main site?

it's possible that GA, being as it is, doesn't give whole information and is aggregate info - for example if you look on GWT about what your website keywords are it talks about variants of words and not exact words. It is possible therefore it does the same in GA and one of the "like" keyterms does rank at 3 or 4... it's also possible that the data is upto 90 days out of date on GA. Both of these can and do effect both Moz and GA

Thats correct.

Ok my suggestion is to 301 your old.domain to your www.domain AND add the whole subdomain old.domain to robots.txt to ban indexing of that subdomain. Once the domain itself is gone from search results delete the files or back them up etc etc...

As for image search as long as you've pointed old urls to new ones you should be fine

I assume that your website curerntly in old.domain was formerly of www. my question is do the 301's you have in place point to old.domain or to the new page within www.domain ?

can you provide us with a url, it would be useful in this case.

Something to note would be what I consider as the "bedding down" period of a new site, whether 100% new or just a website refresh or a wholesale a website was here and now here is a different one. It refers to the 1 or 2 months following go live (it is similar tto the sandbox theory) where Google doesn't totally know whether to trust a site or not and nor has it indexed every new url yet.

You've done all the right things, you just need to wait and check next month - results won't be instant with this kind of thing ... remember SEO is a Journey and Not a Destination.

The base url http://www.thegreatgiftcompany.com/categories/categories_travel?sort=name_asc&searchterm=&page=1&layout=table is indexed by Google - what is evident is that the url would be classes as having too many variables to be indexed correctly. If it's a big issue just add it to robots.txt but i don't think its a big issue.

Also for clarity canonicals should be absolute and not relative, this prevents all kinds of issues.

Ok a few things here to talk about.

PA won't instantly move across, just as "page rank" and other ranking factors wouldn't. What would happen though is that a large portion of the link worth from the old urls would move the the new ones - though this raises the question... is the new website structure sat on top of old urls which are redirected to the new site or old site? ... if the first great if the later move them to the new urls and slowly watch PA move across.

In terms of images being indexed, they will remain in the index and searchable for sometime after deletion, also when they try to send someone across to the page with it on - if you've 301'd it correctly it will be a link to the new site and product anyhow and also Google will find that image again to index. (hope that makes sense).

In all honesty you set up sound a little odd, I would suggest making the move sooner rather than later to ensure you don't get a duplicate content issue too.