Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Yeah that's pretty much what I was thinking but then could they be right? I mean there doesn't seem to be any data anywhere to show if it does have an affect on the linked-to page (however minimal). Somebody somewhere must have tested it.

It does make sense to keep it seen as a moved page and not a new one to keep whatever trust it's built up but surely as an internal page, any new page that replaces it wouldn't take long to pull that same trust back in anyway (this is based on the fact that it's not exactly got a lot of equity anyway).

Well yeah that wouldn't be too many at all, but then going back to what Marcus and EGOL said you're much better off using bold tags for readability reasons than simply using it on keywords really. It has little to no impact in terms of rankings (probably a tiny bit) but can have a much greater impact on keeping your visitors moving forward and converting if used to break the content up into more digestible chunks with a good scent of what's important to them and where their eyes should go next.

I'd probably use bold a few more times in a 500 word piece but use it as what it is, an emphasis tag Not emphasising keywords for Google but whatever it is in the content that will encourage the user to feel they're in the right place... if that happens to combine with some keywords or keyword phrases then great, but don't see it as a game-changer for rankings

After following what the others have said on here about sorting the site out first, when you move on to link building, don't go crazy with keyworded anchor text on spammy sites. Go for branded anchor text first then move on to partial and phrase match as well, then mix in some exact match... all from decent sites. That's if you build the links yourself, but it's always preferable to have content that good that you just attract links naturally anyway... go for both approaches

Google Analytics can do most of what springmetrics does and none of what the SEOmoz tools do. They're quite different pieces of kit... for SEO, I mean not just measuring but doing, there's no way I'd trade SEOmoz for anything, let alone something that can't do any of the stuff I need it to.

The Q&A alone on here is worth the spend, then you've got the crawl errors, OSE, a whole host of other tools... and that's not to mention the stuff they're working on at the moment to come out soon. You'd be mad to swap out, especially as the two options are miles from "like for like" in terms of what they do.

Spring Metrics = Analytics tools

SEOmoz = SEO tools

I suppose if you were going to look at it as "how many is too many" though it would be a percentage density instead of an actual number because it would depend on the size of the piece.

If you had a 1,000 word page then 50 words in bold might look okay but if it were a 100 word page then 50 words in bold would be ridiculous.

I've recently come across this:

A site changes the URL of one internal page to something more search friendly, and 301's the old to the new as you would expect.

They don't change the link on the homepage in the navigation. Instead they keep it to the old URL so they go through the 301 to get to the page even though it's internal.

They say if they change the URL it will reset the internal flow of link equity to that page.

I've not come across this before and so am not sure what to think. I mean I can see what they're saying but I would have though that it being internal would mean it's different and that the flow to internal pages would just kind of resume as-was quite soon afterwards.

Any views?

I've played about with it a bit, it's pretty cool. At first we were worried about the footprints it leaves all-over everything but with it being free, a simple plug-in, etc... there's going to be more and more people using it all of the time for legit reasons (as opposed to content networks, etc...) meaning footprints won't be a problem.

Ah lol... thanks Tom. That's the best news ever. The reason I posted that question was that I was in a bit of a debate with a friend at work about the impact of link velocity, and I was sure I'd seen it on there before and said so, but then he brought it up on the screen and proved me wrong... but clearly the version we were looking at then wasn't the full one. This means I can go back to him tomorrow and win

I owe you a beer I think!

How come there's no reference to link velocity in the Search Ranking Factors, 2011 or prior?

We know that we have to continue building links for a client even if they're already doing well, not just because of the competition nipping at their heels but because if we stop they slip down anyway, so we know that stopping link building will often times have an adverse effect... meaning link velocity right? So how come there's no mention of it?

Just curious

I do it. Unfortunately it's sometimes necessary when there isn't enough of a budget for creative, etc... (small businesses that can afford nothing more than the cheapest of cheap links). It's not the right way to go though, and certainly not in the long term, but for some businesses it's the only chance they have to compete.

Easy, for something like that you don't link build at all, you just publish, publicize and promote. I assume that it's original and news-worthy content if it's a newspaper, so interesting stories, etc... In which case all you need to do is get it out there in front of people and the links will come naturally.

Don't forget your video meta

http://www.reelseo.com/add-infile-metadata-video-files/

I'm looking forward to it and fidgety in apprehension Can't wait!!

Thanks, yeah the video says pretty much what I was thinking, that whilst PR isn't worth obsessing over, it is worth watching (i.e. as a sign of Google's reactions to stuff, such as penalties)... I stopped watching it all together about two years ago but it seems I need to start watching it again.

Up until today I was anti PageRank, believing that it was a useless metric which just caused obsession and misplaced working effort... however, as of today I have done a complete u-turn and been shown how it is still useful as a trigger monitor type thing which is awesome.

Just wondering what others views were on this?

Is it a shared server you moved to? You could be sharing with a dodgy site that's got a blacklisted IP.

Yes, it's not good practice so you'd do well to avoid it. I don't know in a technical sense whether Google would decide that a page that has a similar title to it's description would make any ranking difference, but if a bunch of pages had the same titles as each other then it definitely isn't good. Also, descriptions should be tailored to that individual page anyway, with whatever helps to encourage a click, which it wouldn't be if it was too similar to other pages.

And forget about the Meta Keywords tag, it's useless