Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thank very much!  Great advice! I will do it that way.

Hi Teconsite, this is a great question. I would not recommend marketing the "p" parameter in Search Console. Instead, I'd leave it as "Let Google Decide" and use  your pagination SEO implementation to guide the search engines. There is still a lot of debate around pagination as it relates to SEO. The way I have always implemented is is: Every paginated page canonicals to itself, because you do not want the search engines to start ignoring your paginated pages which are there somewhat for users, but also for SEO. Use rel next/prev to help Google understand that they are in pagination, which will also help them rank the beginning of pagination for the terms you are trying to rank for. Use noindex/follow on pages 2-N to be sure they stay out of Google's index. Use the numbers showing how long pagination is to drive the search engines deep into your pagination to get all of your products/whatever indexed.  This is often done through linking to page 1, the last page, and the 3-5 pages on either side of the page you are currently on. So page 7 of 20 would like to page 1, pages 5-9, and page 20. The reason most people say to canonical pages 2-N to the base page is to preserve any link equity pointing to these pages and help the first page rank. However, I have almost never seen a deep paginated page with links, and if you have architected pagination correctly then the equity going into pages 2-N will also flow to page 1, just like product pages linking to category pages. Hope this helps!

Yes you can redirect the 3 URLs to the new product page and everything would be alright. The question to consider though, would be if you had tens of thousands of product pages and so then would need tens of thousands of redirects. If the old pages did not get much or any traffic, or just the popup URL was hardly ever visited, it might not make sense to implement the redirects. Those redirects could slow down portions of your server or site while processing those redirects. Essentially if you had a bunch of old pages that were just never useful, let them 404. If they were useful and linked to or in the index, then 301 redirect to the new page. Hope that helps?

Thank you so much! I noticed the problem with the canonical when I was auditing the site. I think is this is a major issue. Google seems to be omiting that, because it is still showing inner pages in its results. We are not sure about how this can be affecting the entire site rankings, but I think it is not good at all. We have addressed that and we hope the site improves its rankings soon. Thank you again for your advices!

Thank you Gianluca for your time and answer! 

Hey, You may come up with headings like that according to your page to eliminate any confusion. And yes I agree the content length would be extended but this is what a visitor expects when he visit a particular degree page, i.e. to get all the information. If you think, the page would look ugly you may come up with cool graphics, in-page content navigation and things like that to make it more user-friendly. Umar

Thanks again!

Hello Umar, I am about in the same situation as teconsite. I would suspect that the search engine will ignore the ?itok token because it's a well known URL parameter and therefore the search engines will assume that they mustn't take it into account. Or do you think, they will consider image.jpg?itok=1 and image.jpg?itok=2 as two different images? Would it make sens to specify this in the Search Console/GWT as URL parameter? Thanks for your help in advance!

Hi there! First of all, I believe that you shouldn't use both canonical and rel=prev/next. The two techniques do not work together well: "In cases of paginated content, we recommend either a rel=canonical from component pages to a single-page version of the article, or to use rel=”prev” and rel=”next” pagination markup." (quoted from http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2013/04/5-common-mistakes-with-relcanonical.html" Basically you have more possibilities: Do not set up canonical or rel="prev/next", but use noindex, follow meta robots tag for pages 2+ (kind of old school, but still works as a charm) Implement Rel="Prev/Next" but without a canonical! the two elements do not work together (as mentioned above) I think the best method for you would be to have a rel="prev/next" and have the canonical removed. I hope this helps, Keszi

Hi again Andy! I would advice to create different content. They will decide what to do. The portals are quite important, and its authority is higher. This website is too new. I would tell them both things: different content and also sending that content inmediatly to the index from Google Webmaster Tools. Thanks for your time!

Thank you!!!!

Thanks Everett, I agree that the best would be creating diferent content, but It is a little difficult, cause it is the explanation of the contents and programming of one course. Thank you for your answer, and I will recomend publishing the content first in NEWSCHOOL and sending to the index before sending that content to other pages or portals!

I recommend the manufacturer creates two separate descriptions - one for themselves, and one for their distributors. Requires more work, but I think is a nice solution to this problem.

Thank you! Very helpful

Hello. I wouldn't be too concerned with this as a thin content issue as the content of each page is the image, its attributes, size, etc. Several sites--Instagram, Pinterest, Flickr, etc--are almost all purely image based content with the great bulk of their pages being one image on one URL and very little other content. Google is aware of image heavy sites and gallery formats and has a system in place for aiding in indexing this type of content, their Image Sitemaps: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/178636  I'd use that system for indexing your separate image URLs and then monitor the success via Search Console. If your search console (Google Webmaster Tools) is displaying a manual action for thin content, it's likely not the image galleries. Cheers!

Thank you! I completly agree!

Here's more info on blocking javascript and the effects it can have on ranking: https://yoast.com/google-panda-robots-css-js/ It's certainly possible that it's affecting the site, but there could be other issues as well. Regarding the news articles, the number of words is not what matters most but whether these are useful to people. If most of these have very low user engagement, then they could possibly cause Panda to affect the whole site.

I just did a similar migration Oscommerce to Magento, because the site was so big took a while for Google indexed all the new URLs even with the 301. We lost a little bit of traffic in the first 3 weeks but in the forth week we recovered the same traffic we had before the new site went up and in the following weeks we just kept growing.  Right now we have 20% more traffic. The drop in ranking it's normal right after a big migration, when Seomoz became Moz they also saw a few weeks of drop in the organic traffic. I wouldn't worry too much about it yet. Just make sure your on page optimizations are well done in the new website and wait for big G complete your new website index.

Contact the sites responsible for showing the rich snippet. If you do not want to have it displayed, then they should be able to turn that snippet off for you. Same with the reservation system. Depending upon what platform you are using, there is probably a reservation system available within the code, or through a plugin. I 'm not sure if setting up a strickly internal booking system only on the hotel's website makes sense tho. Depending upon what site people find the hotel listed on, they are going to want to book it right then and there, and not have to link to another site to do so. Be careful to not make it more complicated then it needs to be.

Thank you!!!