Welcome to the Q&A Forum

If you want to get in contact with them, you can just use the Twitter account or Facebook fan page? What additional benefits does having an email address over having their Facebook and Twitter data? If they wanted you to be able to email them, they would've put their email address or a contact form on their website.

Dr. Pete wrote an excellent blog about this a while ago: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/what-keywords-do-i-rank-for

Unfortunately you can't, as Dr. Pete explained in the following blog post: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/6-extreme-canonical-tricks

From now on link to your homepage as http://poolstar.net/ and set a 301 redirect in place from http://poolstar.net/Home_page.php to http://poolstar.net/

Not that it is any of my business, but I would really recommend to have someone redesign your website. It looks rather 1998 at the moment which is most likely costing you new customers and possibly (after Google Panda) is making it harder for you to rank high in the search engines as well.

Tough call.

I think the main point is how well these websites can manage to become unique, useful (and link worthy) on their own. Having to maintain 30 websites, of which neither one really has unique content, is both a burden their developers, editors and finances as it is virtually worthless to visitors.

The ranking for local searches could be handled via a sub folder structure, where each 'branch' has their own sub website such as www.example.org/new-york and www.example.org/orlando which could be optimized for that given city. Having the (future) authority of the main domain behind it, ranking may actually be easier for those sub sites than it is now for the actual separated websites with thin content and (presumably just as thin) link profiles.

Conclusion based on the information available: merge.

Yes it would, though in this case you're the original source and all their websites are linking back to your website to attribute the original content to you.

The republising of articles is a common practice, so I wouldn't worry to much about the 'duplicate content' aspect of this situation if I were you.

There is a great resource on the SEOmoz blog about this. It takes you from 'start' to 'finish' regarding the marketing and optimization of a website: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-noob-guide-to-online-marketing-with-giant-infographic-11928

Especially since Google Panda takes user experience into account when ranking website, investing in a redesign would be a double-edged sword (as it might increase your rankings and/or your conversion rate).

I would say that there aren't 25 'good article directories' (anymore). But, under the assumption that there are: yes, these would could as 25 unique links, and you wouldn't have to write 25 unique articles for this.

You could use OpenSiteExplorer to see if any of those pages still has incoming links. If so, I'd recommend to redirect those pages to (in order of preference): an updated version of that article, the category page for this article or your main page. This would make sure the least amount of dead links turn up on the internet (and on Google) and the most link value is saved for you in one move.

Given the current state of the Internet (with the shorteners you've mentioned, etc) I would suggest to use English characters so a maximum amount of people can read the URL.

What exactly is an 'external' or 'internal' menu? Every menu that is on your website is internal by definition that it is 'on your website'?

Menus should be fully accessible with Javascript turned off. With that in mind you could add Javascript to make the menu function better for users that have Javascript enabled.

What I can recall from Matt Cutts is that Google is pretty much ignoring all meta tags besides the 'description' one. Given the fact that I've never even heard of this one, I think it is pretty save to assume it is of no value (atleast to search engines).

Coding this yourself (or having it done by your developer) is a pretty simple job. It requires not much more than reading the 'q' parameter from the URL, which in PHP for example can be done by reading the $_GET['q'] variable.

For what purpose do you plan to use this parameter?

This depends on quite some factors, most importantly if this is a local site targeting only the Farsi language or it is an international site written in Farsi?

If this site is local, then having Farsi keywords in your URL (which should be displayed properly in most modern browsers these days if I recall correctly) might boost both your CTR from the SERPs and possibly even your rankings (though I must admit this is just a hunch and I don't have any data to support the ranking hypothesis).

On the other hand if the site is international, I would certainly go for the English URLs. Using them would enable a vastly greater amount of people to be able to actually read and understand the keywords in the URL, causing for example a higher CTR from the SERPs. Even if your site is local, but occasionally has international visitors, I would probably still go for the English characters to help both search engines and human visitors understand the contents of that page better.

It is not absolutely necessary to choose a local server in the UK. However, these servers will serve the content faster to visitors from the UK than servers from (for example) the USA will.

There was quite a good Whiteboard Friday on the subject on international SEO a couple of months ago, you might wanna check it out: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/international-seo-where-to-host-and-how-to-target-whiteboard-friday

Having globally closely related links to your website mainly contributes to local SEO. This applies both to national scale SEO (Dutch inlinks are good to rise faster in the Dutch Google SERPs) and city based SEO (links from pages about a particular city will make you rank faster and better for that given city).

Regarding international SEO ('google.com') I don't think it really makes a difference from which country these links are coming. The quality of these links (in high PageRank, MozRank, TrustRank, etc.) will have a much greater impact on the value it provides to your website.

The actual PR shown in the toolbar is rather useless these days. See for example a blog I wrote on PR.

What is far more important is if the amount of visitors have gone down/up, whether the rankings have gone down/up and most importantly if the conversion rate of the website has gone down/up after the change?

PS: any chance you can change it back so the root domain URL actually loads the root domain?

I'm afraid I can't give you any specific number to aim for. Perhaps there is somebody else with experience on what a truly natural amount of new links is for your type of website (which we don't know yet by the way)?

What you could try to look at: Would (any) of these links have occured if it wasn't for your manual effort? Without your effort, at what rate would this particular domain have acquired links?

For example: if this is a site about one specific type of highly niche screwdrivers, it would be far less likely to attract a significant number of backlinks per day than a tech blog that regularly has big scoops.

Are you referring to incoming links or to outbound links on a page PH292?

Assuming it to be incoming links, there is no magic number. As you said yourself: natural is best, and considering you're worried about too much links too fast I doubt this process will be 'natural'. You could try monitoring the results for your domain on majesticseo.com and see if the increase in links shows a natural curve (when compared to other similar websites in your niche).

If you visit the pages yourself and the website shows the correct (new) title in the title bar and address bar of your browser, Google will find out sooner or later and start using the new titles and URLs. Patience is all it takes!