FB referral combinations
-
Hi, I am somewhat confounded about the right set of channels to join All facebook referrals into one.
In the wake of experiencing various renditions, not certain which one is right and will work
A few adaptations state that Search string ought to be - ^.*facebook.com$
furthermore, Replace string ought to be - facebook.com
While as per other Search string ought to be > .*facebook
also, Replace string ought to be - facebook
Kindly guide which one of this is right and will work?
Much obliged
-
No doubt, 2nd is best
-
Yes 2nd Is Best
-
I think 2nd is best.
-
yes 2nd one is perfect.
-
2nd one is right for this.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Combining variants of "last modified", cache-duration etc
Hiya, As you know, you can specify the date of the last change of a document in various places, for example the sitemap, the http-header, ETag and also add an "expected" change, for example Cache-Duration via header/htaccess (or even the changefreq in the sitemap). Is it advisable or rather detrimental to use multiple variants that essentially tell browser/search engines the same thing? I.e. should I send a lastmod header AND ETag AND maybe something else? Should I send a cache duration at all if I send a lastmod? (Assume that I can keep them correct and consistent as the data for each will come from the very same place.) Also: Are there any clear recommendations on what change-indicating method should be used? Thanks for your answers! Nico
Technical SEO | | netzkern_AG0 -
Many Pages Being Combined Into One Long Page
Hi All, In talking with my internal developers, UX, and design team there has been a big push to move from a "tabbed" page structure (where as each tab is it's own page) to combining everything into one long page. It looks great from a user experience standpoint, but I'm concerned that we'll decrease in rankings for the tabbed pages that will be going away, even with a 301 in place. I initially recommending#! or pushstate for each "page section" on the long form content. However there are technical limitations with this in our CMS. The next idea I had was to still leave those pages out there and to link to them in the source code, but this approach may get shot down as well. Has anyone else had to solve for this issue? If so, how did you do it?
Technical SEO | | AllyBank1 -
I'm thinking I might need to canonicalize back to the home site and combine some content, what do you think?
I have a site that is mostly just podcasts with transcripts, and it has both audio and video versions of the podcasts. I also have a blog that I contribute to that links back to the video/transcript page of these podcasts. So this blog I contribute to has the exact same content (the podcast; both audio and video but no transcript) and then an audio and video version of this podcast. Each post of the podcast has different content on it that is technically unique but I'm not sure it's unique enough. So my question is, should I canonicalize the posts on this blog back to the original video/transcript page of the podcast and then combine the video with the audio posts. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | ThridHour0 -
Document.referrer Is that harmful to my website?
Someone (maybe my Competitors) open a subdomain on tumblr.com. Just like keywordxxx.tumblr.com , and use following script to redirect to my website. var s=document.referrer; if(s.indexOf("google")>0 || s.indexOf("bing")>0 || s.indexOf("yahoo")>0 || s.indexOf ("aol")>0){ self.location='mywebsiteurl'; } so , If anyone seach in google ,and click on keywordxxx.tumblr.com , this script will direct the user to my website. I have found many cases like that, is that harmful ? how can i avoid that?
Technical SEO | | sunvary0 -
Could getting referral traffic from SEO moz damage your rankings?
Buon Giorno from OS grid reference SE404481 Having just read Googles https://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2648487 disavow contnet something troubled me... Is it a possibility you could damage the page rank of a site if you add its url in these posts. Put another way if I added a url pointing to a specific site would googles radar detect the source as SEO and penalise the site in some way? Any insights welcome 🙂
Technical SEO | | Nightwing0 -
Do FB Likes, Tweets, +1s etc give weightage to a page
Lets say I publish a PR with two anchor links (keywords) to a particular website. Will these backlinks get more weightage in the eyes of Google if manage to get this page 100s and 1000s of FB Likes, tweets, +1s etc? Does this strategy really work?
Technical SEO | | KS__0 -
ECommerce Site, URL's, Canonical and Tracking Referral Traffic
I'm very, very new to eCommerce websites that employ many different URL's to track referral traffic. I have a client that has 18 different URL's that land on the Home Page in order to track traffic from different referral sources. For example: http://erasedisease.com/?ref=abot - Tracks traffic from an affiliate source http://erasedisease.com/?ref=FB01 - Tracks traffic from a FB Ad http://erasedisease.com/?ref=sas&SSAID=289169 - Tracks more affiliate traffic ...and the list goes on and on. My first question is do you think this could hinder our Google rankings? SEOMoz Crawl doesn't show any Duplicate Content Errors, so I guess that's good. I've just been reading a lot about Canonical Url's and eCommerce sites, but I'm not sure if this is a situation where I'd want to use some kind of canonical plugin for this Wordpress website or not. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks so much!!
Technical SEO | | Linwright0 -
Does the Referral Traffic from a Link Influence the SEO Value of that Link?
If a link exists, and nobody clicks on it, could it still be valuable for SEO? Say I have 1000 links on 500 sites with Domain Authority ranging from 35 to 80. Let's pretend that 900 of those links generate referral traffic. Let's assume that the remaining 100 links are spread between 10 domains of the 500, but nobody ever clicks on them. Are they still valuable? Should an SEO seek to earn more links like those, even though they don't earn referral traffic? Does Google take referral data into account in evaluating links? 5343313-zelda-rogers-albums-zelda-pictures-duh-what-else-would-they-be-picture3672t-link-looks-so-lonely.jpg Sad%20little%20link.jpg
Technical SEO | | glennfriesen1