Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Well thanks for clarifying

Haha, will do.

Thanks for the information tho

Haha, love it

Hey Vadim,

Thanks for your response.  Yeah, that is what we are doing currently, I was just seeking a means to make it even easier on visitors.  As well as with that functionality, I feel like we'd be able to do some pretty cool call to actions.

Thanks again!

Hey Robert,

Thanks for the response, I may have not verbalized exactly what I'd like to accomplish.  I'm not looking to embed existing Google+ reviews to my website.  I'd like to embed something from Google that is a text box where people can submit a review from our website, instead of having them click on an icon to go to another page.

Thanks for any advice

Haha, which is what I was thinking thanks for your response Vadim.

Sweet, thanks for the reply!

Sweet, thanks for the reply!

Sure does, thanks for your response!

Greetings Mozzers,

I'm wondering if there is a way to get a Google+ embed on a website for visitors to easily provide Google+ reviews without having to leave your site?

Hard? Easy? Doable? Good Idea?

Any direction or education on this matter would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

Greetings Mozzers,

I'm working on some Google+ profiles currently and have one interesting case where I'd like some advice.  The name of one of my clients' web addresses, company name, and Google+/Google Local verified local business names all reflect the same thing.

[Name] Surgical Associates

However, on Google+ it looks like it has a limited number of characters so it reads:

[Name] Surgical Ass...

How important is it to keep the name identical to everything else on the web? Could I get away with just changing the name on Google+ to [Name] Surgical

I appreciate in advice on this matter and what would occur if I changed it here. Thanks.

Hey Keri,

Thanks for the response, the issue looked to be on Google's end, as after getting a hold of someone on the phone they expressed everything had been done correctly, however it was being bogged down on their end.

I was told that they are working on fine tuning their process to make sure it goes quicker for the future.

Greetings Mozzers,

I'm having a tough time merging my Google+ page with my Google Local page and wanted to see if anyone could give me some additional information/advice for progressing on this.

Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112342618763108384372/about?hl=en  Google Local: https://plus.google.com/104995472630988321277/about?gl=us&hl=en

Both of them have been verified and "managed" via postcards, however the Local one never seems to get "managed".  I look forward to hearing back on any guidance/advice.

Much appreciated,
Ryan

Great thought, I'll try to make sure the intent is actually have the cooking recipes for the product in a prominent place, and then have products beside it to show you can buy this product to complete your recipe.

Thanks for you time!

Thank you for your advice and thoughts on the matter.  The product I'm selling is coconut oil, thus we actually do have recipes on the page as well.  I'm thinking since it is a product page and we do have recipes, the potential of both displaying has to be an increased possibility.

Greetings Mozzers,

I'm working on an ecommerce site and my goal is to have the product rich snippets on each of them however, I would like an image to start displaying in the SERPs.  Looking for some guidance on this issue.  Here is a well phrased questioned I found that sums up my thoughts:

Product schema has the "image" attribute, but it is not displayed in rich snippets in SERP. However, there is recipe schema and it allows to show image directly on SERP. It means that we can define two entities on a page (product and recipe, it is allowed) and it should display an image from recipe's part + the rest of information (price, availability) from product's part. I know it is a dirty hack and semantically incorrect, but will it work? If so, would it affect rankings or not? Any other drawbacks?

Thank you for any advice/clarification!

Thanks Marisa,

Looks like it shows up there.  I appreciate the tip on that tool.

Greetings Mozzers,

I recently added a significant amount of information within a single page utilizing toggles to hide the content from a user and for them to see it they must click to reveal.  Since technically the code is reading "display:none" to start, would that be considered "Black Hat" or "Not There" to crawlers?  It isn't displayed in any sort of spammy way.  It is more for the UX of the visitor that toggles were utilized.

Thoughts and advice is greatly appreciated!

Greetings Mozzers,

To my knowledge I'm doing everything that is "required" to start showing up on the map results when searching something local, however, we never seem to be on map results (A, B, C, D...etc).

We have a Google+ page, submitted to Google Places (received PIN and entered it), optimized address to identical and in high authority map listing directories (GetListed.org), increased citations throughout the web, optimized keywords for categories on Google Places, schema.org HTML markup for address, meta address tags, consistent reviews being written by unique visitors to review sites (Yelp, Google+, etc).

Am I missing a major component? Any advice would be great as I feel like I'm hitting many notes that should translate into a map result.  Even for keywords that aren't incredibly difficult where we are ranking #1 above map results every time.

Thanks and hope all have a great weekend!

Thanks for some insight

Greetings Mozzers,

I'm wondering if duplicate content could potentially function as a "link" in Google's eyes.  Since they know I have content first and then someone else just uses it, Google could maybe think of that as a recommendation that the content is good?

Reason I ask is, when I first starting going after a keyword for a company I wanted to go after two (2) separate regions, let's say "San Antonio" and "Dallas".  My non-region based keyword started to rank for "San Antonio Keyword" because the content on the San Antonio page was too closely related.  So i'm wondering if maybe having that content so close/duplicate may have boosted the original page because it was kind of like a recommendation?

Thoughts, Information, Clarification, any and all are welcome and appreciated!

Both would have similar url structures like this ->

clothing.com/belts/new-york-belts

clothing.com/belts/miami-belts

For this example, they are equal amount of external and internal links. Freshly made pages, 2 months old.  One was indexed and ranking well, the other, indexed and not ranking in the top 20 pages?

Greetings Mozzers,

I'm working on a web based companies SEO where their services can be optimized for each area.  We have different pages for different keywords with a region attached to the keyword string we are going after.  For example, if the keyword is "Belts" and the regions you want to go after is New York and Miami. You are located in Miami so you have a page for "Miami Belts" and you rank well for it, but you want to start selling them online and want to rank for New York, so we have a "New York Belts" optimized web page that is completely unique content, however it isn't ranking at all.

Any thoughts? I know the address would be helping the the Miami page, but besides that why would the New York optimized page not rank? Lets say the two regions are equally competitive.

Any clarification and information is greatly appreciated.

Thanks for your advice, yeah I want to make sure I don't harm myself.

Thanks for the response! I'd' have responded sooner but was reading all the content.  Great share, it will definitely help my linking building efforts.

Greetings Mozzers,

I came a cross several sites and when looking at their link profile I found they had several links from these free services to gain links.  Obviously duplicate content is bad, but if all the content on each one was completely unique, would these links be of quality?  Let's say, 1 link per site that is external to your site.

I know it's a tricky topic but just wanted thoughts, would the above be a potentially beneficial method for gaining a simple quality link.

Your advice and information is much appreciated!

Thank you very much for you clarification.

Thank you for your insight on this matter.

Right now we are using xml-sitemaps.com however it looks like it isn't generating an accurate or lengthy sitemap.

Do you have any recommendations?

Great explanation.  Thank you for further clarification!

Hey Mike,

'Thank you for responding to our question.  For further clarification, if we talked about plumbing on our home page and repeatedly spoke about "plumbing" and we offer these services in "San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, and Houston"  Each region would be linked to their respective pages which would be targeted "Region Plumber" or "Plumber in Region". This way the home page is aimed at nationally ranking and sub pages ranked for region based keywords.

Reason I ask about only linking the regions site wide is becasue typically the full region keywords wouldn't show up naturally within content that would be on lets say the home page because then it would be spammy. For example: "We offer, san antonio plumbing, houston plumbing, and austin plumbing."

Right? Or would it be more beneficial to be spammy as the link's anchor text would be the region based keyword pointing to the region based keyword page?

Thanks again for all the clarification.  We just want to make sure that our content and internal linking strategies are the right way to get the most bang for you buck on getting the sub region based keyword pages ranked.

Greetings Mozzers,

I am wanting to get the most "bang for my buck" in regards to region based keyword pages.  If I am going after the keyword "Plumber" and the region "San Antonio", would it be best to:

1- Create a San Antonio Plumber page where we can target all critical factors for the region based keyword "San Antonio Plumber"
2- Link every instance of the term "San Antonio" and "San Antonio Plumber" throughout the site to the newly created "San Antonio Plumber" page.

Thank you for any advice/clarification on this matter.

Hey Tom,

Thanks for tipping us off on this post.  We'll take a look at it!

Greetings Mozzers,

When ever I check my home page on OSE it says I have a total of 5 internal links. Obviously this is WAY off.

I've used all relative links, if I were to removed all relative and make them absolute, would there be a better chance of OSE identifying them instead of losing that juice?

I think this is huge to resolve as when I compare my site to competitors, almost all factors are in our favor except this huge gap of only 5 internal links.

I'm using Drupal CMS. For example, Drupal normally outputs internal links as "/about" and "/about/team" in the menus. If we changed it to "https://monsterweb.net/about", and "https://monsterweb.net/about/team", would that make a difference?

Thanks for all the advice and clarification on this matter.

Hey Keri,

Thanks for responding to this.  Yeah it seems like just one of those things.

We appreciate your information!

Hey mememax,

We'll try this.  Thanks for your reply!

Greetings Mark,

I have read on several different articles that a multi-step process is something that is liked by visitors.

http://uxdesign.smashingmagazine.com/2009/05/28/12-tips-for-designing-an-excellent-checkout-process/

In the above article it talks about a multi-step checkout process (#7) which is navigated by several different pages. It explains that visitors going through a multi-step process provides control for someone surfing the web which is helpful to keep visitors happy.

So all-in-all it seems doing this helps make visitors happy and in control which should in theory push visitors to keep clicking until they get to the end of the road. Which if so, would be good for SEO.

Greetings Mozzers,

What would be the cause of the Title of the SERP to read a company name only instead of the <title>content?</p> <p>For example, if everywhere on my website, it reads SuperFun (if SuperFun is my company name).  And I have a <title> of "SuperFun | Great Fun that is Super | New York"</p> <p>Let's say I then Google -> Great Fun in New York and I'm ranked 3rd. Yet the SERP reads "Super Fun" as the title.</p> <p>Any reason for this? Or ways I can further optimize this so it reads:</p> <p>1- the correct company name</p> <p>2- the <title> I specified in source code.</p> <p>Thanks for any clarficiation/advice on this matter!</p></title>

Greetings Mozzers,

I've posted several clients on aboutus.org sometime ago and it doesn't look like it is showing up on OSE.  Its been well over 5 weeks.

I have looked on their profile and none of the links are rel="nofollow" is there another thing I can check that would take all the juice away from them? Or does someone know if this is a good place to use?

Thanks for any advice and clarification!

Hey James,

Thanks for your advice, I will definitely play with this tool.  Seems like it is a good way to start.

Greetings Mozzers,

I have read that interacting on blogs in a natural way is good for building relationships as well as earning links.  This is what I'd like to do, however what is the best way to find blogs to start doing this for different industries?

Google [industry blogs]? Go to competitors and look at their link profiles to see if there are blogs they are on?

Whats a good way to start this method?

All the advice/clarification would be outstanding!

It's more of an open ending question.  I was asking if  there is a way to utilize new domains for an SEO strategy.

Greetings Mozzers,

I wanted to see if someone could clarify the power of domains for me a bit.  Is there an SEO benefit in purchasing fresh domains for a specific website? Something that would effect certain metrics like parking keyword domains to pages that target that keyword?

I'm not talking about buying pre-existing domains that have value and are for sale. I'm talking about newly registered domains.

Thanks for any advice/clarification.

Interesting, I like this.

I see how this could be beneficial because the content would be similar just changes gears a bit. I'm interested in if this would be better for my overall domain authority or having just one link on each site (home page more likely then not) in the footer with different anchor text and title tags to our home page.

Hey Pincart,

Basically we are using https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/staticmaps/ currently.  With this in mind do you feel the embed is still the best option because of the possible interaction metrics?

The reason we like the above is because it is mobile/responsive friendly, however, if it holds more benefit for actual embed then we would consider the change.

Thanks again

Fantastic response, thank you.

Greetings Mozzers,

When doing a website, we generally link a Google Map image of the company to the Google Maps in a new tab.  Reading other questions made us wonder.

Is it better to do the above or is it more beneficial to SEO to have a Google Map embedded on the website.  Which I guess means it links Google to the Business in one way?

Thanks for any/all responses.

Greetings Mozzers,

I wanted to see how I can get the most bang for my buck in regards to footer links back to my site.  I understand that the footer is one of the weakest areas for links, however, I have many sites that I have done and want to get the most benefit from the footer area where I say created by etc.

First Question: Is there a chance to get some value at of this area?

Second Question: What is the best structure to use to get the most benefit from this opportunity?

If there is zero value within this region and I can't get any benefit, would the following penalize me?

Current Structure Used: Powered by MonsterWeb (On hover the title tag reveals a small 10 word sentence about us.)

Additional clarification would be greatly apprecaited.

Hey Tom,

Thanks for answering our question.  Basically our sites are a parent company/ministry, a kids mentoring/tutoring ministry, a medical center ministry, and a food pantry ministry.

They all have their own domain and website currently but need to be updated.  We are looking at combining the sites administrative functionality to allow for authors of each individual site as well as super authors for all sites.

So, the question is, should each site continue to have its own domain as they each will have unique content or should they be setup with subdomains becasue they are all apart of the same network.

Here is an example of a website setup very similar --> http://www.interlochen.org/

Thank you for further clarification/time on this matter.