Hi Philip,

You definitely want to look into Custom Post Types.  By creating a new Custom Post Type, it can allow you to create another set of content in the same manner as "Posts" (non-archived) or "Pages" (archived & hierarchical) you can then use to separate your content into buckets like you mention.  For some folks we will create very specific custom post types like "Products" that feature items for sale.  You can also create custom fields that apply to just those post types that can then be used to add additional meta data to the custom post.

Two plugins we use for this are-

• Types - https://wordpress.org/plugins/types/
• Advanced Custom Fields - http://wordpress.org/plugins/advanced-custom-fields/

Obviously there are others but that should get you started.  I'm happy to reply to any other questions you may have, just leave a comment.  Good luck!

Hi Nick,

Unfortunately at this time there isn't a way to specify a shorter meta description.  The only way to achieve what you're looking for would be to shorten all meta descriptions for sub-pages but that means you'd lose a lot of real estate if it showed up in a normal SERP.

DMOZ wait times are typically measured in months and/or years, if you ever hear anything.  Don't stress about it; move on and cross your fingers!

Greetings!  I think you're going to be better off creating an evergreen page that you can build trust to over time.

Because blog posts are off time-stamped Google may tend to ignore it as it gets stale.  The exception would be if you were to, as Jimmy is suggesting, create a category page or something similar with unique content AND an aggregation of recent blog posts in that category.  But you'd need both to keep it ranked over time.

Greetings Pamela!

This is nothing to worry about at all.  UTF-8 is simply a type of character encoding and is set in the websites to instruct web browsers on how to interpret the character encoding.  See- http://screencast.com/t/s4I2RNsgqUh

As it's not negative and perfectly normal, there's no need to change it at all.

Just a quick note, adding it to robots.txt instructs the crawlers not to crawl the URL, but it can still be indexed if it is being linked to from other places (and probably is if Moz crawler is finding it).

The easiest way to solve the problem if you don't want them indexed is to edit your search results page template and add a meta noindex to the .

I personally don't like to see search results surfaced to search engines (unless there's a strategic reason for doing so).

The file name isn't as important for SEO as it used to be.  It can provide a useful signal as to the nature of the image's content and the text content around it.  It shouldn't cause any "issues" or penalties with your SEO, however, you may lose the side benefit of some/all traffic from image searches.

The biggest concern I would have is if the manufacturer decided to move, delete or rename images.

I personally prefer the slash but it doesn't make any difference as long as you're consistent and if as you say Google is already indexing most without, I'd probably go that way too!

If you are using rel canonical then you can have the same on each page and it should be okay.

Otherwise, I would make sure your paginated pages don't have it.  The next/prev helps Google to understand these are subsequent pages of the original category but it doesn't really give instruction as to the preferred page, etc. (like the canonical would) so you could end up with Google ignoring the content after it sees it too many times.