Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Gagan, this is good for Pro members. I think it would still be nice to be able to offer website feedback from anywhere.

Maybe this is something Moz wants to hear through the social channels provided in the footer?

Two things.

First, I could not find exactly where to report an issue or provide feedback about the website. I don't need to contact about Moz Analytics or any other products. I just want to provide feedback about the Moz Blog. I think it would be nice to be able to report an issue or provide feedback to "Roger" and have that item sent to the appropriate department for review. A lot of websites tend to use "[email protected]" for this, but anything would work. My suggestion is to offer a feedback form on the Contact Moz page.

Second, the issue I wanted to report has to do with blog comments. I left a comment early this morning and, with me being on Central Time and the timestamp for comments using Seattle local time, I was surprised to see that my comment had been posted "2 hours ago" immediately after I clicked "Submit." I presume this text is dynamic and that, in Seattle, you see "seconds ago" or something but, being in Wisconsin, I see "2 hours ago." This is confusing mainly because I have no idea how long ago other comments may have been posted.

P.S. There isn't a question category for the Moz Blogs so I am choosing Moz - Other Research Tools. I view the blogs as a Product Moz provides so maybe adding "Moz - Blogs" to the Moz Product Help list of categories would be appropriate.

I agree with Jackson on this one. If it makes sense and provides value to bold a keyword phrase, I see no reason why you shouldn't do it. I often bold phrases I want to drive home in the reader's mind.

But if it is really just to highlight keywords and for "SEO" then, yeah, it will probably look spammy.

Is this what you are looking for?

http://pro.moz.com/tools/crawl-test

Hello Theresa,

There could be many reasons Moz is reporting a different ranking than what you see. First, have you already confirmed you are not receiving personalized results when you search for this phrase? Cyrus Shepard provides a method for un-personalizing Google Search in this post.

Also, here's another related question with some tips.

Mat's right. Your content does need to be readable, indexable, and crawlable.

It sounds the resulting content will still be HTML output of some sort; however, you are stating that you won't have access to any actual static HTML files for SEO purposes.

If this is the case, the backend needs to be extensible enough to allow you to still do your job as an SEO. If you can't provide unique Page Titles, descriptions, canonical link elements, etc..., your organic search results will suffer.

Here's another issue: if your pages are built with JavaScript, you need to make sure the output is readable by search engines. I've seen issues with JavaScript-built pages before where search engines are indexing "blank" pages, indexing the wrong pages, or seeing duplicate content where AJAX is used to inject the unique content after the page is ready and has already been crawled.

Indeed! Just as your content should be relevant and valuable (not for keyword density) so should your links be relevant and not just for links. Good point David.

Good question. There has been much discussion on this topic. Here's a post from the blog about how to create crawlable links, but make sure you read all of the comments and that the solution you build indexes all of your content correctly and with the right canonical URLs.

Ah, yes. Since the tag just "represents" the URL that should be used for the content, it doesn't produce an endless loop. Redirects (301 or 302) produce loops from time to time, but that is another issue. Good question to ask and good that you are looking at everything to make sure your site is healthy.

Hi Julie, great question! David and Mark are right, link building can be about real marketing - everything is really.

Here is a resource I've found to be very valuable to get you started with link building. Jon Cooper put tons of time into building this resource; it's easy to ready, easy to follow, and provides many of the best link building strategies out there.

http://pointblankseo.com/link-building-strategies

Hope this helps and let us know how it goes!

Hello ASMC, I believe you are asking whether search engines look at the title tag

<title>This is the title</title>

or if they look at a meta title tag

The answer is that search engines look for the first example, the title tag. The second example is not a normal meta tag and does not need to be used.

I hope this answers your question.

I see a lot of this for phone numbers too.

In reading your question though, I had to ask myself this question, "Are these sites ranking because there are no better alternatives?" If everyone in the space is using duplicate content/content spamming, they will all be in the results because no one is creating a site with better information.

I would view your research as opportunity. If you feel you need to connect with customers based on zip code, build  better pages and become the best result for your users.

Hello 858,

Here's the short answer: dashes.

For the long answer, check this post out: http://www.seomoz.org/q/hyphens-vs-underscores

Hope this helps!

Is this what you are looking for?

http://pro.moz.com/tools/crawl-test

Isn't increased CTR on searches reason enough?

Many different ideas have been discussed regarding meta descriptions. Overall, most argue Google does not factor meta descriptions into rankings.

Personally, I think it would probably still factor in as a quality signal since the text used by Google often changes based on a particular search. If the description doesn't fit the keyword phrase and/or content, Google will often look for other content to use instead. For that reason alone, I would use a different meta description for every page (at the very least, for every page I want indexed) and I would make sure the description fit the content.

Hello Dana,

I suggest reading this over: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=139394

Midway down the page, Google states:

Can the link be relative or absolute?

rel="canonical" can be used with relative or absolute links, but we

recommend using absolute links to minimize potential confusion or

difficulties. If your document specifies a base link, any relative links

will be relative to that base link.

Hope this helps!

In-house for my own sites and freelance SEO mainly to local businesses. I'm actually more interested in writing software so will be delving into SEO software next.

I couldn't tell from your profile, which are you? Nice to meet you Eyepaq.

You won't be able to delete your root domain. The same index page is resolving for two different URLs.

I think you would want to 301 redirect from www.ferringway.com/index.php to www.ferringway.com. This will keep your links in place and fix the duplicate content problem. You can read more about 301 redirecting here.

To answer your main question, content aggregation is not good SEO.

First, search engines are going to see scraped duplicate content. Second, if you add any ads at all, you will only increase the odds you will be viewed as a profit-seeking-curated-content farmer which may as well be equivalent to spam.

Panda and Penguin were released to deal with sites that provide no-value content aggregation.

If you aren't adding value, don't do it.

OK, all that being said, I do find Flavors.me interesting.

I think it might work as a personal website used to drive traffic through to other channels. Like About.me, but with a bit more oomph!

Provide a solid profile (unique content providing value) that points to the places I spend my time on the Web.

Document refers to the single web page you are placing the canonical link on.

The base link is referring to the URL you can provide as the href property for the base tag. The base tag can be included in the head of your HTML document.

Example base link:

<base href="http://www.ccisolutions.com/">

If you choose to use the example base link above and this relative URL:

Your canonical link will end up referring to “http://www.ccisolutions.com/page1.html”.

Here is a second example, this time using a new base link which includes the products directory:

<base href="http://www.ccisolutions.com/products/">

If you choose to use this new base link and the following relative URL:

Your canonical link will end up referring to “http://www.ccisolutions.com/products/page1.html”.

If you choose to use this new base link and this relative URL:

Your canonical link will actually refer to one-level-up from your base link or “http://www.ccisolutions.com/page1.html”. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the syntax "../" (dot dot slash), but it means to go up one level from the current directory.

The use of base links for canonical linking might be useful for a CMS where the content is generally dynamically created. It might be good to sit down with your developers and discuss which tactic would be best for the site in question.

I am including a link to this SEOmoz blog post in case it is also of help.

Edit: expanded on the explanations...