Welcome to the Q&A Forum

Thanks Will, appreciate the insight. I'm going to get the Bing and Google wordpress plugins on there to see if that helps, build up a few more links and give it some time to wait and see. Thanks!

Thanks, I've actually submitted request to be indexed multiple times over the last 3 weeks to no avail.

Hi Will, thanks for reaching out! No, not yet resolved. Still struggling to figure this out. I sent you a message on Facebook and Linkedin- would love to connect and try to get this figured out!

We keep adding blog posts almost every day, still not getting in the index for some reason. Discovered, yes. Crawled, yes. But not indexed, and no errors or anything.

I actually got a quality link 2 weeks ago, but the blog post the link was published in still isn't indexed by Google either. The rest of his site is, just not his newest article for some reason, and it's 2 weeks old now. Another mystery...

It's a review website, and only 3 of my 24 reviews are indexed. All are discovered, most even crawled, but only those three in the index. And when I updated them, the search listing in Google results was updated within a few days. So they came back, are aware of the changes, but just not adding the others to the index.

And there are no affiliate links on this site at all. No spam, no links to spam, and I've attached a blog with 500+ word well written articles (about 20 so far) and none of the blog posts are indexed either.

I've never seen anything like this. The content is good, but almost none of it is getting indexed for some reason, despite being discovered and crawled.

It's a new domain, no previous ownership, and no issues detected in search console for manual actions or security. There's no robots, noindex or any of that going on. They just won't index a bunch of the pages for some reason and it's very odd.

Hey all, have a really strange situation I've never encountered before. I launched a new website about 2 months ago. It took an awfully long time to get index, probably 3 weeks. When it did, only the homepage was indexed.

I completed the site, all it's pages, made and submitted a sitemap...all about a month ago. The coverage report shows that Google has discovered the URL's but not indexed them. Weirdly, 3 of the pages ARE indexed, but the rest are not.

So I have 42 URL's in the coverage report listed as "Excluded" and 39 say "Discovered- currently not indexed." When I inspect any of these URL's, it says "this page is not in the index, but not because of an error." They are listed as crawled - currently not indexed or discovered - currently not indexed.

But 3 of them are, and I updated those pages, and now those changes are reflected in Google's index. I have no idea how those 3 made it in while others didn't, or why the crawler came back and indexed the changes but continues to leave the others out.

Has anyone seen this before and know what to do?

So the non dub version of the URL points to www right now. Somehow, what they plan to do is take 25% of all visitors to our website and send them to www2 instead of www. I don't know how this works personally.

I guess with analytics, how do you even set that up? As a separate profile in Google Analytics? But the domain is the same, so can you do sub-domain specific? I need separate analytics for the new site to make sure conversions look good, and that's what I'm not sure how to set up.

My secondary concern is doing a noindex on the www2 subdomain. Is that the best way to keep this out of the index? Once testing is done we'll move the new site to www and redirect www2 to it as well. Any thoughts on that set up?

So it's not my decision but the IT department's. Our current site at www.ourdomain.com will remain while www2.ourdomain.com will be the new design receiving 25% of the traffic to our domain. So not three domains, just two different subdomains is all. I just want to make sure we have analytics on there in a way to be able to see that it's working/converting without getting www2 indexed if that makes more sense.

1. Domain Authority- this is kind of like SEOmoz's version of pagerank, only on a 100 point scale instead of 10. The more links you have to all the pages of your domain, the higher it's authority. The more links you get from other authorities, the higher your authority.

2. Mozrank is here: http://www.seomoz.org/learn-seo/mozrank

3. Ext. followed links is how many of your inbound links from external sources are followed as opposed to nofollowed.

4. Linking root domains is how many domains link to you, not how many pages or how many links, just how many different domains have at least one link to you.

5. Followed linking root domains is how many of those linking domains are following their links as opposed to nofollowing them

6. A C-block is related to server lingo. Every IP address is xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx and the c-block is one of those sets. So if I own two domains and have them registered and hosted together, you may have two domains linking to you, but only one c-block, as they would be on the same server c-block. So this is the important one as spammers can get 1,000 domains linking to them but get them all on the same c-block. Doesn't help much. Google knows when you just buy a bunch of domains and make them all link to you.

The secret to good SEO is to stop wasting time with automation tools. SEO simply cannot be automated and left to a robot. If it could, none of us would have jobs

If it automates directory submissions, bookmarks, articles, blog comments or anything else, it's useless and should be left alone. Far too many SEO folks waste far too much time tinkering around with them...only to figure out they are useless and that they wasted a lot of time. The Onion comically gives us another great way to stop wasting time:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/openminded-man-grimly-realizes-how-much-life-hes-w,19273/

From an SEO perspective, all TLD's are supposedly treated equal, but I have my doubts. So the text book answer is your TLD has no affect on SEO. Now if you got a .co.uk for a US travel site, that could be problematic. But a .us is supposedly the same as a .info or a .com or .net or whatever else. Again, I have my doubts.

The problem with a .us domain is in your branding. Let's say you were YountTravel.us. You cannot brand yourself as Yount Travel because by default everyone thinks .com. So you have to brand the .us with your brand name so people will actually remember your website.

My best advice is to not pay any attention to keyword rich domains. Google said they won't for long. I would build any website around a brand, so I think a brandable .com is infinitely better than a keyword rich .us.

The Google webmaster blog answered this perfectly the other day, here is their post:

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/05/do-404s-hurt-my-site.html

I wouldn't necessarily look for stats or studies about meta descriptions here, but look at research done on PPC copy as well. There is likely a whole lot more of it for one, and its a very similar concept. Which words get more clicks? That's what it boils down to. I'm sure if you look more for stats in the PPC side of things you can find more concrete sources on what language is most effective.

Social bookmarking should be part of an SEO package. But its important to remember that digg is not a social bookmarking website, it is a social news site. Social bookmarking in its purest form is just delicious, jumptags and the like. If you have a few dozen employees, have them maintain regular social bookmarking accounts. Have them use these accounts to bookmark all sorts of stuff. Then when you have a new client, they can integrate a few of the client's pages into their bookmarking profils. This way you don't look like a bunch of spammers or unnatural users.

Brent, this seems to be a very ambitious undertaking. Those look like some big keywords that sound somewhat competitive. Here is what I would recommend for your questions:

1. Based on your goals, I would target the photography words as opposed to the photographer words. You'll probably just as easily rank for both if you have one, but still, someone looking for a photographer wants to see a small sample, then some contact information and pricing packages. Sounds like you just want the casual passerby to stop and stay a while. So I would focus on photography.

Your question about which terms to target is all of them! Make your home page photo blog or photography blog. Then make a category for each keyword you want to target, black and white, abstract, etc. Get each category page to rank for its keyword. Then you don't just pick one, you can do it all.

2. Photography over photographer(s)

3. Not enough keywords to focus on. A quick search for photography and you'll see a lot of different types of searches, from religious to nature to animals to objects. People look for all kinds. I would find all the different types people search for (That you actually do) and then create a category for each one so that you can upload your photos into each category and get that category page ranking for that particular term.

These are bigger keywords, but one key to SEO is deep links. Don't just link to your home page for one keyword. Get links to all your pages for all your keywords. This is why you should have a robust keyword list to start as you have already. You're on the right path.

The article says it can contribute to the social signals as well as help in image searches. I'm pretty skeptical myself. I don't use Flickr and don't plan to. I would rather have images on my domain in image search results, and I have plenty of them there without using Flickr. I wouldn't bother personally.

It might not be the best solution, but one idea would be to look at just your traffic from Google News. Take note of all the kewyords sending traffic. Then look at your traffic from Google search. Do any of those same keywords show up? If so I think it is safe to assume that traffic came from a click in a News result that appeared in normal Google search.

In other words, see which keywords send traffic from Google News, then just see how much total traffic those keywords sent and that's probably how much news traffic you received. Probably not the best or most accurate solution but it can help you ball park it if nothing else.

No difference from an SEO perspective. After the Q&A last year at SMX Advanced with Matt Cutts, I went up and asked him this very question. He said make sure one version redirects to the other, and if it is an existing site, Google will likely display the version with more pagerank. If this site is still in development, when you release it, have all links go to the sans www versions and make sure the www versions 301 redirect to the sans www URL's.

From a branding perspective, it only matters if you plan on displaying the .com on the page or in the logo or something like that. If you plan to display the .com, then sans www. Looks cleaner and just better recognition overall.

If you aren't planning to display the .com anywhere, then it really doesn't matter as hardly anyone outside this industry pays attention to which version of a URL they are on.