<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Duplicate Content And WordPress &#8211; An Unresolved Problem</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/</link>
	<description>Internet Marketing And SEO From A Different Point Of View</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:06:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Welford</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4368</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Welford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 18:07:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4368</guid>
		<description>There is no Google penalty as such.  It&#039;s just that if either of two pages could be relevant, then the relevance of each compared to other web pages will be reduced.  Whereas if there&#039;s only one page that&#039;s relevant, then that will rank higher.

As for your tags question, it depends what you show on your tags pages.  I show only titles so there&#039;s little duplicated content in that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is no Google penalty as such.  It&#8217;s just that if either of two pages could be relevant, then the relevance of each compared to other web pages will be reduced.  Whereas if there&#8217;s only one page that&#8217;s relevant, then that will rank higher.</p>
<p>As for your tags question, it depends what you show on your tags pages.  I show only titles so there&#8217;s little duplicated content in that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Windscreens Nottingham</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4366</link>
		<dc:creator>Windscreens Nottingham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 16:26:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4366</guid>
		<description>I always thought that google loved wordpress so it would understand the fact that thats what wordpress does and understand that and not give penaltys for dupe content. Just a point if i use tags in my post does that duplicate each post?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I always thought that google loved wordpress so it would understand the fact that thats what wordpress does and understand that and not give penaltys for dupe content. Just a point if i use tags in my post does that duplicate each post?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: San Diego Homes Sale</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4359</link>
		<dc:creator>San Diego Homes Sale</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:36:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4359</guid>
		<description>A great tool that I used for my San Diego real estate site is DupeFree Pro.  However, they recently announced that their program was no longer synchronizing with Google.  A fix is apparently in the works.  The biggest challenge for me was switching house listings to a new site after they&#039;d been cached on one of my other sites.  It was my content, but I didn&#039;t want the homes descriptions to be considered duplicates.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A great tool that I used for my San Diego real estate site is DupeFree Pro.  However, they recently announced that their program was no longer synchronizing with Google.  A fix is apparently in the works.  The biggest challenge for me was switching house listings to a new site after they&#8217;d been cached on one of my other sites.  It was my content, but I didn&#8217;t want the homes descriptions to be considered duplicates.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Welford</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4293</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Welford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:42:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4293</guid>
		<description>If you edit the header.php file and use the feedburner URL for the feed, then the normal way of getting a feed will give you the feedburner feed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you edit the header.php file and use the feedburner URL for the feed, then the normal way of getting a feed will give you the feedburner feed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4292</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 14:22:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4292</guid>
		<description>I use feedburner as well for my feeds instead of the default WP. The problem is it seems to automatically create it no matter.  The WP feed isnot linked anywhere on my website but you can still access directly.  Is there a way to turn that off?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I use feedburner as well for my feeds instead of the default WP. The problem is it seems to automatically create it no matter.  The WP feed isnot linked anywhere on my website but you can still access directly.  Is there a way to turn that off?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Epic Traffic Systems Review</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4113</link>
		<dc:creator>Epic Traffic Systems Review</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 May 2010 11:32:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4113</guid>
		<description>Great post. i found it interesting when you...discuss duplicate content, because i am still unsure if google really penalizes you for duplicate content. i have heard arguments on both sides.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post. i found it interesting when you&#8230;discuss duplicate content, because i am still unsure if google really penalizes you for duplicate content. i have heard arguments on both sides.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrik</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4108</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 May 2010 23:47:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4108</guid>
		<description>Very good article! Duplicate content is something I work with a lot to avoid. Most importantly, I believe, is to put &quot;no follow&quot; on that kind of functions that can do to make it dublicate content. So which &quot;tags&quot; &quot;categories&quot; &quot;date&quot; and so on. And have &quot;do follow&quot;  on liks that does not give duplicate content. For I believe Google dislike sites that do not give out links, either. For their entire system is based precisely on it. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very good article! Duplicate content is something I work with a lot to avoid. Most importantly, I believe, is to put &#8220;no follow&#8221; on that kind of functions that can do to make it dublicate content. So which &#8220;tags&#8221; &#8220;categories&#8221; &#8220;date&#8221; and so on. And have &#8220;do follow&#8221;  on liks that does not give duplicate content. For I believe Google dislike sites that do not give out links, either. For their entire system is based precisely on it. <img src='http://www.bpwrap.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Best 10 WordPress Articles on MMO Social Network</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4051</link>
		<dc:creator>Best 10 WordPress Articles on MMO Social Network</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 12:25:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4051</guid>
		<description>[...] Google Duplicate Content and Wordpress &#8211; An Unresolved Problem [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Google Duplicate Content and WordPress &#8211; An Unresolved Problem [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry Welford</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4042</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Welford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 15:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4042</guid>
		<description>Yes, oempak.  Adding the source is a nice courtesy to the original author, but it&#039;s still duplication.  Duplication is really concerned with whether the search engines think the content is essentially similar.  In which case, depending on the exact keyword query either one or the other might be shown.  This obviously reduces the chance that the original source article is displayed in a SERP where really it is the most relevant item.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, oempak.  Adding the source is a nice courtesy to the original author, but it&#8217;s still duplication.  Duplication is really concerned with whether the search engines think the content is essentially similar.  In which case, depending on the exact keyword query either one or the other might be shown.  This obviously reduces the chance that the original source article is displayed in a SERP where really it is the most relevant item.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oempak</title>
		<link>http://www.bpwrap.com/2010/05/google-duplicate-content-and-wordpress-an-unresolved-problem/comment-page-1/#comment-4041</link>
		<dc:creator>oempak</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 14:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bpwrap.com/?p=1301#comment-4041</guid>
		<description>Is it called duplicate if we put the source in the article ?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it called duplicate if we put the source in the article ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
