Make a backup and reinstall everything, change passwords etc… unless you are sure your site wasn’t compromised. If it is hacked you’ll probably find other files that have been uploaded to allow further access by the hacker. Been there a few years back, made the mistake of storing FTP passwords in Filezilla and running Internet Explorer with an out of date Adobe plugin (I think my PC was compromised, think a hacker downloaded the Filezilla password list which isn’t encrypted!!!: never store your passwords in Filezilla, massive security flaw) was a pain fixing the damage caused.

David

When installed correctly this link will load the main Stallion CSS file, since nothing loads Stallion isn’t in the correct location

Mcode>http://www.wellwaterhydration.com/wp-content/themes/stallion-seo-theme/style.css

If you log into your site using FTP you should find this folder when installed correctly

/wp-content/themes/stallion-seo-theme/

and in that folder will be amongst other files the style.css. If that's not what you see via FTP you've got it wrong.

Solution is delete Stallion and reinstall.

What you might have done is install Stallion within two folders by extracting the Stallion zip file on your PC and uploading it all instead of the /stallion-seo-theme/ folder found within the extracted /stallion-theme-7.1/ folder.

Other possibilities are you renamed the /stallion-seo-theme/ folder and the name you used isn't valid, best not to rename the folder.

David

Not looked at Massive Passive Profits for ages, if I recall correctly it uses shortcodes for titles, Amazon buttons etc… so guessing you’ve added the button shortcode twice by mistake.

David

I’m sure I’m overlooking something simple…I’m using version 7.1.1 with MPP and on my post pages the Amazon “Buy Now” button and price appears twice, on every page for every Amazon link. Please advise what I may be doing incorrectly.
Thanks!

The question for me is how would adding 16 sitewide links (which would count as 8 links since they are duplicate sets) that pass full SEO and link benefit to Google+, Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, Stumbleupon, YouTube, Flickr and Feedburner help Google’s users?

I’m not linking to those sites to recommend them as relevant resources to this site, they aren’t about WordPress, themes, SEO etc… I’m linking to them to promote my social media type profiles. If I added 8 sitewide links to 8 of my random domains from all 130 domains I own (millions of backlinks), I’d get my entire network banned for being a link farm!

Though I don’t think Google would penalize a site for linking to Facebook sitewide, I don’t think it adds anything useful either and it would damage this sites SEO since the links aren’t relevant to the sites content. Another way of looking at it is would Google have a problem with adding a link that’s not clickable like this one: http://www.facebook.com/david.c.law that goes to my Facebook profile?

I’d have no problem with a manual Google review of those links. Just like I have no problem with Google seeing the 4 javascript based social media buttons to Google+, Facebook, Twitter and Stumbleupon (using the javascript supplied by those social media sites) that make it easier for users to share this sites content.

David

I had link clocking off under Stallion advanced SEO options. I did this because although, I agree with your idea that Java script is nothing bad. It is not hiding the link, as it is clearly visible and the end user can click it, thus it is not really cloaked. This is fair as it is all about the end user. True link cloaking (bad) is the opposite, that is links visible to the search engines but hidden from the user. At least that is my theory. What you do I would imagine is OK as many websites, trusted sites use this for advertising.

It is just Java, something that is used on almost every website. Yet, I would rather err on conservatism and not activate that feature. I can not see how it would be a penalty as the end use can use this. yet I get a little paranoid.

All that I wrote above do you think I am correct?

So until my worries subside, I will think of another way, either put a Google + link on all my pages (that is a lot of juice leaking) or do something like you recommend, that is have pages linking to my “author page” that links out to Google +.

My smaller sites, not a big deal, but my larger sites with 100s or 1000s of pages, I do not know if I want one page getting that much juice as it might distort the natural flow of things.

Since Panda hit my sites, I have been trying to add content and really improve the quality of my posts. So when I finish an upgrade to a post I do not mind signing my name to that post. Therefore, most of my post will deserve Authorship claims if I upgrade them.

So I have to think about this and weigh my options.

Both sets of social media links are using the Stallion Link Cloaking feature, those links are invisible to Google and other search engines. Note you can have the links pass PR, though not a very good idea.

View source of the whole page, not just the bio box by selecting the content and viewing selection source: there’s an interesting ‘bug’ when you “View Selection Source” in Firefox, it shows a mashed version of the cloaked link code (that search engines see as text) and what the javascript outputs to a browser with javascript turned on. You can also test with javascript turned off, you’ll find the social media clickable image links are no longer clickable, just images.

Stallion SEO Advanced Options:

Cloak Affiliate Links ON
Cloak Bio and Profile Links ON

If a search engine spider simulator is reporting the links as valid it’s a faulty search engine simulator, although Google tries to read some javascript there’e no evidence they can read this sort of javascript, it’s an external js file for starters. Without specifically adding “look for this javascript and do the following” Google will not be able to read those links, unless this technique becomes the norm I don’t think Google will add something to their algo to account for this code.

Google reads those links as an image surrounded by a span tag, not an image link.

David