meta user
network profile
| bio | website | glynndavies.net |
|---|---|---|
| location | United Kingdom | |
| age | 35 | |
| visits | member for | 9 months |
| seen | May 6 at 13:45 | |
| stats | profile views | 71 |
Technical SEO chap at LBi, hobby webmaster and web-tinkerer.
|
May 7 |
awarded | seo |
|
Apr 21 |
answered | Good idea if I only have <header> and <footer> inside <article>? |
|
Apr 21 |
comment |
Good idea if I only have <header> and <footer> inside <article>? "Markup does not effect SEO and you should use whatever is easier for yourself" [sic] Not true. |
|
Apr 20 |
revised |
Website design using Responsive Approach or Mobile Site added 10 characters in body |
|
Apr 16 |
comment |
SEO implications of having multiple languages available at same URL @nathangiesbrecht I think the information to answer you question is here. If you implement things Google considers and documents as non-optimal, whether you care or not, you should nevertheless do so knowing there's a possibility of harming your rankings. If your site has value you wish to preserve or enhance, test on a development site, not a public one. |
|
Apr 11 |
answered | Wordpress Category/Tag Pages As Indexed Actually Help In Traffic? |
|
Apr 10 |
revised |
Website design using Responsive Approach or Mobile Site fixed typo |
|
Apr 7 |
answered | Website design using Responsive Approach or Mobile Site |
|
Mar 24 |
comment |
301 or 302 redirect for mobile/non-mobile pages @bybe Your question presupposes that the OP isn't considering responsive. Read it. You also imply – falsely - that non-responsive approaches are invalid from an SEO standpoint. In any case, why presume to question somebody's chosen approach unless invited to do so? He may have very good reasons for not using responsive. |
|
Mar 24 |
answered | 301 or 302 redirect for mobile/non-mobile pages |
|
Mar 24 |
comment |
301 or 302 redirect for mobile/non-mobile pages @bybe No, it isn't. |
|
Mar 24 |
comment |
301 or 302 redirect for mobile/non-mobile pages @bybe How do you know he hasn't considered responsive design? |
|
Mar 23 |
awarded | Cleanup |
|
Mar 20 |
comment |
Is there any advantage/disadvantage to using robots.txt to disallow access to legal pages such as terms, privacy policy, etc.? Bybe's wrong about robots.txt. It does prevent crawling, but doesn't prevent the blocked content being indexed (if the content in question is linked to). |
|
Mar 19 |
comment |
SEO Impact on changing the resolutions of already indexed images You mean to just swap the image out, or dynamically changing image resolution based on device? |
|
Mar 18 |
answered | Would a 403 page, a blank page and a page redirect be indexed by search robots? |
|
Mar 15 |
revised |
Should rel=canonical point to page one of a set and still have rel=prev/next on the page as well? refined answer relative to OPs clarification about search content |
|
Mar 15 |
comment |
Should rel=canonical point to page one of a set and still have rel=prev/next on the page as well? @merk No need to remove prev/next markup: you're placing too much value on GWT's HTML Improvements. Regards the "view all" and page size issues, have you read Google's documentation on this? They deal explicitly with that (and simultaneous use of canonical). |
|
Mar 15 |
revised |
Should rel=canonical point to page one of a set and still have rel=prev/next on the page as well? defined CLE |
|
Mar 15 |
comment |
Should rel=canonical point to page one of a set and still have rel=prev/next on the page as well? @merk Sorry, CLE = canonical link element. If no other duplication issues then no need for canonical element; just use the pagination markup. To some extent I agree about the titles and descriptions, although I'd argue there's some value to users in adding "page #" to title (not meta desc). Remember that GWT data is just a guide: simply having things listed under HTML Improvements doesn't mean those things are damaging site performance, it's just an indication of things that might be unless there are mitigating factors (like pagination). |
