►
From YouTube: English Google SEO office-hours from November 10, 2020
Description
This is a recording of the Google SEO office-hours hangout from November 10, 2020. These sessions are open to anything webmaster related like crawling, indexing, mobile sites, internationalization, duplicate content, Sitemaps, Search Console, pagination, duplicate content, multi-lingual/multi-regional sites, etc.
Watch out for new sessions, and add your questions at https://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleWebmasterHelp/community
Feel free to join us - we welcome webmasters of all levels!
A
A
Oh
bad
yeah,
like
nobody,
calls
me
except
now.
Maybe
that
was
me.
Oh
man,
okay,
well,
a
part
of
what
we
do
are
these
office
hour
hangouts,
where
people
can
jump
in
and
ask
their
questions
on
on
google
meet
not
by
telephone
about
their
website
and
google
search.
A
So
a
bunch
of
things
were
already
submitted
ahead
of
time.
I
can
run
through
some
of
those.
For
some
reason
it
looks
like
people
aren't
jumping
into
the
hangout
at
the
moment.
That
might
be.
I
don't
know
because
they're
all
busy
or
might
be
something
on
google
side,
but
we'll
kind
of
get
started
anyway.
Maybe
more
people
will
jump
in
later
on?
Do
any
of
you
want
to
get
started
with
our
first
question.
B
A
I'm
I'm
not
planning
on
taking
away
anything.
I'm
like.
I
think
this
is
one
of
those
features
where
the
the
various
teams
at
google
really
kind
of
love
the
data
that
they're
collecting
there
and
love
to
get
these
things
into
the
index
as
quickly
as
possible,
but
unfortunately
that
sometimes
also
attracts
attention
from
people
who
are
using
it
to
try
to
get
spammy
stuff
index.
A
Oh,
if
I
don't
do
anything
manual,
then
it
takes
two
weeks
to
get
a
new
page
index
and
from
from
my
point
of
view,
that
seems
like
something
that
shouldn't
be
taking
so
long
from
our
side.
So
we
should
really
kind
of
take
some
of
these
examples
and
work
to
kind
of
improve
our
systems
from
at
least
from
from
my
point
of
view,
that
was
kind
of
the
background
there
and
it's
it's
not
related
to
any
of
the
indexing
issues
that
we
had
in
the
past.
A
Okay,
I
I
will
just
kind
of
pop
through
some
of
the
questions
that
that
were
submitted,
we'll
see
if
more
people
can
jump
in
as
well.
Let
me
double
check
that
the
link
is
actually
all
posted
yeah.
I
don't
know
we'll
see
what
effect
does
redirecting
wordpress
attachment
pages
to
media
files,
as
recommended
in
the
yoast
plugin
have
on
the
chance
of
ranking
in
google
images
and
website
seo
in
general.
A
That's
an
interesting
question.
I
don't
know
exactly
what
what
the
yoast
plugin
recommends
or
what
it
does
specifically
there
from
my
information
in
general,
you
would
have
the
images
embedded
in
the
individual
blog
posts
or
in
the
individual
pages
of
your
website,
and
you
would
also
have
the
same
image
on
kind
of
these
attachment
pages
and
usually
when
it
comes
to
image
search,
we
would
be
indexing
the
kind
of
a
landing
page,
your
blog
post
and
the
images
that
are
linked
there.
A
So
the
attachment
pages
are
kind
of
something
that
we
probably
don't
need
to
pick
up.
Essentially,
so
my
guess
is
probably
redirecting
from
from
your
wordpress
attachment
pages
to
media
file.
A
Various
country,
specific
sections
of
our
website,
lose
visibility
periodically
since
the
end
of
october,
the
amount
of
d
index
pages
has
increased
dramatically
by
tens
of
thousands.
The
pages
that
take
the
place
in
the
search
results
are
historic,
they've
had
and
still
have,
301
redirects
for
many
months
search
console
indicates
that
google
is
choosing
the
old
pages
as
canonical.
A
Thousands
of
pages
are
now
not
found
on
any
url,
not
on
new
or
the
old
url.
The
sites
on
the
same
domain
sharing
the
language
with
affected
sites
start
to
rank
instead,
for
example,
in
google.de
people
see
many
of
our
austrian
pages.
Instead
of
the
german
pages,
the
pages
are
mapped
correctly,
with
hreflang
tags
and
xml
sitemaps,
so
kind
of
goes
on.
With
with
some
more
details,
I
I
think
specifically,
I
would
need
to
have
some
sample.
A
Urls
to
to
know
for
sure
what
what
is
kind
of
happening
down
but
kind
of
taking
a
step
back
when
you
have
redirects
from
one
page
to
another.
From
our
point
of
view,
what
happens
there?
Is
we
take
those
two
urls,
the
old
url
and
the
new
url,
and
put
them
into
a
shared
cluster
that
we
then
use
for
canonicalization?
A
So
we
we
essentially
say
these
two
urls
lead
to
the
same
content
which
of
these
should
we
be
showing,
and
we
use
redirects
to
try
to
figure
out
which
of
these
we
should
be
showing,
but
we
also
use
a
lot
of
other
factors.
Things
like
internal
links
within
your
your
website,
external
links,
sitemap
files,
other
annotations,
that
you
have
on
these
pages.
A
All
of
that
kind
of
comes
together
and
with
all
of
those
extra
pieces
of
information,
we
then
say:
okay
for
each
of
these
pages
that
are,
in
this
cluster
of
pages
that
essentially
lead
to
the
same
content
which
of
these
is
the
best
one
to
show,
and
sometimes
that
can
be
the
redirect
source.
Sometimes
that
can
be
the
redirect
target,
depending
on
essentially
what
what
the
bigger
picture
says.
A
So,
just
that
things
shift
from
the
redirect
target
to
the
redirect
source
at
some
point,
even
if
those
redirects
have
been
in
place
for
a
while,
that's
not
necessarily
broken
from
our
point
of
view.
So
that's
not
something
that
we
would
say
is
unusual
or
anything
that
you
explicitly
need
to
fix
because
purely
from
a
ranking
point
of
view,
nothing
changes
there.
It's
really
just
the
url
that
is
shown
in
search,
there's
nothing
with
regards
to
kind
of
different
ranking
there.
It's
purely
just
the
url.
A
Of
course.
The
part
that's
also
associated
with
this
is
in
search
console.
We
show
the
data
by
canonical
url,
so
you
will
also
see
that
shift
in
search
console
and
it
makes
tracking
a
little
bit
confusing
sometimes
so
I
agree
that
can
be
annoying
one
of
the
things
that
I
would
recommend
doing
in
a
case
like
this,
especially
if
you're
seeing
this
change
happen
on
a
large
scale
across
your
website
is
to
double
check
all
of
the
other
factors
that
are
involved
with
canonicalization.
A
So,
in
particular,
I
I
would
look
at
things
like
internal
links,
sitemap
file,
other
annotations,
that
you
have
on
these
pages
with
regards
to
hreflang
or
any
kind
of
cross
link
that
you
have
there
and
make
sure
that
they're
all
aligned
with
the
url
that
you
now
want
to
have
indexed
and
the
more
you
can
make
all
of
those
factors
align
the
more
likely
we'll
choose
the
url
that
kind
of
comes
out
on
top
after
canonicalization.
A
So
from
from
our
side
again,
it's
not
a
sign
that
we're
de-indexing
pages
or
that
anything
is
broken.
It's
just
we're
picking
the
other
url
to
show
instead
of
this
one
and
we're
showing
it
the
same
place
and
the
same
can
happen
with
international
content,
especially
if
the
content
is
in
the
same
language,
then
we
might
say
well,
this
content
is
primarily
the
same
content.
One
one
of
these
pages
is
for
germany.
One
of
them
is
for
austria,
it's
essentially
the
same
full
content
there,
and
in
a
case
like
that,
we
will
perhaps
not
always.
A
We
will
perhaps
choose
one
of
these
pages
as
a
canonical
because
we
say
they're
essentially
the
same.
They
deserve
to
be
in
a
canonical
kind
of
cluster
and
there
again
we'll
take
the
different
kind
of
factors
into
account
who
are
picking
the
canonical
url
and
if
you
have
href
lang.
Additionally,
on
these
pages,
we
will
pick
one
of
these
as
the
canonical
url,
but
we'll
still
swap
out
the
url
that
we
show
in
the
search
results
depending
on
the
user's
location.
A
So
my
guess
I
again,
I
don't
know
because
I
I
don't
know
which
site
this
is.
My
guess
is
when
you're
seeing
this
change
from
germany
to
austria,
for
example,
for
your
sites,
then
probably
that's
what's
happening
and
if
you
explicitly
search
in
in
google,
germany
or
with
with
the
settings
for
kind
of
content
for
germany,
I
think
that's
with
the
parameter.
A
Gl
equals
d
e
in
the
in
the
query
on
top,
then
you
should
see
your
your
pages
essentially
showing
in
the
search
results,
and
if
you
hover
over
the
link,
you
should
see
the
kind
of
the
appropriate
localized
version.
A
So
that's
from
from
our
point
of
view,
that's
kind
of
working
as
expected.
It's
not
something
we
would
consider
a
bug,
but
it
is.
It
is
confusing,
and
we've
we've
been
going
back
and
forth
with
the
team
that
works
on
ahref
flang
for
a
while
now
to
see.
If
we
can,
I
don't
know
change
that
somehow,
but
I
don't
see
that
changing
in
the
short
term.
A
Essentially,
from
our
point
of
view,
it's
working
as
intended
that
we
fold
these
pages
together
for
canonical
cluster.
If
they're
essentially
the
same
content,
if
they're
not
the
same
content,
then
we
would
kind
of
track
them
separately
again,
and
it's
working
as
intended
that
we
would
use
hreflang
to
pick
the
right
url
to
show,
and
it's
also
working
as
intended,
that
in
search
console,
you
see
the
reports
based
on
the
canonical
and
all
of
these
things
add
up
and
they
kind
of
make
it
a
bit
confusing
to
track.
A
Let's
see
with
bert
coming
out
will
the
importance
of
the
exact
keyword,
exact
match,
keyword
decrease,
so
I
think
bert
has
been
in
working
in
various
ways
for
quite
some
time.
So
bert
is
essentially
a
machine
learning
setup,
I
believe
for
understanding,
essentially
the
content
a
little
bit
better.
A
A
A
I
have
a
question
about
the
faq
page
schema.
I
read
the
guidelines
and
it
says:
text
sent
through
schema,
markup
and
visible
text
should
be
the
same.
However,
what
I'm
not
sure
about
is
html,
for
example,
would
I
be
allowed
to
have
affiliate
links
in
the
text
that
is
visible
on
the
page?
If
I
remove
the
a
tags
from
the
json
data
so
that
the
affiliate
links
don't
show
up
in
the
search
results,
the
text
will
be
the
same
as
per
the
guidelines,
but
the
html
would
be
slightly
different.
A
A
I
also
double
checked
the
guidelines
for
faq
page
markup
in
general,
and
I
saw
that
you
could
even
leave
the
links
in
the
answers
themselves
and
I've
seen
some
sites
do
that
where,
if
you
kind
of
fold
out
the
the
question
to
get
the
answer,
you
have
a
link
directly
in
the
search
results
and
depending
on
your
site.
Maybe
that's
something
that
you're
actually
kind
of
keen
on.
A
Maybe
that's
something
that
you
don't
care
about,
but
whether
or
not
you
link
the
kind
of
the
answer
in
exactly
the
same
way
as
you
have
it
on
the
page
itself.
I
I
think
that's
ultimately
up
to
you.
A
The
important
part
is
really
from
our
side
that
the
text
is
the
same
and
in
particular
the
goal
behind
this
is
we
want
to
make
sure
that,
when
a
user
clicks
on
a
search
result
that
they're
not
surprised
by
the
content
there,
that
they
really
kind
of
know
what
what
is
coming,
what
to
expect
if
you
were
starting
a
new
website
today,
what
technology
would
you
use
that's
best
for
crawling
indexing
and
ranking
what
technology
probably
html?
I
don't
know
I
mean
what
what
do
you
make
websites
out
of
and
like
where?
A
Where
do
you
start
counting
where
the
technology
comes
in,
I
I
think
that's
really
hard
to
say
I
I
don't
know,
I
think
if
I
were
starting
out
with
a
new
website
and
wanted
to
create
something
new,
I
would
I
would
try
some
new
technologies
out
and
see
see
how
they
work.
It
also
kind
of
depends
on
what
what
kind
of
website
it
would
be
if
it's
something
that
needs
to
be
interactive,
then
obviously
you'd
want
to
look
into
some
of
the
more
modern
formats,
maybe
even
a
javascript,
based
framework.
A
If
you
need
something
to
just
display
content,
if
you
wanted
to
write
the
code
yourself,
maybe
using
amp
would
be
an
option
there
to
make
really
fast
pages.
If
you
just
want
to
get
on
with
writing
content,
you
don't
have
time
to
actually
figure
out
all
of
the
technical
details,
probably
using
a
cms.
A
Something
like
wordpress
is
a
good
approach
and
some
of
these
systems
you
can
combine
as
well
I
I
know
there
are
plugins
for
wordpress
that
will
make
amp
pages
out
of
your
site,
so
you
could
have
both
of
these.
At
the
same
time,
I
don't
know
so
much
how
you
would
combine
wordpress
and
javascript
sites,
but
I'm
sure
there
are
plugins
for
that
too,
but
I,
I
think,
kind
of
the
the
essence
of
the
the
answer
is.
A
There
are
many
different
ways
to
to
make
websites
nowadays
and
luckily
most
of
these
technologies,
they
just
work
well
in
search
by
default,
so
finding
a
technology
that
works
well
for
you
that
works
well
for
the
people
that
you're
working
together
with
who
can
help
you
to
get
things
set
up.
Who
can
help
you
solve
kind
of
the
the
hurdles
that
come
along
the
way
with
any
kind
of
new
website
or
business
that
you
roll
out?
I
think
that's
kind
of
what
you
should
be
watching
out
for.
A
When
setting
up
a
data
studio
report
using
the
recommended,
google
template
there's
a
huge
discrepancy
between
metrics
reflected
in
search
console
and
the
data
studio
report,
impressions,
clicks,
etc.
Why
is
that?
And
what
is
the
solution?
I
have
absolutely
no
idea
sorry.
So
this
is
something
where
I
I
guess.
Internally,
I
defer
to
daniel
who's.
A
Who's
worked
on
a
lot
of
the
analytics
and
data
studio
side,
who
might
know
a
little
bit
more
on
this,
but
another
approach
would
be
just
to
check
out
in
in
the
webmaster
help
forum
and
see
what
folks
there
are
saying,
because
the
data
studio
reporting
for
search
console
data
is
something
that
a
lot
of
people
do.
So,
I'm
pretty
sure
there
are
people
who
can
help
you
to
kind
of
get
that
figured
out
too.
A
I
inherited
a
website
client
that
has
a
bit
of
jumbled
url
naming
structure
about
half
the
pages
are
listed
as
domainname.com
top
level
service.
Slash
specific
page
and
another
half
are
just
labeled
with
slash
specific
page.
These
pages
are
mixed
so
that
one
top
level
page
has
a
mix
of
both
naming
structures.
Does
this
confuse
googlebot
when
it's
crawling
the
site
should
the
naming
be
consistent
throughout?
A
If
I
need
to
change
the
naming,
I
would
set
up
301
redirects,
I'm
always
reluctant
to
rename
urls.
But
of
course,
if
I
thought
my
client
could
get
more
traffic,
then
maybe
you
do
that.
So
from
our
point
of
view,
both
of
these
structures
work.
A
It's
not
that
you
need
to
have
a
consistent
structure
within
your
website,
but
essentially
we
need
to
have
consistent,
stable
urls
for
your
content
and
if
you
find
those
stable
urls
for
your
content,
if
they're
not
changing
all
the
time,
if
you
don't
have
the
content
on
multiple
urls,
the
same
pieces
of
content,
then
essentially
we
can
crawl
and
index
that
site
normally.
So,
from
a
practical
point
of
view,
just
for
seo
reasons,
you
don't
need
to
make
any
changes
here.
A
My
my
suggestion,
however,
would
be
to
try
to
get
this
cleaned
up
a
little
bit,
primarily
so
that
you
can
track
things
better.
So
in
search
console,
you
can
look
at
things
on
a
sub
sub
directory
level
in
analytics.
You
can
also
kind
of
drill
down
into
individual
subdirectories,
and
if
you
have
a
clearer
structure
on
your
website,
then
it's
a
little
bit
easier
to
figure
out.
Okay,
is
this
a
product
page
or
category
page
or
a
blog
post
or
news
article
or
what?
What
is
it
specifically
and
that's
kind
of
the
direction?
A
A
I
have
two
news
sites.
I
post
the
same
content
on
each
one,
but
only
one
of
the
two
appears
on
top
stories.
Why?
I
I
don't
know
why,
but
at
the
same
time,
if
you're
posting
the
same
content
on
both
of
these
sites,
why
should
both
of
them
appear
in
top
stories?
If
it
seems
like?
We
should
pick
one
of
these
and
show
it
there
and
not
both
of
them.
A
But
I
I
don't
know
what
the
specifics
are
for
top
stories
ranking
and
why
and
when
we
would
show
individual
ones
there.
Sometimes
posting
the
same
content
to
two
individual
sites
doesn't
mean
that
you're
doing
exactly
the
same
thing,
but
rather
maybe
one
side
is
really
seen
as
being
critical
and
important,
and
the
other
is
something
completely
new
that
you
started
off
with
so
just
because
you're
posting
the
same
piece
of
content
to
both
of
these
sites
individually
doesn't
mean
that
that
piece
of
content
will
be
equivalent
on
both
of
those
locations.
A
A
A
So
I,
from
from
my
point
of
view,
I
I
would
definitely
go
in
that
direction.
Essentially,
when
it
comes
to
ranking,
we
don't
count
the
number
of
words
on
a
page.
So
it's
not
the
case
that
you
need
to
fill
your
page
with
a
long
essay
of
thousands
of
words
just
so
that
we
understand.
Oh,
this
is
a
an
apple
pie
recipe.
A
Essentially,
we
look
at
a
variety
of
different
factors
for
understanding
the
content
on
the
page.
You
can
use
things
like
structured
data
to
help
us
understand
that
automatically
as
well,
and
with
that
you
can
also
make
really
short
pages
that
rank
really
well
in
the
search
results.
So
that's
something
where
there's
no
kind
of
trick
to
ranking,
and
certainly
it's
not
the
case
that
you
need
to
fill
your
pages
with
tons
of
text
that
nobody's
really
interested
in.
A
I
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
this
initially
started
with
the
recipe
sites
having
a
lot
of
text
there.
I
suspect
at
some
point
it
has
become
kind
of
self-sustaining
and
that
people
see
these
sites
sometimes
ranking
while
in
search
and
saying
oh
well,
if
this
other
site
is
doing
this
kind
of
big
background
story
on
the
history
of
apple
pie,
then
I
also
need
to
add
a
big
background
story
for
my
apple
pie,
recipe,
and
probably
that's
not
the
case.
A
What
are
the
best
google
analytics
metrics
for
tracking
to
track
for
deciding
using
a
b
testing
what
to
place
on
the
top
of
the
website's
page?
I
have
photography
websites
in
mind
so
comparing
things
like
slideshows
grids
of
images,
single
images
with
text,
etc.
I
really
don't
know
how
you
would
best
compare
this
with
google
analytics.
I
would
ask
someone
from
the
google
analytics
team
or
check
in
with
their
help
forum
to
try
to
find
out
a
little
bit
more.
A
Kind
of
awkward
that
it's
there's
not
so
many
people
joining
in,
I
I
hope,
there's
nothing
blocking
from
the
meat
side,
but
I
guess
we'll
find
out
when
I
check
twitter.
A
Okay
hope
that
doesn't
mess
things
up
more
worry.
A
A
A
I
think
that
would
be
awkward
anyway.
Back
back
to
the
more
important
question
of
images.
I
I
double
checked
our
our
public
documentation
for
image
search
and
we
don't
have
avif
images
listed
there
at
the
moment.
So
I
don't
know
if
we
would
support
that.
My
feeling
is.
A
We
wouldn't
support
that
at
the
moment
for
image,
search
with
regards
to
googlebot
and
kind
of
the
evergreen
side
of
googlebot,
that's
slightly
different
there,
so
in
particular,
when
it
comes
to
rendering
a
page,
then
we
would
essentially
have
googlebot
and
kind
of
the
evergreen
setup,
which
probably
would
support
avif.
A
The
the
thing
I
would
watch
out
for
with
all
of
these
modern
formats
is
that
not
all
browsers
support
the
modern
formats
yet
and
with
that
you
always
have
to
have
that
backup
set
up
anyway,
where
you
have,
I
think,
the
the
picture
element
in
your
html
with
the
different
image
urls
listed
there,
which
you
would
use
for
responsive
images,
but
you
can
also
use
for
different
image
formats,
so
essentially
you'd
always
have
that
backup
there
anyway.
A
A
When
google
announced
page-based
indexing
the
example
it
provided,
an
announcement
showed
a
featured
snippet
result.
Do
you
know
of
both
featured
snippets
and
the
core
results
in
the
10?
Blue
links
will
benefit
from
passage-based
indexing,
or
will
it
just
result
in
better
answers
for
featured
snippets?
We
haven't
heard
much
on
that
front.
I
honestly
don't
know
so
my
kind
of
taking
a
step
back
and
just
guessing
at
this.
A
With
with
my
internal
information,
usually
what
happens
with
these
things
is
we
will
roll
them
out
in
in
one
particular
place
experiment
a
bit
to
find
out
how
to
best
implement
these,
how
they
best
work
and
then
find
ways
to
roll
that
out
a
little
bit
more
broadly,
so
it
might
be
that
we
start
showing
these
in
the
featured
snippets.
First,
because
I
don't
know,
we
showed
that
example,
or
maybe
that's
the
clearest
way.
A
We
can
check
this
and
then
at
some
point
we
start
showing
them
more
in
the
normal
search
results
as
well.
The
other
thing
to
keep
in
mind
is
that
the
name
is
a
little
bit
confusing.
It's
like
we
called
it.
I
think
page-based
indexing,
but
it's
really
more
about
ranking
the
existing
pages.
It's
not
that
we
would
index
something
different.
It's
just
that.
We
would
kind
of
understand
these
pages.
A
These
passages
a
little
bit
better
and
be
able
to
pull
those
out
and
show
them
a
little
bit
better
in
in
the
search
results
and
generally
be
able
to
rank
those
pages
a
little
bit
better,
so
kind
of
a
few
things
coming
together
there,
but
again
kind
of
like
with
all
of
these
newer
changes
in
search.
A
A
A
We
essentially
see
those
pages
as
individual
or
those
urls
as
identifiers
for
those
individual
pages,
and
if
we
find
a
link
pointing
there,
we
will
crawl
it
and
try
to
index
it.
If
we
find
a
link
to
the
higher
level
directory
and
it
returns
404,
then
that
url
is
just
not
indexed.
It's
not
that
everything
below
that
url
is
not
indexed.
It's
just
that
particular
url
is
not
indexed,
so
it's
perfectly
fine
not
to
have
all
sub-directories
return
content
by
default.
A
One
of
the
things
I
I
would
watch
out
for
here,
though,
is
if
you
have
a
plugin
that
creates
the
breadcrumb
markup
for
your
pages,
then
make
sure
it
doesn't
just
blindly
link
to
your
subdirectory
level
parts
of
your
website
without
those
pages
actually
existing,
because
if
you
want
breadcrumb
markup
to
appear
in
your
search
results,
we
need
to
know
that
those
breadcrumbs
actually
lead
somewhere.
A
A
A
Should
we
make
the
headings
of
all
components
as
h2,
or
can
we
make
h2
h3
freely,
according
to
the
importance
of
the
components
and
keywords,
can
this
make
it
hard
for
google
to
understand
your
page
assuming
there's
an
h3?
There
must
be
a
parent
h2,
so
google
is
not
picky
and
doesn't
expect
a
completely
clear
heading
kind
of
structure
within
your
website,
so
sometimes
you'll
have
an
h3
and
not
an
h2.
A
Sometimes
you'll
have
two
h1s
on
a
page
all
of
these
things
they
just
happen
on
the
web,
and
we
have
to
deal
with
that
and
it's
not
the
case
that
there's
any
advantage
of
having
a
clearly
structured
headings
on
on
your
site.
It's
not
the
case
that
there's
a
disadvantage.
A
If
you
don't
have
that,
I
think
it
makes
sense
for
accessibility
reasons
to
have
a
clearly
structured
heading
set
on
your
page,
but
for
seo
it
doesn't
really
matter
so
with
with
that
in
mind,
if
you
have
individual
parts
of
your
site
separated-
and
you
have
clear
headings
for
those
individual
parts,
then
that
makes
perfect
sense.
A
A
So
that's
kind
of
the
the
one
thing
I
would
watch
out
for
when
a
site
is
not
updated
regularly.
Google
takes
longer
to
discover
new
urls.
Two
three
days
can
be
very
relevant.
To
be
able
to
show
in
discover
submitting
by
new
url
in
search
console
is
useful
for
many
small
sites.
I
definitely
agree
there,
that's
it.
Like
I
mentioned
way
in
the
beginning,
I
think
we
should
be
able
to
pick
these
up
a
little
bit
better
on
our
side
too.
A
You
said
duplicate
content
first
gets
index
and
then
the
content
on
call
is
processed
in
the
recent
search
of
the
record.
Gary
was
saying
that,
while
rendering
the
system
processes
the
canonical
tag
for
duplicate
content,
can
you
please
confirm
what
is
the
real
process?
Will
duplicate
content
git
index?
First
or
not?
A
A
So
from
that
point
of
view,
I
don't
think
it
it's
really
something
that
you
can
rely
on
either
way
where
you
say
oh
well,
my
page
will
always
be
indexed
like
this
first
and
then
it's
indexed
like
this.
Sometimes
we
can
follow
a
canonical
link
directly
and
just
focus
on
the
destination
page
and
have
that
indexed
immediately.
A
Sometimes
we
can't
focus
on
the
destination
page
that
quickly,
so
we
first
process
kind
of
the
origin
page.
So
it
kind
of
depends
on
on
the
individual
circumstances
of
of
a
site.
A
Is
there
any
reason
that
images
and
image
packs
featured
snippets
and
knowledge
panels
register
an
impression
and
search
console
for
web
search?
Those
images
first
link
to
google
images
and
not
directly
to
publisher
sites
for
google's
own
documentation.
Only
links
leading
outside
of
the
search
results
should
register
as
an
impression
these
images
can
really
throw
off
the
reporting
for
many
sites
and
cause
a
lot
of
confusion
with
site
owners
yeah.
A
I
I
don't
know
occasionally
this
this
question
comes
up,
but
I
mean
from
from
our
point
of
view,
we
would
essentially
see
these
links
as
as
links
to
a
site
kind
of
like
how
an
image
search
when
you
click
on
an
image
to
expand
it.
We
would
also
see
that
there,
so
that's
something
where
I,
I
think,
because
of
the
kind
of
intermediate
step
there,
where
the
image
is
first
shown
in
a
preview
and
kind
of
expanded
there.
A
That
sometimes
throws
things
off
a
little
bit
with
regards
to
how
you
would
count
that,
because
in
in
search
console,
we
don't
have
this
notion
of
it's
like
you
clicked
on
it,
but
it's
you're,
looking
at
a
larger
preview
first
and
then
you're
clicking
to
again
to
go
to
the
site
itself.
A
I
don't
know,
I
guess
the
other
part
of
the
question
in
general
is:
should
we
be
counting
these
at
all
in
web
search,
or
should
we
be
essentially
dropping
all
image
links
that
are
shown
in
web
search?
And
I
don't
know
that
feels
like
a
pretty
drastic
step
if
we
were
to
go
down
that
route,
but
maybe
that's
something
to
discuss
with
the
search
console
team
again,
I
see
many
discussions
about
people
buying
expired
domains
to
take
advantage
of
links
associated
with
the
expired
domains.
A
A
Now
I
don't
know
these.
These
discussions
have
been
around
since,
like
the
beginning,
when
domain
names
started
expiring
and
people
try
to
keep,
I
don't
know.
I
keep
using
some
that
had
some
good
history
and
trying
to
build
things
there
I
think
initially,
probably
just
to
to
keep
the
name
alive
and
then
at
some
point
for
seo
reasons
of
well
as
well,
of
course,
and
our
systems
try
to
understand
what
to
do
here
and
for
the
most
part.
I
think
we
we
get
this
right.
A
A
So
kind
of
domain
name
changes,
ownership
and
those
are
all
normal
situations,
and
it's
not
the
case
that
google
should
go
in
there
and
say:
oh
like
we
need
to
be
extra
cautious
here,
so
finding
those
situations
where
essentially
people
are
trying
to
abuse
the
system
by
picking
up
expired
domains
that
are
totally
unrelated
to
what
they've
been
working
on
and
hoping
to
get
them
to
rank
well
in
search.
That's
that's
something.
That's
sometimes
a
bit
tricky
and
we
have
a
lot
of
practice
with
that.
A
I
don't
think
we
always
get
it
right,
but
at
least
the
the
many
cases
I've
looked
into
there
seems
to
be
working
out.
Okay,
but
anyway,
this
this
has
been
around.
I
think,
will
be
continue
to
be
around
as
long
as
people
can
change,
ownership
and
kind
of
reuse.
Existing
domain
names,
it's
kind
of
a
part
of
the
web.
B
All
right,
so,
let's
go
back
to
the
passage
indexing
since
it
didn't
launch
and
nobody
knows
what's
really
going
to
happen.
So
can
we
speculate
a
little
bit
more
about
it?
So
last
I
think
last
week
and
the
week
before
you
said
that
passage
indexing
is
not
really
about
a
webmaster
seo
or
whatever
you
want
to
call
these
people
today.
It's
not
about
them
changing
their
content,
because
you
know,
generally,
you
want
to
make
sure
your
content
is
structured
in
a
good
way.
B
You
want
to
make
sure
the
page
is
structured
in
a
nice
way.
It's
more
about
google
being
able
to
understand
content
on
a
page.
That's
not
structured!
Well,
so
it
sounds
like
you
said:
it's
not
really
to
optimize
for
that
point
because
google's
getting
better
with
passage,
indexing
or
ranking,
with
the
ability
to
understand
the
page.
B
That's
not
so
structured
well
on
google
videos
and
say
all
right
this
section
on
this
page,
even
though
it
doesn't
have
a
headline
or
doesn't
have
a
certain
content
block
that
we
can
understand
that
this
is
about
x,
y
and
z.
Now
we
can
understand
that
this
specific
section
is
about
this
topic,
so
is
that
a
better
way
to
look
at
it,
as
opposed
to
seos
going
about
saying
hey
now,
I
need
to
go
ahead
and
make
sure
my
page
is
instead
of
like
a
lot
of
people.
B
Have
these
like
hub
pages,
where
they
have
a
topic
about,
let's
say
seo
and
then
seo
talks
about
amp
and
mobile
first
and
yada
yada,
so
that
hub
page
might
have
a
little
sn
subsection
about
mobile,
first
indexing
and
amp
and
so
forth.
So
you
might
be
able
to
rank
that
top
level
page
for
with
passage
indexing
for
amp
for
search
on
amp,
as
opposed
to
the
deeper
level
page.
B
So
you
can
see
how
seos
are
kind
of
thinking
about
this
yeah.
I
guess
two-part
question
is
one
is:
are
you
going
to
rank
that
top
level
page
as
opposed
to
the
deeper
level
page?
I
assume
that
probably
would
not
be
the
intent
of
this
and
two
should
seos
really
do
nothing
based
on
what
we
just
discussed.
A
A
So
I
I'm
not
worried
that
seos
will
sit
back
and
just
start
doing
nothing
at
some
point.
I
I
think
they're
super
creative
and
the
super
smart
people
sometimes
yeah,
but
with
regards
to
kind
of
focusing
on
a
higher
level
page
versus
focusing
on
the
individual
kind
of
more
detailed
pages.
I
I
think
that's
something
that
you,
you
kind
of
always
need
to
look
into
and
need
to
consider.
Does
it
make
sense
or
does
it
make?
Does
it
not
make
that
much
sense?
A
It's
similar
on
e-commerce.
When
you
have
a
category
page
and
you
have
a
product
page,
you
could
optimize
that
pro
that
category
page,
to
kind
of
be
a
little
bit
more
focused
on
the
individual
products
that
you're
you're
trying
to
sell,
and
that
could
result
in
that
category
page
ranking
a
little
bit
better
for
those
products
as
well.
A
Is
that
what
you
want
to
achieve?
Or
do
you
need
people
to
go
to
your
product
page,
that's
something
where
like,
depending
on
your
goals
and
what
what
you
want
to
achieve
with
your
page,
you
can
kind
of
tweak
things
in
either
direction
in
general,
if
you
have
fewer
pages
and
you
make
those
pages
stronger,
I
think
that's
generally
a
good
strategy.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
and
I
mean
one
way
to
kind
of
look
at
this
or
to
play
with
this.
A
little
bit
is
to
just
do
a
b
testing
and
take
some
categories
where
you
get
enough
traffic
so
that
you
can
measure
differences
and
kind
of
build
out
those
category
pages
or
those
those
higher
level
pages
a
little
bit
more
and
see
if
that
changes
anything
for
you.
A
If
people
end
up
going
to
those
higher
level
pages
more
and
if
they
go
to
those
higher
level
pages
more,
are
they
doing
whatever
that
you
want
them
to
do
on
your
website
or
have
have
they
changed
their
behavior
a
little
bit
and
like
testing?
These
kind
of
things,
I
think
is,
is
something
that
you
almost
need
to
do,
because
there's
no
definitive
answer
that
says,
like
one
really
long
page,
is
going
to
be
better
than
a
bunch
of
short
pages.
B
Right
I
mean
for
users,
I
mean
obviously
depends
on
the
user,
but
if
somebody's
looking
for
a
specific
topic
about
again
back
to-
let's
say
just
amp
around
the
seo
topic,
how
important
is
am
for
seo?
They
might
not
want
to
try
to
find
on
the
page
where
that
section
starts
and
scroll
through
it.
B
Of
course,
I
assume
google
could
be
looking
into
that
anchor
feature
with
the
modern
browsers
the
target
down
to
the
page
and
highlight,
but
it
just
seems
I
don't
know
it
just
doesn't
seem
what
a
normal
user
would
expect
on.
I
guess
it
depends.
You
have
to
test
it.
Of
course,
so
it
used
to
be
like
seos
would
build
out
as
many
deep
level
pages
as
possible
panda
came
out
and
that,
like
consolidate,
all
your
content
make
higher
level
quality
pages
less
lower
quality
pages
and
quality
is
very
effect.
B
Of
course,
you
can
have
very
short
content
that
answers
the
question
that
users
love,
so
it
keeps
seems
like
the
focus
again
still
goes
to
making
these
higher
level
pages.
That
help
answer
the
question
on
a
like.
You
said
less
pages
more
less
pages,
more
building
up
those
individual
pages
as
opposed
to
deeper
level
pages,
with
less
signals
pointing
to
it
now
that
seems
like
an
seo
answer
as
opposed
to
a
necessary
user
answer.
A
Yeah
I
mean
you,
you
kind
of
have
to
balance
that,
and
it's
it's
probably
also
something
where
marketing
in
general
plays
a
role
where
I
don't
know.
If
you
think
back,
I
don't
know
how
many
years
like
10
years,
probably
when
the
fad
of
the
really
long
kind
of
marketing
landing
pages
came
up.
That's
something
where
lots
of
sites
did
these
kind
of
a
b
tests
where
they
did
short
marketing
landing
pages
and
really
long
marketing
landing
pages,
and
sometimes
the
long
ones
performed
better
someone's.
A
Okay,
wow,
I
think,
for
some
reason
people
are
joining
today,
but
whatever
it
happens,
let
me
see
if
any
new
questions
showed
up.
Otherwise
anything
else
from
any
of
you
is
definitely
welcome.
A
C
Yeah
my
question
is
in
regards
to
exact,
match
urls.
This
is
I
work
with
a
very
large
number
of
small
businesses
in
the
uk,
and
so
this
is
a
question
that
we
have
very
often
so
I'd
like
to
hear
your
point
of
view
as
if
this
is
sustainable.
If
this
is.
C
Within
best
practices,
so
we
have
a
client
who
against
without
telling
us,
he
purchased
a
large
number
of
urls,
which
is
location
and
product,
for
example,
flowers,
burgess,
hill
or
flowers.
Here
with
heath,
which
is
pretty
much
where
he's
located
so.
C
What
is
this?
A
good
strategy?
Is
this
against
practices,
one
because
I'm
a
little
bit
confused
in
regards
to
this
client
who
suddenly,
this
morning,
sent
us
an
email
saying
I
just
purchased,
really
happy.
He
said
I
just
purchased
15
new
urls
and
I'm
like
right.
A
Yeah,
so
usually
there
are
a
few
things
that
come
into
play
with,
with
these
kind
of
exact
match
domains
on.
On
the
one
hand,
we
may
see
them
as
doorway
pages.
If
you
have
a
lot
of
these
domains
leading
to
the
same
content,
then
it's
possible
that
we
will
just
say:
oh,
we
will
just
index
your
primary
content
and
drop
those
doorway
pages.
A
So
it's
not
that
there
would
be
a
disadvantage
of
having
those
it's
more
that
well,
you
don't
have
any
big
advantage
of
using
those.
That's,
I
think,
the
the
primary
aspect
that
comes
into
play
there.
The
other
thing
is
that
sometimes
these
kind
of
domains
can
make
sense
for
non-seo
reasons.
For
example,
if
you're
doing
local
marketing
campaigns,
you
might
have
kind
of
an
easy
to
remember
domain
name
that
you
can
point
people
at
you
can
make
a
sign
with
these.
All
of
these
things
and
people
can
go
there.
A
They
get
redirected
to
your
main
site
and
that's
essentially
fine.
So
I,
I
think
yeah
those
are
kind
of
the
the
primary
aspects
there
with
regards
to
doorway
sites
or
doorway
pages.
Usually
it's
something
where
the
amount
of
pages
or
the
amount
of
doorway
sites
that
you're
creating
is
really
significant.
A
If
you're
talking
about
10
15
sites,
then
I
I
don't
think
even
if
the
web
spam
team
looked
at
that
manually,
they
would
say
this
is
a
big
problem.
If
you're
talking
about
100
domains
and
that's
something
where
the
website
team
might
kind
of
look
into
a
little
bit
closer
and
say
what
is
exactly
is
happening
here.
A
I've
seen
cases
where
there
are,
I
don't
know,
10
000
domain
names
that
were
involved
in
this
kind
of
a
setup
and
then
that's
really
something
where
you
spend
a
significant
amount
of
money
on
all
of
these
domains
to
keep
them
running.
And
if
the
web
spam
team
says.
Oh,
we
will
just
index
one
of
these
and
that's
a
really
big
problem.
But
if
you're
talking
about
10
15
domain
names,
then
it's
probably
not
an
ideal
investment,
but
it's
still
not
something
where
I'd
say
it's
like
you're
you're
completely
throwing
money
out
the
window.
A
Sometimes
it
can
make
sense,
even
just
for
non-seo
reasons,
brilliant.
Thank
you
sure.
All
right,
let
me
take
a
break
here.
I
I
hope
you
all
found
this
useful
and
maybe
we'll
have
more
watchers
on
the
recording
afterwards,
maybe
we'll
have
more
people
join
in
the
next
hangout
on
friday.
I
think
the
next
one
is
lined
up,
but
thank
you
all
for
joining
in.
Thank
you
all
for
submitting
questions
and
for
asking
questions,
and
I
wish
you
all
a
great
day
until
next
time
bye.