►
From YouTube: English Google SEO office-hours from October 27, 2020
Description
This is a recording of the Google SEO office-hours hangout from October 27, 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
All
right
welcome
everyone
to
today's
webmaster
central
office
hours
hangout.
My
name
is
john
mueller.
I
am
a
webmaster
trends
analyst
at
google
in
switzerland
and
part
of
what
we
do
are
these
office
hour
hangouts,
where
people
can
join
in
and
ask
their
questions
around
their
website
and
web
search.
A
bunch
of
stuff
is
submitted
already,
but
if
any
of
you
want
to
get
started,
feel
free
to
jump
on
in
now,.
B
I
have
a
question:
I
have
a
question
about
dynamically
loading
content,
so
if
I
have
a
really
long
page
like
a
long
article,
so
it's
gonna
have
a
lot
of
text
images
and
some
ads
on
there
as
well.
Are
there
any
best
practices
for
dynamically
loading
that
with
like
using
javascript
while
making
sure
that
google
can
properly
crawl
and
render
that
content?
A
Yeah,
I
I
guess
this
kind
of
goes
into
the
the
topic
of
lazy
loading
and
infinite
scroll
in
in
that
regard.
So
that's
something
where
I
guess.
First
of
all,
you
kind
of
have
to
make
a
decision
on
whether
or
not
you
want
that
content
indexed
or
if
it's
like
critical
for
your
site
to
have
that
content
indexed
or
not.
A
A
But
if
you
do
decide
that
it
does
need
to
be
indexed,
we
have
in
the
developer,
documentation
some
information
on
how
to
implement
lazy
loading
in
a
way
that
works
well
for
search,
and
I
would
just
double
check
that.
So
I
think
in
general,
what
what
happens
when
we
render
the
page
to
process
the
javascript.
A
We
render
it
with
a
fairly
high
viewport
and
basically
we
we
see
what
what
gets
loaded
into
that
viewport
and
when
we
see
that
everything
is
finished
loading
we
use
that
for
indexing,
whereas
if
you
have
code
on
your
page,
that
watches
out
for
specific
events
that
take
place
like
someone
is
scrolling
down
to
a
certain
position
on
the
page
or
clicking
a
read
more
button,
then
probably
those
are
things
that
won't
get
triggered.
A
C
B
So
I
reviewed
the
lazy
loaded
documentation
on
it
and
it
suggests
basically
using
pagination.
So
I
guess
the
better
question
would
be.
Is
there
any
way
to
do
that
and
have
the
content
all
be
able
to
be
indexed
without
using
pagination.
A
Yeah,
I
I
mean,
if
you
want
to
take
the
content
from
kind
of
multiple
pages
and
I'll,
have
it
on
one
page:
you'd
almost
need
to
load
that
in
the
initial
page
load.
Okay,
so
that's
something
yeah,
it's
kind
of
hard
to
to
work
around
that.
B
Okay,
okay
and
then
you
mentioned
that
it
will
just
crawl
using
a
really
little
tall
viewport.
So
does
that
mean
that
if
the
content
like
is
so
long
that
exceeds
what
the
google
box
viewport
would
be,
then
the
content
left
out
at
the
bottom
would
just
not
be
indexed.
A
No,
it's
not
it's
not
that
it
wouldn't
be
indexed.
It's
just
that
we
wouldn't
use
that
to
trigger
kind
of
additional
loading.
So
I
think
I
think
it
uses
like
the
what
is
it
viewport
observer
or
something
something
like
that.
I
forgot
what
the
actual
name
was
to
kind
of
trigger
the
the
code
on
the
page
to
say
the
page
is
now
this
this
tall
and
if,
if
your
code
is
waiting
for
a
sign
that
the
page
is
now
like
a
little
bit
longer
than
that,
then
that's
something
we
won't
trigger.
A
B
Okay,
okay,
so
if
okay,
so
if
it
won't,
if
the
trigger
doesn't
fire,
then
essentially
that
content
also
wouldn't
be
indexed.
I
see
okay
and
what's
the
best
way
to
check
if
the
content
is
being
properly
indexed,
I
I
have
been
using
the
mobile
friendly
tool.
I
don't
know
if
there
are
any
better
ways
to
do
it.
B
You
can't
see
the
full
size
of
the
page
in
the
screenshot,
so
I'm
not
super
clear
if
the
content
is
being
indexed
like
right
now,
I
have
all
the
content
in
a
javascript
variable
on
the
page,
which
I
do
see
it's
on
the
page
source,
and
I
do
see
it
when
I
test
it
with
the
mobile
friendly
tool,
but
I
can't
tell
if
that
means
that
googlebot
is
actually
reading
the
you
know
the
content
inside
the
javascript
variable
or
if
it
kind
of,
ignores
it
yeah.
A
A
With
the
testing
tools,
you
can
use
inspect
url
to
look
at
the
fully
rendered
html
page,
but
it's
sometimes
a
bit
tricky,
especially
if
you
have
a
code
in
in
javascript
as
well
as
on
the
page
like.
What
actually
are
you
finding
there
so
usually
waiting
until
one
of
those
pages
is
indexed
and
then
just
double
checking
if
it
actually
goes
down
that
far
is,
is
kind
of
the.
B
Okay,
so
I
actually
did
try
that
and
I
get
kind
of
mixed
results
because
it
seems
like
I
like.
I
can
see
where
the
text
stops
appearing
in
the
search
results
so
approximately
where
the
page
might
not
be
indexed
anymore.
But
then
there
are
images
below
that
point
in
the
page
that
I
can
find
if
I
do
the
site
command,
search
on
google
image
search
like
what
would
be
the
possible
explanations
for
an
image
being
indexed
lower
down
on
the
page.
But
the
text
in
that
same
area
not
being
indexed.
A
I
don't
know
hard
hard
to
say
it
kind
of
depends
on
on
how
you
have
things
set
up
on
your
site.
So
one
of
the
differences
also
with
regards
to
images
and
the
textual
content
is
we.
We
tend
not
to
re-index
images
that
frequently
so
if,
for
example,
one
time
out
of
ten,
we
can
crawl
the
page
and
find
the
link
to
the
image
and
then
we'll
pick
up
that
image
and
put
it
into
image
search.
A
C
A
B
D
John,
I
have
one
regarding
expired
products
on
e-commerce
websites,
so
we're
working
with
the
shop
that
manufactures
its
own
products.
It's
a
jewelry
shop
products
are
unique.
They
make
one
of
each
they
sold
out,
sell
out
and
then
that's
gone.
They
don't
usually
make
the
same
products
again.
They
might
make
similar
products,
but
not
not
the
identical
same
product.
The
thing
is
those
once
they
go
out
of
stock.
They
still
do
seem
to
get
a
lot
of
traffic
from
google
images.
D
So
with
jewelry
people
are
looking
a
lot
in
google
images
and
it's
kind
of
an
emotional
purchase.
They
they
click
on
it
just
to
just
because
they
really
like
what
they
see
and
the
site
employs
like
a
a
section
that
this
is
not
in
stock
anymore.
Here
are
very
similar
products
that
you
might
want
to
purchase.
D
So
is
it
kind
of
a
good
idea
to
to
keep
those
products,
even
if
they're
out
of
stock,
in
this
case,
to
keep
them
active,
so
they
still
get
traffic
from
google
images
rather
than
either
for
forwarding
them
or
redirecting
them
to
the
something
else,
a
category
or
something
like
that?
Is
there
any
downside
to
that.
A
Yeah,
I
I
think
in
a
case
like
that,
where
these
these
are
kind
of
unique
products
and
the
representative
of
the
business
or
of
the
website.
Overall,
that
seems
like
something
that
I
would
try
to
keep
somehow,
and
that
could
be
that.
Maybe
you
have
like
an
archive
section
of
your
website
or
kind
of
similar
products
that
we've
sold
in
the
past
kind
of
thing
just
to
to
keep
that
kind
of
content
available,
so
that
people
can
browse
that
because
it
feels
like
it's
like
that.
A
With
regards
to
how
you
keep
that
index,
I
would
try
to
move
that
more
into
like
an
archive
section
or
kind
of
like.
I
don't
know
things
that
we've
done
in
the
past
references-
something
like
that,
rather
than
keeping
a
product
page
live
where
it
says
like
this
product
is
out
of
stock,
or
you
can't
buy
this
product
anymore,
and
it
was
like
a
one-time
thing
and
here's
a
photo
of
it
now,
because
those
kind
of
out-of-stock
or
not
available
pages
generally
tend
to
end
up
as
soft
404
pages.
D
Now
I
see
so
in
that
case
they
have
products
like
they've,
been
out
of
stock
for
a
year
or
two,
something
like
that
and
still
seem
to
be
indexed
and
are
getting
traffic.
Should
they
start
to
begin
to
think
about
restructuring
that
using
that
or
once
they
see
that
those
pages
start
to
get
de-indexed?
Maybe
that's
yeah.
A
I
mean
it's
with
soft
404s.
It's
sometimes
tricky
because,
obviously,
if
it
were,
if
there
were
a
clear
sign
saying
that
this
page
is
404,
then
we
would
just
be
able
to
drop
them
out
and
sometimes
or
in
general.
We
try
to
recognize
text
on
the
page.
That's
telling
us
well,
this
is
no
longer
available,
so
that
includes
things
like
search
results
where
it's
like
no
results
found
also
products
in
general,
where
it's
like
this
product
is
no
longer
available.
A
If
those
product
pages
are
created
in
a
way
that
don't
have
this
kind
of
like
not
available
text
on
it,
but
more
as
like.
We
sold
this
to
this
price
kind
of
thing.
Then
that
could
be
something
that
could
remain,
but
in
general,
if
it's
a
product
page
and
you
have
a
text
on
there
saying
this
is
not
available.
D
Right
well,
it's
currently
just
out
of
stock.
So
I
don't
know
if
that,
if
google
perceived
that
in
any
way,
yeah
and
it's
if
we
included
in
structure
markup
structure,
data
markup
and
it
shows
up-
you
know-
auto
stock.
I
think
that's
a
good
user
experience
as
well,
because
people
who
really
understand
it's
out
of
stock
and
don't
want
to
visit
it
fine,
but
people
who
might
want
to
see
similar
products.
They
can
go
in
and
and
see
it.
D
A
You
wouldn't
have
like
all
of
these
hundreds
or
thousands
of
other
pages
that
are
essentially
like.
If
people
go
there,
they
can't
buy
what
they
wanted
to
buy.
But
if,
if
we're
talking
about,
I
don't
know
20
20
30
pages,
then
it's
like
that
doesn't
really
matter
either
way.
But
if
these
are
really
thousands
of
pages
every
year
that
end
up
going
into
this
state,
then
that
feels
like
a
lost
opportunity.
D
And
in
cases
those
pages
do
remain
indexed.
Does
google
look
at?
Maybe
how
well
the
you
know
the
overall
user
experience?
Well,
how
easy
is
it
for
people
to
go
to
similar
products
or
something
like
that
if
they
see
a
product
out
of
stock,
how
the
design
and
everything
works
towards
still
recommending
them
a
very
similar
product
or
something
that
they
they
keep
the
user
on
the
side
and
satisfied
with
maybe
some
a
different
product
on
a
similar
price
that
looks.
A
I
don't
think
we'd
have
anything
direct
to
to
go
in
that
direction,
but
indirectly
that
that
might
be
something
where,
like
if
people
land
on
these
pages
and
they're
like
this,
is
terrible.
I
wanted
this,
but
I
can't
get
it
here
I'll
see
if
I
can
get
it
somewhere
else,
then
that's
something
where
it's
like.
You
end
up
kind
of
losing
that
potential
recommendation
from
someone.
D
Okay,
so
as
long
as
you
don't
frustrate
your
users
and
keep
them
satisfied,
that
should
be
kind
of
the
end
goal.
A
Yeah
yeah,
I
I'm
still,
I
don't
know
kind
of
cautious
about
the
the
approach
overall.
So
that's
something
where
I
like,
especially
depending
on
the
the
number
of
products
that
you're
talking
about.
I
would
tend
to
move
those
more
into
kind
of
like
a
persistent
gallery
or
references
type
section
just
to
make
it
clearer
to
people
and
also
to
make
those
images
a
little
bit
more.
D
Yeah
yeah,
that
makes
sense,
I'm
mainly
asking
since
I've
noticed
the
really
large,
like
fashion
retailers,
I'm
not
going
to
name
anyone,
but
the
the
the
really
large
ones
do
kind
of
keep
out
of
stock
products
for
seems
like
very
long
periods
of
time.
So
I
was
wondering
whether
that
there's
any
like
official
way
to
do
this
or
not
I'm
assuming
with
with
our
smaller.
This
is
a
smaller
shop,
so
a
few
hundreds
pro
few
hundred
products.
So
it's
easier
to
kind
of
create
that
kind
of
gallery,
but
with
very
large
retailers,
I'm
guessing.
A
Yeah,
I
mean,
I
think,
that's
something
also
where
some
sites
have
kind
of
policies
where
they
say
well,
we
we
try
to
keep
it
in
like
on
the
website
for
at
least
a
half
a
year,
and
then
afterwards
we
just
remove
it
kind
of
thing
and,
like
you,
you
can
play
around
with
different
variations
of
that
and
depending
on
what
kind
of
products
you
have,
what
what
people
are
searching
for.
It's
like
that's
something
where
you
can
get
some
value
out
of
it,
even
if
you
currently
don't
have
it
on
stock.
A
Maybe
you
have
it
in
a
different
color
or
like
a
different
brand
or
whatever.
Those
are
all
variations.
Yeah
cool
thanks,
cool
all
right,
so
I
have
britney's
question
on
top.
I
don't
know:
do
you
want
to
go
into
it
briefly,
or
should
I
just
read
it.
E
Sure
I
can
jump
in
so
we
did
a
domain
migration
at
the
beginning
of
august
with
pretty
much
entire
traffic
loss
in
the
past
few
weeks,
we
are
at
about
60
traffic
loss,
so
more
broadly
asking
for
updates
and
advice,
but
one
specific
question
I
have
is:
we've
been
working
on
a
cms
rewrite
that
would
allow
us
to
render
our
content
server
side
since
right
now
we
render
a
lot
of
our
content.
Client
side
we've
been
having
some
issues
with
cls.
E
So
I
was
wondering
if
you
had
thoughts
on
whether
this
is,
if
it's
too
risky
to
do
such
a
big
back,
end
change
right
now
or
if
we
should
just
be
full
steam
ahead
or
how
we
sort
of
make
these
decisions,
while
we're
in
the
stage
that
we
are.
A
Yeah
I
mean
it's,
it's
always
frustrating
to
hear
cases
like
that
where
essentially
domain
migration,
where
usually
they
kind
of
go
smoothly
or
it
just
doesn't
work
out
so
I've
I've
been
paying
the
engineering
teams
about
this
every
I
don't
know
pretty
much
every
week
just
to
make
sure
that
it
stays
top
of
mind,
but
I
I
can't
promise
anything
and
I
don't
know
what
what
the
final
state
there
will
be,
but
in
general,
with
regards
to
further
updates
on
the
website,
I
would
just
keep
working
on
it.
A
The
the
one
thing
I
would
not
do
is
another
migration
kind
of
change,
which
probably
you're
you're
kind
of
healed
from
that
anyway.
But
that's
that's
the
one
thing
I
would
try
to
avoid,
but
changes
within
the
website
that
that
seems
like
a
perfect
thing
to
do.
A
E
Okay,
I
don't
know
if
you
recall,
but
when
we
started
on
this
domain
migration
plan,
the
idea
was:
we
have
two
fairly
similar
products.
We
wanted
to
take
our
flagship
product,
get
it
on
the
domain
that
we
really
wanted
to
move
to
fresh.
We
thought
it
was
a
fresh
domain
and
then
take
a
weaker
product
and
merge
it
in
so
long
term.
We
are
hoping
to
stay
on
the
demand,
we're
on
we're,
obviously
hoping
to
see
some
more
recovery,
but
we're
also
hoping
to
merge
in
our
weaker
domain.
E
That
covers
a
similar
topic,
so
would
redirecting
rebuilding
pages
on
our
new
domain
and
redirecting
would
that
be
in
that
area
of
url
changes
that
you're
saying
we
should
be
wary
of.
I
think.
A
That
would
be
fine.
I'm
like
like
adding
more
content,
essentially
moving
some
further
content
from
another
site
in
there.
I
think
I
think
that
would
be
fine.
No,
I
don't
see
any
problems.
It's
it's
more
trickier.
If
you
take
your
your
top
pages
and
you
change
those
urls,
and
that
means
you,
like
change,
all
of
the
internal
linking
structure
of
the
website
that
that
gets
kind
of
tricky,
but
if
you're
adding
more
content.
E
Okay
and
one
more
question
I'll
sneak
in
so
technically
we're
still
on
that
period,
where
search
console
says
we
can
cancel
our
migration.
We
don't
want
to.
We
want
to
see
this
through,
but
we're
not.
You
know
we're
not
removing
any
possibilities
at
this
point,
since
this
is
having
such
a
dramatic
impact
on
our
business
and
ability
to
operate
yeah.
Do
you
have
any
thoughts
on
when
or
if
we
should
consider
reverting
the
domain
migration
or,
if
that,
just
at
this
point,
seems
as
scary
to
you
as
it
does
to
me.
A
Yeah
I
I
would
try
to
avoid
reverting,
because
that
I
in
general,
that
just
makes
it
trickier.
Because
then
it's
not
it's
not
so
much
that,
like
everything,
goes
back
to
the
old
domain
and
it
suddenly
just
becomes
just
as
visible
as
before.
It's
basically
you're
taking
the
current
state
and
then
moving
that
to
to
a
different
domain
and
you're
kind
of
moving
with
this
weird
mixed
state
at
the
moment.
So
I
I
don't
think
that
would
make
anything
better.
A
All
right,
let
me
go
through
some
of
the
other
questions.
I
wanted
to
get
your
thoughts
on
a
project
that
I'm
working
on.
I
am
separating
one
website
into
do
into
two
websites,
as
the
business
now
offers
two
totally
different
services.
A
So
far,
I've
replicated
replicated
the
pages
that
need
to
move
on
the
new
domain,
applied
the
rel
canonical
tag
to
those
pages
on
the
former
domain
to
the
new
location,
one
search
console
and
the
search
results
start
recognizing
the
new
location.
For
those
pages,
the
plan
is
to
apply
301
redirects,
and
let
me
see
where
this
is
going
long
question
is
there
anything
that
you
would
recommend
to
kind
of
minimize
the
risk
of
losing
damaging
visibility?
A
So,
in
general,
when
you
take
one
website,
you
split
it
off
into
two
websites:
it's
not
something
that
we
would
see
as
a
domain
migration,
because
you're
essentially
generating
a
new
state.
You
have
kind
of
the
the
previous
stage,
this
one
big
website
that
you
have
and
then
you're
generating
two
separate
websites
out
of
that.
A
So
it's
really
hard
to
say
ahead
of
time
what
what
the
final
state
will
be
with
regards
to
search,
but
in
general,
if
you
are
able
to
move
things
on
a
per
url
basis,
if
you're
able
to
kind
of
fix
the
internal
linking.
So
it
works
well
within
both
of
those
websites.
Then
that
seems
like
something
that
should
be
fairly
straightforward
and
I
think
the
approach
that
you're
taking
here,
where
you're
generating
these
two
websites
and
then
using
rel
canonical
to
kind
of
get
things
started
and
then
setting
up
301
redirects.
A
I
think
that's
perfectly
fine.
You
could
probably
also
just
do
the
the
redirects
from
the
start
and
just
saying
well,
these
are
separate
pages
and
they
moved
here
and
the
internal
linking
on
both
of
those
sites.
If
that's
okay,
then
that
should
just
work
out
fine
one
thing
I
would
recommend,
though,
just
in
general
with
regards
to
any
kind
of
move
like
this,
is
that
you
track
things
really
meticulously.
A
So
it's
like
really
keep
track
of
all
of
the
urls
that
you
have
before
double
check,
all
of
those
urls
afterwards
to
make
sure
that
they're
all
redirecting
appropriately.
So
that
you
don't
run
into
a
situation
where
you
move
some
urls,
but
you
forget
about
others
and
then
after
half
a
year
you
notice
oh
like.
Why
is
the
wrong
one
being
indexed?
A
A
How
does
google
crawl
podcasts
the
links
from
guest
podcasts
from
say,
spotify
makes
sense,
so
we
we
have.
I
guess
there
are
two
aspects
here.
One
is
we
show
some
podcasts
in
the
search
results
directly
and
that's
based
on
kind
of
the
the
ability
to
recognize
where
podcasts
are,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
help
center
content
on
that
which
gives
you
information
on
like
how
to
set
up
an
rss
feed
for
podcasts
how
to
make
sure
that
we
can
find
your
podcasts
all
of
those
things.
A
So
that's
kind
of
the
the
main
thing
I
would
say
with
regards
to
podcasts
and
the
other
is
of
course
the
angle
of
well.
Actually,
these
are
also
web
pages
as
well,
and
when
it
comes
to
web
pages,
you
can
treat
those
just
like
any
other
web
page.
The
thing
to
keep
in
mind
with
podcasts
in
particular,
when
they're
hosted
on
web
pages.
Is
we
don't
try
to
do
any
kind
of
text
analysis
on
a
podcast
file
to
recognize
what
you're
saying
within
the
podcast?
A
A
A
really
simple
way
to
do
that
is
just
to
host
the
the
transcript
of
your
podcast,
together
with
your
pages
with
the
link
to
the
individual
podcast
episodes,
for
example.
So
in
that
regards,
there's
nothing
really
tricky
around
podcasts.
It's
just
that
they're.
Those
two
angles
kind
of
like
the
podcasts
themselves
can
be
visible
and
your
web
pages
can
be
visible
in
search.
A
By
google
standards,
our
pagination
pages
have
become
canonical
by
themselves,
but
the
problem
is
that
sometimes
the
next
pages
get
impressed
and
clicked,
and
now
we
doubt
whether
the
pages
should
be
canonical
to
the
first
page
or
have
the
current
status.
What
should
we
do
to
prevent
the
next
pages
from
being
indexed,
we've
written
a
description
for
the
first
page
and
send
the
faq
to
google
with
a
schema,
but
is
there
a
way
that
the
next
pages
will
not
be
displayed
in
the
search
results?
A
Good
question?
So
I
I
think
we
we
get
this
question
a
lot
and
it's
something
where
it
feels
like
they're
they're,
different
differences
of
opinion
with
regards
to
pagination,
and
I
I
think
one
way
to
look
at
it
is
to
consider
why
you're
setting
up
pagination
on
your
site.
A
So
if
you,
for
example,
if
you
have
an
e-commerce
site-
and
you
have
a
category
page
and
you
have
pagination
on
the
category
page,
then
one
of
the
goals
of
that
pagination
is
to
make
sure
that
the
individual
products
themselves
are
actually
findable.
A
So
you
can
go
to
page
two
page,
three
page
four
page
five,
and
then
you
see
the
link
to
individual
products
there
and
that
can
be
really
important
to
get
those
products
indexed.
On
the
other
hand,
it
might
be
that
you
have
all
of
those
products
already
indexed
because
they're
like
really
well
cross-linked
within
your
website,
then
the
indexing
through
the
paginated
category
pages
is
not
as
critical
and
that's
kind
of
the
the
first
decision
you
need
to
make
there
it.
A
A
Usually
the
next
level
from
here
is
when
you
apply
filtering
or
when
you
have
other
kinds
of
searches
within
those
category
pages,
and
usually
that's
the
step
where
you
can
say
well,
these
definitely
don't
need
to
be
indexed
because
they're
already
indexed
through
either
the
paginated
pages
or
normal
cross
linking
on
the
website.
So
all
of
those
filters-
that's
that's
something.
Probably
you
can
block
from
being
indexed
with
either
no
index
or
with
the
rel
canonical
to
go
back
to
your
main
category
pages.
A
A
In
a
lot
of
cases,
though,
if
you
set
up
pagination
so
that
you're
linking
from
page
one
to
page
two
to
page
three
to
page
four,
then
those
further
paginator
pages
will
be
like
even
further
away
from
the
the
root
of
your
category
set.
And
usually
that
means,
if
someone
is
looking
for
that
category
set,
then
probably
they'll
find
the
first
page
from
the
category
set
that
you
have
there,
because
that's
just
the
strongest
page
on
your
website
for
that
category.
A
On
the
other
hand,
if
someone
is
searching
for
maybe
a
category
and
a
product
that
is
only
listed
on
page
five,
then
maybe
we'll
show
page
five
in
the
search
results,
so
lots
of
options
lots
of
variations
there,
it's
something
where
it's
easy
to
talk
with
people,
and
they
have
very
strong
opinions
about
which
way
you
should
handle
this,
and
it's
worth
considering
that
your
site
is
kind
of
unique
and
you
need
to
figure
out
what
makes
sense
for
your
site.
There.
A
A
For
the
last
two
weeks,
page
actions
like
request
url
for
indexing
in
search
console,
have
been
temporarily
disabled.
Do
you
have
an
update
when
this
will
be
back
to
normal?
I
don't
have
an
update
at
the
moment
I
I
know
the
team
has
been
working
on
this,
but
I
don't
have
any
timeline
that
we
can
share
there.
A
Usually
these
kind
of
things
settle
down
fairly
quickly,
but
sometimes
there's
like
more
more
involved
than
just
like
tweaking
things
slightly,
and
we
also
don't
want
to
just
like
re-enable
the
the
feature
in
the
ui
and
then
not
actually
do
anything
with
the
submissions
and
the
back
end.
We
just
want
to
make
sure
that
everything
works
well
there
on
a
large
website.
If
a
few
pages
have
a
few
404
out
links
within
the
domain,
can
google
consider
that
the
page
is
low
quality,
outdated
or
not
fresh.
A
A
As
the
eat,
algorithm
is
becoming
more
prominent
to
improve
the
overall
site,
quality
and
important
passages
in
webpage
are
becoming
a
ranking
signal.
Can
we
consider
including
more
faqs
and
landing
pages,
to
be
competitive
in
google
search
results?
So
I,
I
think,
the
the
different
sides
there
don't
necessarily
have
much
to
to
do
with
each
other.
A
A
I
don't
know
simple,
algorithmic
factor
that
just
does
this,
so
that's
something
where
essentially,
what
we
tell
the
search
quality
raters
to
watch
out
for
are
things
that
normal
users
would
watch
out
for
as
well,
and
if
you
improve
your
website
in
that
regard,
then
that
seems
like
something
that,
like
would
make
sense,
regardless
of
the
any
algorithms
and
changes
on
google
side
with
regards
to
including
more
faqs
on
the
landing
pages.
A
You're
always
welcome
to
do
that.
I
think
sometimes
it
makes
sense
to
include
faqs
on
pages
other
times,
especially
when,
when
talking
with
some
of
our
our
tech
writers,
I've.
A
That's
something
that's
totally
up
to
you.
If
you
have
pages
with
faqs
that
match
our
guidelines,
then
we
might
be
able
to
pick
that
up
and
show
that
in
the
search
results,
that's,
I
think,
less
a
matter
of
being
competitive
in
the
search
results,
because
it's
not
that
you
will
rank
higher
with
faqs
on
your
pages,
but
more
like
you,
you
will
be
visible,
potentially
with
those
faqs
being
shown.
D
John,
just
a
quick
follow-up
to
that.
I
noticed
that
some
travel
websites
are
using
faqs
for
like
for
their
hotel
pages,
and
then
you
have
an
faq
like
does
this
hotel
have
a
swimming
pool,
how's
the
breakfast
and
things
like
that,
and
I'm
not
saying
that's
an
issue
or
not.
I
I
think
that
looks
fine,
but
the
documentation
mentions
that
whatever
is
in
the
faq
structured
data.
Markup
should
also
be
on
the
page.
D
I'm
just
curious,
should
it
be
like
word
by
word
I
mean
if
they
have
like
a
hotel
facilities
and
you
have
pool
do
you
still
need
to
have
that
complete
text
answer
like?
Does
this
hotel
have
a
pool?
Yes,
this
hotel
has
a
pool
and
whatever
you're,
showing
up
in
the
structure.
Data
markup
should
be
word
for
word.
What
you
have
and
the
content
of
the
page.
A
I,
I
think,
that's
kind
of
the
goal
so
with
with
faqs
based
on
the
content
itself.
I
think
that's
a
little
bit
tricky
because,
like
the
individual
words
might
be
on
the
page,
just
not
in
that
order,
but
in
general,
with
structured
data,
one
of
the
things
that
our
algorithms
do
is
really
try
to
make
sure
that
the
content
itself
is
on
the
page
and
it
might
be
with
with
faqs
that
these
algorithms
are
a
little
bit
more
flexible
and
that
they
say
oh
well.
Most
of
the
question
is
directly
visible
on
the
page.
A
Yeah,
so
it's
like:
does
this
hotel
have
a
pool
and
you
go
there
and
you
search
for?
Does
this
hotel
have
a
pool
and
then
you're
like
there's
no
results
like?
Why
was
that
shown
in
search?
Whereas
if
you
search
for
just
pool-
and
it
says
yes,
then
like
it's,
it's
kind
of
tricky,
but
I
I've
I
could
imagine
our
algorithms
are
are
currently
in
a
state
where
they're
a
little
bit
more
flexible.
A
A
Yep
a
question
related
to
the
discontinuation
of
flash,
oh
wow
from
the
past.
I
work
on
an
online
gaming
site
where
we
still
serve
quite
a
lot
of
flash
games
in
terms
of
quality.
They
occupy
roughly
50
of
the
pages
on
the
site,
but
in
terms
of
organic
traffic
they
only
account
for
about
10
of
our
total
traffic
after
december
2020.
A
A
This
wouldn't
affect
how
we
index
this
this
flash
content,
and
I
wouldn't
see
it
as
something
where
we
say
well,
there's
flash
on
this
page.
Therefore,
this
page
should
not
be
shown
in
search,
but
rather
what?
What
I
imagine
is
probably
already
happening
here
is
we're
indexing.
This
page,
based
on
the
content,
that's
visible
in
the
html.
A
That's
visible
in
the
dom
when
the
page
is
rendered
and
if
there
just
happen
to
be
some
elements
on
the
page
that
we
can't
process
because
they're
in
their
shockwave
files
or
whatever
java
applets
or
I
don't
know
whatever
technology
is
still
in
use,
then
we
will
essentially
just
ignore
that
part
of
the
page.
We
won't
say
this
page
as
a
whole
is
bad.
We
won't
say
this
page
as
a
whole
should
not
be
indexed
because
we
have
enough
useful
information
from
the
rest
of
the
page.
A
So
probably
in
in
your
situation,
my
guess
is
that
nothing
big
will
change
with
the
traffic
that
you're
seeing
to
your
website,
because
probably
we're
already
indexing
your
page,
your
content,
based
on
the
html
content
that
you
provide
for
these
games,
not
based
on
the
content
within
the
flash
file
in
the
past.
It
was
a
little
bit
different
because
some
some
sites
were
completely
made
in
flash
and
there
it
was
such
that
we
did
use
the
content
from
the
flash
files
as
a
part
of
indexing.
A
A
We
were
unsure
whether
the
consent
management
provider
banner
would
negatively
influence
the
crawling
of
our
pages,
therefore
excluded
googlebot
via
the
user
agent.
This
means
googlebot
doesn't
get
to
see
the
banner
at
all,
but
the
user
does.
Can
this
procedure
be
considered
as
cloaking
and
lead
to
a
penalty?
A
It
does
kind
of
go
into
the
area
of
cloaking,
especially
depending
on
the
way
that
you
have
those
banners
set
up
and
the
I
don't
know,
judging
judging
from
your
name,
I'm
guessing,
maybe
you're
based
in
europe.
One
of
the
things
that
might
might
come
into
your
into
your
side's
advantage
is
that
if
you
only
show
this
banner
to
users
in
europe-
and
you
don't
show
it
to
users
elsewhere,
then
in
general
you
wouldn't
be
showing
it
to
googlebot
anyway,
because
googlebot
tends
to
crawl
from
the
us.
A
The
the
other
side
here
is
that
when
it
comes
to
cloaking
and
a
penalty
or
manual
action,
usually
the
web
spam
team
try
tries
to
take
into
account
the
intent
of
what
the
site
owner
is
doing
there,
and
if
we
can
recognize
that
this
is
clearly
a
legal
interstitial
and
we
we're
essentially
indexing
the
content
that
users
would
see
anyway,
when
they
go
through
that
interstitial,
then
probably
from
a
web
spam
point
of
view.
That
would
be
less
problematic.
A
One
way
to
double
check
with
regards
to
google
indexing.
If
this
banner
is
a
problem
or
not,
is
to
use
the
inspect,
url
tool
and
search
console
fetch
a
live
version
of
the
page
have
it
rendered,
and
then
you
can
check
in
the
html
of
the
page
to
see
if
the
actual
content
is
visible.
There,
too,
and
if
the
actual
content
is
visible
there
too,
then
that's
something
where
the
banner
probably
doesn't
cause
any
issues
for
indexing
anyway.
A
No,
we
we
don't
do
that
so
quality
raters
are
essentially
one
of
the
ways
that
we
test
algorithm
updates.
Where
we
say
we
would
like
to
make
a
change
in
this
particular
direction,
and
then
we
will
give
information
to
the
quality
raters
about
that
change.
That
could
be
in
the
form
of
a
b
search
results
where
we
say
this
search
result
versus
a
different
one,
and
we
generally
give
them
information
on
what
to
double
check
for
like.
Should
they
just
look
at
the
titles
of
those
pages?
A
Should
they
actually
look
at
the
content
of
those
pages?
Should
they
look
past
just
the
content
of
the
landing
page.
Anything
like
that
and
the
quality
writers
will
kind
of
review
all
of
these
different
search
results
and
give
us
advice
and
say:
well,
the
version
without
your
change
was
better
or
the
version
with
the
change
was
better
and
based
on
that.
We
can
kind
of
work
step
by
step
to
improve
the
quality
of
the
search
results.
A
A
A
A
Let's
see,
is
it
okay
to
submit
the
same
sitemap
in
a
sitemap
index
file
and
separately
in
search
console,
because
when
we
submit
it
separately,
we
see
index
coverage
of
the
individual
file.
You
can
definitely
submit
them
individually
and
separately.
If
you
want
to
do
that
in
general,
we
will
crawl
the
cycle
file
once,
but
if
you're
looking
at
the
metrics
in
search
console-
and
you
want
to
see
kind
of
the
overall
metrics
and
the
individual
metrics
then
submitting
that
separately
is
is
perfectly
fine.
I
don't
think
it
would
change
anything.
A
How
does
google
treat
a
302?
What
url
does
google
show
in
the
search
results,
the
original
or
the
redirected
url?
What
url
will
google
search
console
report
clicks
and
what
happens
if
we
keep
the
302
for
a
long
time
like
months?
A
So
these
are
all
good
questions.
These
all
go
into
the
topic
of
canonicalization
and
when
it
comes
to
canonicalization,
essentially
the
problem
that
we're
trying
to
solve
is
we
know
of
multiple
urls
that
lead
to
the
same
content,
and
it
could
be
that
it's
exactly
the
same
content,
which
is
usually
the
case
with
a
redirect.
A
It
could
be
that
it's
mostly
the
same
content,
which
could
be
the
case
if
you
have
the
same
article
on
different
parts
of
your
website,
for
example,
and
with
canonicalization.
We
try
to
take
into
account
all
of
the
signals
that
we
have
for
those
sets
of
urls
and
pick
one
of
the
urls
to
be
the
representative
url
to
kind
of
use
in
search
and
that's
the
the
canonical
url
and
we
use
things
like
redirects,
301
and
302
redirects.
A
However,
302
is
a
temporary
redirect
and
if
you
make
that
redirect
permanent,
then
our
systems
might
say
well,
it's
kind
of
like
a
soft
301
redirect
in
the
sense
that
you're
not
saying
it's
a
301
but
you're,
treating
it
as
a
301.
So
maybe
we
should
take
the
destination
page
into
account
in
practice.
All
of
these
kind
of
subtle
things
tend
not
to
matter
as
much.
A
It's
really
more
a
matter
of
the
the
bigger
picture
it's
like
is
in
within
the
internal
linking
of
your
website,
which
of
these
pages
are
you
linking
to
within
your
sitemap
file,
which
of
these
pages
are
you
actually
referring
to,
and
all
of
these
things
add
up
and
then
usually
we
will
try
to
pick
the
one
where
you're
like
really
being
clear
on
what
you
want
to
have
indexed.
A
A
It's
just
well,
we
picked
the
one
that
you
didn't
want
and
if
you
look
at
analytics
or
if
you
look
at
search
console,
you
have
to
like
think
about
the
one
that
you
didn't
want,
instead
of
the
one
that
you
actually
did
want
to
have
index.
So
it's
more
a
difference
with
regards
to
reporting,
rather
than
with
regards
to
ranking.
F
John
got
a
question
sure
in
case
you
do
it
302.
Redirect
I
mean
in
the
long
term.
Google
has
said
it.
You
know
evo.
You
know
potential
in
the
long
term
treat
them
the
same,
but
the
question
is:
if
you
three,
or
one,
redirect
and
undo
the
three
or
one
reader
after
a
while,
could
it
be
the
case
that
you
know
google
afterwards?
I
wouldn't
you
know
trust
on
on
301
reader.
I
can
say:
okay,
we've
seen
in
this
case.
You
know
we
moved
over
and
came
back
to
the
original
states.
A
Usually
the
canonicalization
algorithms
don't
think
that
much
to
I
don't
know
to
simplify
it,
so
it's
not
that
they
would
say.
Oh
it's
like
this
guy's
trying
to
be
sneaky
and
kind
of
like
redirecting
back
and
forth
kind
of
thing.
The
canonicalization
algorithms
tend
to
look
at
the
current
state
and
they'll
just
say:
oh
well.
This
redirect
is
no
longer
here,
so
this
factor
from
the
redirect
no
longer
accounts
for
that
other
url
and
what
what
do
the
other
factors
say
and
based
on
that?
A
We
kind
of
pick
which
one
to
to
use
as
the
canonical
url.
So
it's
not
it's
not
something
that
from
a
canonicalization
point
of
view,
we
would
see
as
something
that
our
algorithms
have
to
kind
of.
Second
guess,
but
it's
more,
we
have
all
of
these
different
factors.
We
give
them
individual
weights,
and
then
we
calculate
the
factors
together
in
which
which
one
of
these
urls
has
a
higher
number.
In
the
end,
that's
the
one
we'll
try
to
keep.
A
So
if
you
redirect
somewhere
and
then
you
change
back,
then
our
algorithms
are
not
going
to
just
like
swap
back
over
to
the
old
one,
but
rather
they'll
say:
oh,
it's
like
an
unsure
state
at
the
moment,
but
we'll
keep
the
old
one
first
and
then
over
time
we'll
say:
oh
well!
It's
it's
clear
now
like
this
is
actually
a
change
in
the
the
preference
from
the
site
owner.
F
One
question,
and,
and
how
long
does
it
take
for
google
to
recognize
two
to
three
or
two
redirects
I
mean
I
mean
I.
I
know
that
you
can
give
an
exact
time.
You
know
approximately
how
long.
A
A
A
I
don't
know
if
we
have
specified
a
time
there,
but
that
might
be
something
to
to
look
at
to
see
if
there's
a
time
there
kind
of
as
a
rough
guess
like
what
might
be
the
case
with
302
and
301
as
well,
I
I
don't
think
it
would
apply
one
to
one,
but
it
gives
you
some
idea
of
the
the
order
of
magnitude.
A
G
G
We
have
two
e-commerce
websites
on
two
different
domains
and
we're
migrating
to
one
single
domain,
more
inclusive
domain,
so
we're
basically
migrating
all
the
products,
not
the
categories,
so
we're
really
interested
in
having
the
products
well
good,
having
a
good
ranking
on
the
website
c
on
the
third
website,
where
we're
moving
the
product.
So
we
have
been
thinking
about
how
to
do
this
and
we
came
up
with
two
ways:
seo
wise.
G
So
first
one
was
using
the
google
change
of
address
tool
and
redirecting
all
the
traffic
from
the
products
from
website
a
and
b
to
website
c,
and
the
second
one
was
just
you
know,
leaving
the
website
a
and
b
the
where
they
are
and
replacing
the
e-commerce
buttons
with
jim
some
links
to
the
new
websites.
G
A
A
You
would
only
be
able
to
do
it
for
one
domain
moving
to
to
a
different
domain,
so
that's
kind
of
the
the
first
thing
that
you'll
notice
like
if
you
try
to
implement
that
in
practice,
you
can
still
migrate
like
that,
though,
you
can
set
up
301
redirects
from
those
two
domains
to
that
one
central
domain:
that's
essentially
a
legitimate
site
change
that
you
can
make
kind
of
like
combining
multiple
sites
together
is
always
a
little
bit
tricky
because
you
don't
know
exactly
what
the
outcome
will
be,
but
it
is
something
where
you
can
make
this
kind
of
change
and
usually
it
ends
up
fairly
well.
A
A
I
mean
you
can
go
down
that
direction,
but
I
feel
in
the
long
term,
you're
kind
of
competing
with
yourself,
because
you
would
have
essentially
three
websites
for
the
same
content
that
you
would
have
otherwise
on
just
one
website
and
by
having
it
split
out
across
those
three
websites,
you're
kind
of
diluting
the
value
of
your
content
there.
So.
G
That's
what
I
understand
that
he
here
is
my
reasoning
for
that.
So
if
we
go
the
other
route-
and
we
just
do
the
reader
directs
the
probability
of
the
a
product,
for
example,
we
have
about
two
or
three
products
that
are
really
really
good,
ranking
like
in
the
first
place
for
their
for
the
searches,
so
it
would
be.
We
would
not
be
able
if
we
would
lose
that
ranking
to
complete
the
entire
traffic
just
by
ppc.
G
So
seo
is
really
important,
so
we
can
lose
that
for
like
six
nine
12
months,
it
would
be
the
end
of
the
business.
So
it's
really
important
for
us
to
do
that,
and
this
this
was
the
reason.
This
was
a
loophole
that
I
thought
we
could
use
at
least
for
a
while
until
website
c
gays
gains.
You
know
sufficient
visibility
in
order
to
shut
down
website
a
and
b,
so
this.
This
was
the
reason
why
I
proposed
this
version,
because
many
people
that
use
this
other
approach
of
just
redirecting
traffic.
A
E
A
A
I
think
the
only
thing
you'll
notice
is,
if
you
keep
those
two
websites-
and
you
also
set
up
the
third
website-
is
that
the
third
website
will
have
a
really
hard
time
kind
of
gaining
visibility
in
search,
which
means
you'll,
have
kind
of
have
a
really
hard
time
being
able
to
make
that
cut
off
change,
because,
if
you're,
not
redirecting
the
value
from
those
existing
websites
to
your
kind
of
shared
common
version
of
the
website,
then
essentially
you're
creating
another
website,
and
you
kind
of
have
to
work
to
promote
that
other
website
as
well.
A
So
that
my
worry,
there
would
kind
of
be
that
you
can
do
that,
and
you
can
kind
of
keep
those
individual
pages.
But
you
will
never
run
into
this
situation
where
that
third
version,
that
new
version
is
suddenly
more
visible
in
search
than
the
existing
previous
ones,
because
you
never
kind
of
like
passed
that
value
to
that
new
version.
G
Yeah
we
were
thinking
if
those
are
the
the
first
two,
a
and
b
remain
there,
just
like
some
blogs
that
just
redirect
some
traffic
to
the
new
one,
hoping
that
the
new
one
will
gain
a
better
position
and
for
the
example.
If
we
see
the
the
third
website
getting
closer
to
the
positions
that
the
other
one
had,
we
just
take
them
up.
Take
the
the
first
website
down
and
do
redirect
to
the
new
website
and
in
the
end
google
would
just
look.
G
Probably
google
would
just
look
at
the
data
we'll
see
that
there's
nothing
there,
just
a
redirect.
There's
no
data
on
the
old
website,
because
we
just
like
deleted
the
website
and
probably
in
the
end.
The
new
website
will
take
place,
we'll
replace
that
ranking
and
we
will
kind
of
keep
our
position.
But
I'm
not
sure
about
that.
A
Now
I
I
mean
this-
this
is
also
seems
like
something
that
you
can
test
individually,
where
you
can
kind
of
take
that
more
kind
of
safe.
I
don't
know
I
I
don't
know
if
it's
really
safer,
but
kind
of
the
the
more
kind
of
slow
approach
of
keeping
those
two
websites
and
then
doing
on
a
per
product
basis,
kind
of
setting
up
redirects,
and
that
would
kind
of
give
you
a
little
bit
more
confidence
in.
Is
this
new
domain,
picking
up
the
value
from
the
old
one
or
not.
G
Okay,
so
this
is,
this
is
a
good
idea,
so
I
can.
I
could
try
just
to
read
our
direct
half
of
the
products
yeah
and
maybe
keep
half
of
the
products
with
the
buy
from
website
c
option
and
see
how
that
plays
out.
A
Yeah,
I
I
mean
it's
like
when
we
talk
with
the
engineers
about
these
kind
of
situations.
Usually
they
just
say
it's
like.
Oh,
you
should
just
redirect
everything
to
the
right
version,
but
I
I
totally
understand
if
people
are
a
little
bit,
I
don't
know
worried
about
a
big
change
like
this,
because
you
you
can't
really
test
it
ahead
of
time
like
you
could
test
something
from
a
usability
point
of
view.
A
Like
do
users
like
this
one
or
the
the
other
one
better,
a
redirect
is
kind
of
like
this
one
shot
thing
and
then
it's
there
or
it's
not.
There.
G
Okay,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
and
your
answer
sure.
D
A
I
I
think
it
was
possible
with
the
old
version,
but
with
with
a
new
one.
That's
there
I
think,
for
like
a
year
now,
you
can
really
just
have
one
change
of
address,
set
up
for
a
specific
site.
D
D
But
to
be
honest,
this
is
the
case
for
http
https,
I
think,
or
the
dub
dub
dub
non
dot,
dub
dub
or
something
like
that
for
the
same
domain.
So
maybe
it
doesn't
apply
for
different
domains,
but
just
saying
that
it's.
A
Oh
you're,
using
it
for
www
and
http.
That's
interesting!
Okay,
because
I
thought
I
thought
we
kind
of
tried
to
check
for
that
and
prevented
people
from
doing
that,
because
it
doesn't
make
that
much
sense
as
a
side
move
but
okay,
interesting
yeah,
but
I
I
think
that
doesn't
change
much
with
regards
to
the
question
where
it's
like
like.
Should
I
do
it
or
should
I
not
do
it
yeah,
yeah,
cool,
okay?
Well,
thank
you
all
for
joining
in
thanks
for
all
of
the
questions
that
were
submitted.