4 ms·
Not sure why this article offended you so much. It was all rehashed info but it wasn't that bad. Just because Google can somewhat crawl and parse certain Java
by jerednel 15y ago
Not sure why this article offended you so much. It was all rehashed info but it wasn't that bad.
Just because Google can somewhat crawl and parse certain JavaScript doesn't mean it's good for SEO. I think you would be doing a disservice to your company to act like you can just load your site with client-side loading content and act like Google is going to retain your content. I've countless anecdotal examples of content hidden behind JavaScript not being found by search engines. In fact, it's a celebration whenever Google announces they managed to crawl a common piece of JS (Disqus, FaceBook)
Internal links are not irrelevant...What on earth would make you think this? It's not hard to prove that internal anchor text passes the relevance to the linked-to page by using a made up word to link to an otherwise orphaned' page to rank.
Regarding 404's....Let's pretend I have a great piece of content that has amassed hundreds of links. Marketing has deemed that the content is no longer worthy of being present on the site and has removed the page without consulting you. You have the option of letting it sit there dead with hundreds of links pointing to it, or you can 301 redirect it somewhere to pass the amassed link equity. Yeah, you go ahead and keep your 404.
Finally, links are just something that agencies tell you to sell their services??? Are you suggesting that gaining good links will do nothing for your site's natural search traffic? Ok. Sure.
- franze 15y agoad ">Just because Google can somewhat crawl" see my response above "this tip is good, but leads to the false conclusion that google does not parse/render/"see" JS." for the other points: i have a very special niche, i deal with companies that go through 1,2,3,...x SEO consultant, agencies, companies that spend an unbelievable amount of resources, dev time, money just to get SEO right - and their traffic still sucks. they have the most optimized internal link anchor text you can imagine, tens of thousands hardcoded redirects (no joke, i have seen the .htaccess) to "funnel that linkjuice to the most valuable page" and spend a huge monthly budget for linkbuilding and the most "sophisticated SEO tools" you can imagine. their URLs were just "keyword optimized" and now they are working with a company "to keyword optimize our content". after five sentences with their CEO he starts talking about PageRank. i have to cut through all of that bullshit and establish a manageable, scaleable site that consists of * a startpage * sitemap.xml * (interlinked) landingpages and sadly from a SEO point of view: yes, you need links - but not the links SEO agencies tell you you need, and not with the methods SEO blogs recommend.