pierrefar

9 ms·

31.
by pierrefar 12y ago
> Google treat the http and https versions of a domain as SEPARATE PROPERTIES. That's not quite accurate. It's on a per-URL basis, not properties. Webmaster Tools asks you to verify the different _sites_ (HTTP/HTTPS, www&#
32.
by pierrefar 12y ago
I was involved in this launch and I want to address a very common misconception I'm seeing here and elsewhere. Some webmasters say they have "just a content site", like a blog, and that doesn't need to be secured. That m
33.
by pierrefar 12y ago
Hi return0 This means that at some point Googlebot discovered https://siteB . It could simply have been a misconfigured CMS, or a bad sitemap, or an errant link one of your visitors shared on a forum, or something a previous owne
34.
by pierrefar 12y ago
Hi tootie These are two sites. In reality, most secure sites have four variants: http://www.example.com http://example.com https://www.example.com https://example.com You should watch the I&#x
35.
by pierrefar 12y ago
I work at Google in web search. It's great to see another example of a site indexed under HTTPS as it's a common question we see. Sadly, for such an important topic, there are many myths. I didn't dig into this particular exa
36.
by pierrefar 13y ago
What we can share publicly is at this diagnostics page accessible to anyone (it's linked from the warning page browsers show): http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?site=http://ph... Verified own
37.
by pierrefar 13y ago
I work at Google and was the one who posted on our forums about this. What our systems found was definitely a compromised JS file, and others on this thread have posted something similar to what we saw. This is not a false positive. We have
38.
by pierrefar 14y ago
How did they control for whether the fonts are actually installed on the participants' computers or not? Also, did they control for desktops vs smartphones vs tablets? It's reasonable to hypothsize the device's screen (and zoom level on mob
39.
by pierrefar 14y ago
It doesn't belong in the guidelines but it is described in the relevant section of the Help Center: http://support.google.com/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&#38... In summary: If for any reason we cannot reach the robots.txt due to an err
40.
by pierrefar 14y ago
That's a misconception. A 404 on robots.txt will not have any effect on crawling as it's treated the same as an empty robots.txt file allowing all crawling. But it's different for 5xx HTTP errors for the robots.txt file. As Googlebot is cur
41.
by pierrefar 14y ago
The best places are our forums ( http://productforums.google.com/forum/m/#!forum/webmasters ) and our regular webmaster office hours ( http://sites.google.com/site/webmasterhelpforum/en/office-ho... ) where a webmaster support Googler (
42.
by pierrefar 14y ago
Hi I work at Google helping webmasters like this. As far as I can tell, there are a couple of interacting issues we're seeing on the site that can be causing what you're seeing. It's a bit technical, but it's easy for you to implement a fix
43.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Hi, I'm the author of the post. Your concern is valid and it's one of the reasons the Google+ account is verified. Also, there is plenty of evidence that it's a real Googler's account. For example, when I blog on our official Webmaster Cent
44.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Hello all I'm the author of this post. There are some suggestions for Javascript-based alternatives. A well-implemented Javascript overlay for the blackout message is a valid option, but keep in mind the following when thinking about it: 1.
45.
by pierrefar 15y ago
All these errors are reported in Webmaster Tools in the Diagnostics section. Verify your site and you'll have access to this and a wealth of more data. Also, we do send notifications in Webmaster Tools, and you can confgure those to be deli
46.
by pierrefar 15y ago
At the bottom of every search results page is a link that says something like "give us feedback". That's your first point of call for reporting bad results, spam, etc. If you have a whole bunch queries that are somehow related, like say we
47.
by pierrefar 15y ago
From my personal point of view, I help webmasters when I see an issue. It's part of my job and it's something that gets me fired up. I help when I go on our forums, I do that here, and I'm regularly helping webmasters on Google+ (my team do
48.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Hi Paul, A site can be crawled from any number of Googlebot IP addresses, and so blocking all except one doesn't help in throttling crawling. If you verify the site in Webmaster Tools, we have a tool you can use to set a slower crawl rate f
49.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Hi I work at Google helping webmasters. It seems something has been blocking Googlebot from crawling HN, and so our algorithms think the site is dead. A very common cause is a firewall. I realize that pg has been cracking down on crawlers r
50.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Thanks for the feedback. I'll pass it on. And good luck with fixing the hack!
51.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Hi I work at Google helping webmasters. Hopefully there won't be a next time, but for reference, your best bet is to post in our forum specifically about this type of issue: http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/label?lid=2...
52.
by pierrefar 15y ago
That's usually the case if you've just verified the site for the first time. It takes a few days for the first data to be collected. Because of this we always recommend webmasters verify early (before things break) and monitor constantly.
53.
by pierrefar 15y ago
>configured to block anything that had the word 'bot' as part of its user agent string Yep, that'll do it :) Glad you found it and fixed it quickly! One follow-up thought for you and anyone in this situation: Set up a Google Webmaster T
54.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Hello all I work at Google as a Webmaster Trends Analyst to help webmasters with issues like this one. Looking into this, the first thing I noticed is that the blog.jquery.com seems to be blocking Googlebot from fetching its pages, but the
55.
by pierrefar 15y ago
Yes, and tap and hold to get the magnifier for a very cool effect.
56.
by pierrefar 15y ago
It works for both HTML documents and non-HTML files. For non-HTML files, you cannot use the HTML link rel="canonical" tag, so this new support for the header is the only option.
57.
by pierrefar 16y ago
This discussion reminds of the Oxford comma style/grammar debates. Similar situation too: whether to use a comma before the and/or/nor of the last item in a 3+ list. For example: "morning, noon, and night" vs "morning, noon and night".
58.
by pierrefar 16y ago
When did facts ever stop an opportunity to hype up a story? Anyway, for reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_van_der_Riet_Woolley
59.
by pierrefar 16y ago
I find GBK's menu very... "creative". I always go for the basic plain burger which is frankly great for meat purists like me :)
60.
Twitter endorsements face Office of Fair Trade clampdown(guardian.co.uk)
3 points by pierrefar 16y ago|0 comments

More ›