How to make FB comments crawlable by Google? <noscript>?</noscript>
-
We get tons of FB comments, but it's all in iframe, so Google doesn't give us any credit for it.
We found a solution - turn all the comments into HTML and hide it from readers with
<noscript>. </p> <p> </p> <p>Will this help? I heard that Google considers <noscript> a scammy practice. Is that true?</p> <p>How do you guys make your FB comments SEO friendly?</p> <p> </p></noscript>
-
Hi! Do you use Wordpress? There is a plugin out there: http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/crawlable-facebook-comments/ although I haven't used it personally.
Additionally, here's the post that Francisco mentioned previously: http://www.seomoz.org/blog/make-facebook-comments-box-indexable-by-search-engines.
I believe both options do the same thing, just that one is a plugin for Wordpress.
Hope that helps!
-
There is a post on youmoz about it, but it seemed a little shaky. This ws about 6 months ago though. Sorry, I don't have an answer.
-
Thanks, we already get links from FB comments as you described and my content is kickass. Now I want to move beyond that and get my visitors' comments crawled by Google.
Consider setting up Thumbnails for your pages, you will get more clicks from FB links then
-
I use Facebook Comments on almost every webpage on my site. Yes it's an iFrame, but I stick my URL in the Facebook Comments so it counts as a link and people are "talking" about me.
Here's my proof. Run OSE on my contact page: http://www.shipoverseas.com/us/contact-us.html I have 57 FB Shares and 0 Likes (because I don't have a Like button on that page).
Then run OSE on my home page: 68 Shares 167 Likes.
Google knows that people are "talking" about me on my contact page. But in reality it's me slapping my URL into the reply.
My point is "if" you are trying to turn FB comments into HTML with noscript to rank higher (because that's what you're really trying to do), you don't need to do it. Write kickass content and more people will leave Facebook Comments and keep slapping your URLs in there.
I think I should write a YouMoz Post about this.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Impact of keyword/keyphrases density on header/footer
Hi, It might be a stupid question but I prefer to clear things out if it's not a problem: Today I've seen a website where visitors are prompted no less than 5 times per page to "call [their] consultants".
On-Page Optimization | | GhillC
This appears twice on the header, once on the side bar (mouse over pop up), once in the body of most of the pages and once in the footer. So obviously, besides the body of the pages, it appears at least 4 times on every single pages as it's part of the website template. In the past, I never really wondered re the menu, the footer etc as it's usually not hammering the same stuff repeatedly everywhere. Anyway, I then had a look at their blog and, given the average length of their articles, the keyword density around these prompts is about 0.5% to 0.8% for each page. This is huge! So basically my question is as follow: is Google's algorithm smart enough to understand what this is and make abstraction of this "content" to focus on the body of the pages (probably simply focusing on the tags)? Or does it send wrong signals and confuse search engine more than anything else? Reading stuff such as this, I wonder how does it work when this is not navigational or links elements. Thanks,
G Note: I’m purposely not speaking about the UX which is obviously impacted by such a hammering process.0 -
Google Answer Box
I optimized several pages using Rand's post on Google Answer Box: https://moz.com/blog/how-to-appear-in-googles-answer-boxes-whiteboard-friday How long after the page is indexed should it appear? Lastly, how long should I wait before determining it will not get an answer box and reconfigure the page? No bad answers 🙂 TY KJr
On-Page Optimization | | KevnJr0 -
Do these items affect Google ranking or Quality Score?
Hi community, After my first crawl of a site that I'm working to improve the SEO on, I find that I have about 500 issues regarding missing Alt Text and Title text for images on my site, as well as about 175 issues with regard to duplicate meta description, missing meta descriptions, and too short/too long meta descriptions. My client is not sure it matters to fix these items and only wants to do so if they have an affect on Google ranking or Quality Score. Does anyone know? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | gataninc0 -
How Does Google Webmaster Tools Come Up with Content Keywords?
When I look at Google Webmaster Tools, in the Content Keywords report there are a couple of ones that are suspect - "prescription", "medications", and "viagra" which are completely unrelated to the content of the site. When I click on the content keyword, and search the source code for those pages, I don't see those words in the source code. Can someone please help me figure out why Google thinks that these keywords are associated with these pages, and how to correct it?
On-Page Optimization | | bernardablola0 -
Google picking up old pages
I recently redesigned a site that had all the keywords it was ranking for going to the home page. Now I have specific pages for each of these keywords but I'm seeing the home page (not the page that, if I do an on page optimization by hand in MOZ gives me an A rating) showing up in the auto reports (assuming pages Google sees for these keywords related to the url) as F's. They're all pointing to the home page. I've redirected the old index.html home page to the new but I suspect the reason is actually these pages (were) ranking for these terms (though none too well - all but one were not in the top 50 and one was 45) because these rankings are all dropping as well. I'm at a loss, with the site replaced, as to how to correct this and tell Google these keyword phrases all have their own pages now. I've dug through this forum and the only applicable answer I can see would be to add these phases to the home page (where they all rank for now) with anchored links to their new (A rated by Moz for these terms when I hand enter them) singular pages? Or is it just a waiting game?
On-Page Optimization | | adworksofboca0 -
Google not showing the proper title
I noticed that google is not showing the proper title in the search results. If you search for PhraseExpander, the title that google reports is: PhraseExpander: Text Expander for Windows but in the title of the page I've set Text Expander for Windows - PhraseExpander Why is that? How can I make google report the proper title? Thanks. Andrea
On-Page Optimization | | nagar0 -
CMS making body copy mark up faux pais
Good morning from 13 degrees C wet an windy wetherby UK Ive noticed some CMS platforms do not mark up body copy correctly. In other words instead of marking up body copy within p tags its marking body content in the following ways: and Whilst my gutt feeling this is not good i wonder just how serious a problem it will cause for the Google bots ie will they have problems indexing the content as its best to always wrap contnet in opening and closing p tags. So my question is please, am i worrying uneccesarily or is there a genuine penalty to pay SEO wise when body content is not mark up correctly. A live example of markup wriddled with break tags is here: http://www.langleys.com/ Thanks in advance 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | Nightwing0 -
Does Google give any (negative) weight to .info domains?
Hi, All! We're working with a client on setting up a support blog for their site (not hosted on-site because it's a related topic, not directly about their business). We're thinking about a few domain possibilities, but for some of the ones we'd like the .com is already taken. .info (as well as others) are available, and the client is interested in using a different TLD, but I'm shying away from it because of the concern that: a) people will look at it more suspiciously (exactmatch.info? must be spam) - but maybe that's just because I'm an SEO b) does Google have anything against exact match domains with endings like .info, .net, etc.? (I know there's never any guarantee that the exact match domain will continue to hold its weight in the algorithm at all, but taking that as a given for now - and we are planning on putting decent quality original content on it). Thanks in advance for the input! Aviva
On-Page Optimization | | debi_zyx0