Welcome to the Q&A Forum

I have worked for a mental health institute treating addiction and associated problems. There is no way to engage with clients or have people that suffer from it participate in open forum discussions like social media. Maybe it's an option to niche it with a related but not the same theme like: things you can do the stay mentally fit tips Tweet channel (I like short names you see). Not associating it directly get's attention and people not bothered to participate in discussions like: how not to feel dead tired and empty when not working tips. This is a prelude state to becoming a client so its prospecting nevertheless.

A more seen and practical alternative is to start expert communities with doctors and other experts that post and interact in a community for example about staying mentally fit. It's a double edge sword as the experts can build online authority and people in real need for medical attention can linger and interact around general items like news clippings on new treatments etc. Why not send a PM to the doc that was discussing e-cigarettes about you not being able to quit smoking pot?

communities recommended:
Social Media Strategies (Google+) with 133K members, high quality posts and moderation
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/100354381402619402956
And of course my very own community on everthing Google + marketing:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/114482540072196914877
But i'ts in Dutch but he where else do I get a change to mention it once i a while on all these EN media:)

Your welcome. Interesting question. My answer is that if the HTML TITLE is set with client side JavaScript then it's has little change of being picked up as the title by crawlers or Google. Let's say we alter the node element Title value with like this:

In this case it will alter the value after the hard coded HTML title was send to the browser. It would need the crawler to load the document in full and read the HTML title value only after fully rendering it as if it where a human user. This is not likely.

Then we could also try a document write to construct the HTML HEAD tag Title as a string to use for the browser as the title like this:

Will not work as the title text is not actually altered after evaluation of the script line.

This does not work because the title is not set but because it's not actually printed to the browser as a string. The source code for the title still looks like this in to any browser:

As you can see the script does not print the result string of the evaluation to the browser but still sets the value of the document object model node HTML TITLE to the value it evaluates to.

Try it for yourself with this dummy page I made just to be certain.
http://www.googlewiki.nl/test/seojavascripttest2.html And this is the DOM info for this page http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/testanchor.php?url=http://www.googlewiki.nl/test/seojavascripttest2.html&anchor=test

Or am I missing something here?

Hope this helps.

Hi... I would not prefer a client side approach to this. If it's readable depends on the script itself. Although some JS fans will say this alright I would prefer to do this server side with php, or similar, and make a template that does this rewrite. It's not to hard. Or why not a batch run to modify all pages once to hardcode the correct title in the page? Have some scripts that can do this for you if you would like.

Hope this helps.

Thanks Jane!

Maybe I just will port it to a chrome plug-in. Thanks for the tip!

And I know and have used ayima plug-in!

Hi everyone,

Im sort of a Google+ nutter and I wanted to figure out exactly what is required for a full bleed image to appear for +1 share on the page itself. I got it figured out and I think it requires:

• canonical url
• og:image
• image wider then 506px
• type article or page (microdata format)

But sometimes it seems that pages without a canonical url still show full bleed image when shared as link when I insert the url directly into a google+ post. My question is if this could be a cached version of the page where it had a canonical url?

Don't really know if that anyone is interested but I made a simple tool that checks if a page meets requirements for having a full bleed image when share as link on Google+. Think I nailed it pretty close but can't seem to get the full bleed image to appear for the tool itself do:) Please dont ask. It's driving me mad already.

http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/check-fullbleed.php

Try it. Take a blog post url, check it with this tool and then see for yourself if it's accurate. If not I would like to hear very much as it would help me pin point it better!

Examples of pages with specific no no factors for you to try are:
http://www.copyblogger.com/google-authorship/ (img to small)
http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/14/5896979/gmail-api-isnt-the-end-of-email-its-a-new-beginning (no og prefix but works)

ha ha this is hysterical: I use an example of a optimization project for local search. It's an marina and in Dutch it is: 'jacht huren near Makkum' which google translate translated to 'rent Yacht near Makkum'. Just try to input this query into google. I'm sometimes scare myself Exact match in English for my set out applied method done in Dutch. This is new because when I set it up I already tested this so it's not luck so to say. And see how the suffix descriptor yacht rental delivers what I promised: marina + home town or rent yacht + marina city. I should have asked more for this:) O yeah it's Alpha Sail that I done it for. The company name for the marina.

I have a nice and valued guide to optimizing google my business that I published in Dutch and am translating to English. Hope to publish it here some time soon if they let me that is:) This is the raw translation with google translate but it reads ok already I think? If there was only more time )

http://translate.google.com/translate?langpair=nl%7Cen&u=http://google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-handleiding/

How must I see this last comment in context of above?

Have you looked in your webmaster tools dashboard for this site? It has a section structured data in your website and shows exactly which structured data has been picked up? Or are the errors showing up there?

Agreed. I use my own method which I call Business alignment for on and offline business which describes this process for Dutch companies. Works like a charm, idiot proof and not economically viable to copy for the technically skilled borderline criminal seo that look for the loophole alone instead of the grand scheme and sustainability in the long run. Something like that you mean?

To bad moz local is not available in the Netherlands but I get around.

Hi Denis,

The thing is: if a website offers inbound links that pass PageRank then by definition they do not comply with the Google guidelines. Google is quick to call all things not compliant spam and sometimes makes arbitrary choices as to what are considered bought links.

During a conference I once asked an ex Googler who was a webspam specialist that I thought that an advertorial on big websites are de facto paid links if they pass PageRank? I never got a real answer but I guess it all depends on the standing a website has with Google. If a small blog asks a fee for an advertisement with an followed link then it's a slippery slope, large news sites are not a problem.

All being true the link they offer is not an advertorial and is an paid link in a link directory and in the end has a high risk of being classified as such. But if you would need to put a price on it: the DA in combination with the anchor text of the link makes it more or less valuable. A DA of 30 is significantly more then 20 and will pass significantly more PageRank so us more valuable. How much more is up to the person who is in the market for buying I guess.

Hope this helps.

Gr Daniel

That's skew any way you look at it. But still. Put them all in a secondary sitemap.html so they are not orphans, remove from sitemap.xml, place noindex in the HTML HEAD and still try to consolidate where possible.

In general we do not want to get rid of pages that are not a problem as they can receive organic traffic for not targeted keywords that we have no real other way of discovering. The web is an organic momentum flux and is not a solid state structure. It needs some degree of unintended and not calculated behavior also in website structure. Otherwise the sum of the parts of all pages in google would equal the value of google which is not the case. google connects dot's, we interpret and find new meaning and relations translating into traffic we did not expect.

The momentum flux is a joke of course. It's a quantum state of course

Your welcome. Interesting question. My answer is that if the HTML TITLE is set with client side JavaScript then it's has little change of being picked up as the title by crawlers or Google. Let's say we alter the node element Title value with like this:

In this case it will alter the value after the hard coded HTML title was send to the browser. It would need the crawler to load the document in full and read the HTML title value only after fully rendering it as if it where a human user. This is not likely.

Then we could also try a document write to construct the HTML HEAD tag Title as a string to use for the browser as the title like this:

Will not work as the title text is not actually altered after evaluation of the script line.

This does not work because the title is not set but because it's not actually printed to the browser as a string. The source code for the title still looks like this in to any browser:

As you can see the script does not print the result string of the evaluation to the browser but still sets the value of the document object model node HTML TITLE to the value it evaluates to.

Try it for yourself with this dummy page I made just to be certain.
http://www.googlewiki.nl/test/seojavascripttest2.html And this is the DOM info for this page http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/testanchor.php?url=http://www.googlewiki.nl/test/seojavascripttest2.html&anchor=test

Or am I missing something here?

Hope this helps.

Hi Carson-Ward,

That's a nice and clean solution. Thanks for that!

I actually did something similar without realizing it by creating an actual canonical file to start with for my latest guide Google My Business which in Dutch is Google Mijn Bedrijf handleiding google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-handleiding/ I have had the nr 1 position ever since it launched a week (or has it been 2 already? Dont know:) or so ago. I made it in to one large file not linking out to anything for the first week accept one strategic link to the google.com help file. This was mend as the canon indeed. Instead here I chose to optimize the category page for Google My Business and not a bulky paginated file or something like that. This category page now ranks 3 to 5th places since Google My Business is released so it's working I guess. The category page which I consider a basic keyword theme landing page -> google-plus-marketing.nl/category/google-mijn-bedrijf/

me really happy with traffic I get from it:) I think I prefer the patter approach for now above a nicely paginated multi page posts.

I experimented with this one first last few months and although it looks better it does not rank better to start with google-plus-marketing.nl/google-plus-handleiding-inhoudsopgave/ although it's ranked 1-3 for months I think simple version is best?

I have worked for a mental health institute treating addiction and associated problems. There is no way to engage with clients or have people that suffer from it participate in open forum discussions like social media. Maybe it's an option to niche it with a related but not the same theme like: things you can do the stay mentally fit tips Tweet channel (I like short names you see). Not associating it directly get's attention and people not bothered to participate in discussions like: how not to feel dead tired and empty when not working tips. This is a prelude state to becoming a client so its prospecting nevertheless.

A more seen and practical alternative is to start expert communities with doctors and other experts that post and interact in a community for example about staying mentally fit. It's a double edge sword as the experts can build online authority and people in real need for medical attention can linger and interact around general items like news clippings on new treatments etc. Why not send a PM to the doc that was discussing e-cigarettes about you not being able to quit smoking pot?

communities recommended:
Social Media Strategies (Google+) with 133K members, high quality posts and moderation
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/100354381402619402956
And of course my very own community on everthing Google + marketing:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/114482540072196914877
But i'ts in Dutch but he where else do I get a change to mention it once i a while on all these EN media:)

yes but that's to easy and where is the fun in it:-) But could also fast become a case of chasing ghosts and shadows it it originates from websites with millions of pages?

Hi... I would not prefer a client side approach to this. If it's readable depends on the script itself. Although some JS fans will say this alright I would prefer to do this server side with php, or similar, and make a template that does this rewrite. It's not to hard. Or why not a batch run to modify all pages once to hardcode the correct title in the page? Have some scripts that can do this for you if you would like.

Hope this helps.

Hi everyone,

Im sort of a Google+ nutter and I wanted to figure out exactly what is required for a full bleed image to appear for +1 share on the page itself. I got it figured out and I think it requires:

• canonical url
• og:image
• image wider then 506px
• type article or page (microdata format)

But sometimes it seems that pages without a canonical url still show full bleed image when shared as link when I insert the url directly into a google+ post. My question is if this could be a cached version of the page where it had a canonical url?

Don't really know if that anyone is interested but I made a simple tool that checks if a page meets requirements for having a full bleed image when share as link on Google+. Think I nailed it pretty close but can't seem to get the full bleed image to appear for the tool itself do:) Please dont ask. It's driving me mad already.

http://www.googlewiki.nl/seo-checker/check-fullbleed.php

Try it. Take a blog post url, check it with this tool and then see for yourself if it's accurate. If not I would like to hear very much as it would help me pin point it better!

Examples of pages with specific no no factors for you to try are:
http://www.copyblogger.com/google-authorship/ (img to small)
http://www.theverge.com/2014/7/14/5896979/gmail-api-isnt-the-end-of-email-its-a-new-beginning (no og prefix but works)

No do not use a 301 and certainly do not remove any pages from the index as mentioned here. That's foolish and uncalled for and potentially harmful against zero to no risk if you would let them be and only make them less prominent to users of the site. And if you really feel you need to cut drastically in the number of tag pages then use rel=canonical instead of a 301!

Consolidate not decimate! When we 301 we assimilate pages to 1 page. We say the old page is gone for good and the new 1 is the new page for the old link. This diffuses the keyword that the page was found for as it melts all different pages that 301 to a page into 1. However when we use a canonical url we consolidate the pages into 1 new one that bundle the old. When we search for a page that has and canonical to a other page it still ranks next to the new page for a while. Only the title in search is the same as the page referred to with the canonical. With the 301 it will disappears completely from the index and google cache along with it's internal keyword binding it hat before. So use canonical not 301! And my advice: consolidate to 1 useful tag page with a real body of work and optimize this for a primary keyword like 'seo news' or something and leave the pages with the 301 be but don't link to them anymore from then on.

Hope this is helpful.

Gr Daniel

Well if we would be punished for this then I would have no blog at all. I optimize for this exactly and rank nr 1 for months on end with dozens of nice saught after keywords. Like this one google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-handleiding/ keyword Google Mijn Bedrijf handleiding (Google My Business guide)
or this one 
http://google-plus-marketing.nl/google-mijn-bedrijf-opzetten/ for Google Mijn Bedrijf opzetten (set up Google My Business) It a landing page on position 1 since it has been created.

So you see why I dont give a r.. as... what they say. It works just fine for me.

Hope this helps

Gr Daniel