4 replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
source | link
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questionsone of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txtrobots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
3 replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reasonoriginal reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
2 Migration of MSO links to MSE links
source | link
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reasonoriginal reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
  • The two examples that Maile Ohye gives in that video are 1) articles (e.g. blog posts) that are spread over several pages, and 2) product pages of e-commerce sites. Neither of these examples fit our case. Each answer stands on its own, unlike the "cookie" example in the video where one page by itself doesn't make any sense.

  • rel=canonical is for duplicate content – and the most important part (as far as searching goes) is indeed duplicated across pages: The question. Which, for obvious reasons, is repeated above the answers on every page. Why is it the most important part? Because the question is what people google for. They're typing a question into the search box because they need an answer, not the other way around.

  • Since the voting system is designed to push the best answers to the top, the correct thing to give a user searching for "How do I solve problem X?" is the first page. If Google responds to this by sending the user to page 2 because of some obscure keyword match occuring on the second page, that means the user gets all except the 30 best answers to the question they had.

    You call this an "SEO trick"1; given the connotation that this acronym carries, I'd rather speak of "search result optimization" here (it's not about ending up in the SERP in the first place; rather, it's about having the most relevant page in the SERP). To Google, it's all just a blurb of text. But we know that the good stuff is on page one. Page two is neither the second half of a text that should be read start-to-finish, nor is it the second half of a product inventory that we want to make sure gets sold.

  • This is the most important part: If a question has more than 30 answers, something is seriously wrong. There is a good reason why this is heavily discouraged by the engine. I argue that a valid, practical, reasonably scoped question never has such a huge amount of valid answers.

    Let's look at data. Out of the six (!) open questions from 2011 that have more than thirty answers, three are of the "Please give an example of X" kind, one is borderline off-topic. The two remaining ones are iPhone development problems where the vast majority of the answers is either hardly more than a "me too", or is of the "in my particular case, I fixed this by removing the following typo in a mildly related file" kind. On one of the two questions, the downvoted answers already start on page one.

1 It should be noted that the original reason for adding the canonical isn't even valid anymore (that's solved by excluding non-default answer sorts via robots.txt), but I think it's still valid.

So, what problem would your suggested change solve?

  • You can google for the content of page 2-answers.

What problems would it cause?

  • Not marking duplicate content as such.
  • Adding irrelevant search results to the 99.9% case of searching for the question.
  • Giving validity to those endless, almost forum-style question threads that we're on a mission to rid the Internet of.
  • Spending time to work on (and risking Google punishing us for) solving a non-issue.
1
source | link