2019 年 2 月 22 日 - Google 幫助環聊筆記

問題 22:22 - 關於在熱門故事輪播中排名的問題。 在過去的幾個月裡，我們注意到我們的國際新聞網站出現了奇怪的行為。 對於相同的查詢，我們在新聞選項卡 SERP 中的排名非常好，但對於相同的查詢，我們沒有出現在頭條新聞輪播中，而對於另一邊的相同查詢，我們在視頻輪播中排名很好。 所以我的問題是，我們可以實施一個特定的結構化數據，以便出現在頭條新聞輪播中。 我們正確實現了 AMP 頁面和結構化數據，所以我們想知道是否需要執行特定的實現才能出現在熱門故事輪播中？

回答 23:37 - 通常不會，如果您實施 AMP，我認為對於移動設備來說這是必需的，我認為對於桌面設備來說，您不需要 AMP 用於熱門故事輪播，這不是 100% 確定的。 但是，如果您已經實現了該功能，那麼無論如何您都會被覆蓋。 否則，頭條新聞功能是有機搜索功能，這並不是說您需要做任何特定的事情才能看到，而是我們嘗試有機地選擇它並在我們認為有意義時展示它。

問題 27:35 - 如何確保 GEO TLD 具有沒有的 Geo 目標。 因此，如果我在印度輸入紐約的酒店，則顯示印度網站。 所以問題是我怎樣才能仔細檢查什麼樣的地理目標任務是什麼樣的。

Answer 27:55 - The thing that I usually do to check is on the one hand, go to that local Google version and other hand there's an advanced search setting that allows you to see the results for a specific country. You can get there fairly quickly by just adding or changing the Url query “ &gl= country code”. You can also you HL= and specific language code, if you want the search results in a different language. Both of those you can set in the advanced search setting in the result too. This won't help with the sort of local search results, however. So if you're looking for a pizzeria in one city then that's not something we have as a parameter.

Question 29:30 - We have two chairs, one in leather, one in fabric, both with separate URLs and different model numbers. Is this a problem or would they be filtered out for duplicate content?

Answer 30:00 - Thats a really common question that we get a lot for E-commerce sites. Unfortunately the answer is, it depends. By default I would prefer to have fewer pages and the advantage is its less to crawl so it's easier to update and on the other hand, fewer pages means we can concentrate the value on fewer URLs, we don't have to dilute it across different versions… Chances are that one product page will be more relevant in the search results in general because we are able to concentrate those signals, all of that value into that product page. The thing that I would call out as an exception here is if people are explicitly looking for something different, so one of these variations is very different the other one and it doesn't make sense to combine them.

Question 32:00 - If you have an e-commerce website and you get a lot of links to product pages which due to their nature expire, what can you do to those pages so that the link equity to those pages won't be lost? Would you create a redirect rule that automatically redirects this page to a subcategory?

Answer 32:55 - In general people see this as more of problem then it actually is, for the most part if the content is so temporary that it expires regularly. Then usually that's not something that people will link to and maybes thats some you can encourage people to link to in different ways. For example if you know that this product is only going to last a couple of months then it's not going to be available ever again and maybe it makes more sense to encourage users to link to the category of products instead or to your business instead of linking to this one specific product because in the long run, those links to the product that no longer exists maybe that's something that doesn't really make sense for other people as we. So what I'd recommend doing there is, on the one hand if you have products that change over time maybe that new product is a replacement of the old one and you can redirect from one old product to a new version. On the other hand if this is a informational landing page that is useful regardless of whether or not you sell that product, some of the information on that page might still be relevant to users. What I would expect from a search point of view, is to see a sort of soft 404 page. So you're saying this product doesn't exist anymore but you're still showing some content instead… There are lots of subtle edge cases here so I'm hesitant to say that everyone should do it like this or everyone should do it in another way. There's some really neat write-ups on how to handle expired content out there, so I'd look around to see what options are available and =what options makes sense in your specific case and maybe there are mixes that you can do as well where you say in the first month or so when the product is not available, you do this and then after a year I do something completely different or I just return a 404 because it's really gone and nobody should care about this. But in general, I wouldn't care too much about those links especially if they're to products that are really temporary by nature because if you're building your whole users experience up around kind of how Google uses those specific links then the chances are you're taking a bigger hit by having a bad UX then you would ever gain by tricking google into thinking that those two links that went to one expired product are now relevant to a different thing.

Question 38:00 - Lets say I have big 10,000 word piece of content, for example a guide divided into 10 chapters. From an SEO perspective is it better to publish it as a single page or to split each chapter on different dedicated page?

Answer 38:22 - Unfortunately, the answer here is also, it depends, in that sometimes people are looking one big comprehensive piece of content and sometimes people are looking for individual pieces of content. So I don't know if it would make sense to always go into the combined or always go in to the split route. What I've noticed from working with out tech writers is that sometimes content performs in ways that you don't expect and it's worth testing to see how it works well for users. Kind of trying to figure out, are people actually going through that content and getting something useful out of it, are they converting in a way that's useful for you? And based on that then making a decision, for example if you split an article up and they all start on page 5 instead of page 1 from the search results, is that still as useful to you and to users as if they landed on a big article where they had all of the comprehensive information. I don't know, maybe there are ways that you can kind of make both of those work. So I'd really recommend testing this and not kind of blindly saying from 8, 000 I need to split it up into two chunks. Instead try to figure out that makes sense for your particular piece of content and what makes sense for your ultimate goal. Your putting this content out there because you want to achieve something specific so measure what that effect is based on those different variations that you're thinking about.

Question 40:00 - I noticed a few big publications listed in Google News are back dating some of the news articles to fool Google search users into believing that they're the first source of that news can Google detect this? How does google act on this? Where can when you report such findings?

Answer 49:18 - We use multiple methods to figure out what the right date is for a page. So sometimes people put a date on the page and we say well this is not correct and we'll treat it as something else. So that's something where I don't know if I would assume that just by backdating something you would have any kind of kind of preferential visibility in the search results. So I kind of questioned that that part of the question there. One of the things I have noticed though is that a lot of publications have trouble specifying dates in a way that are kind of reasonable for Google and in a way that are hard to misunderstand. So sometimes it's something as simple as the date format where we can't recognize that this is actually a date. Sometimes it's something kind of tricky in that sometimes there's a time zone specified, sometimes there isn't, sometimes they're using structured data to specify a date and a time and then on the page that information is not available. All of these things can make it really hard for us to pick the right day sometimes it's not so much a matter of publisher trying to mislead Google but rather Google kind of being confused by what a publisher is providing and those situations are always interesting for us. So you're welcome to pass those on to me so that we can take a look to see what what is actually happening here? How did we get confused? What could we do to make it so that webmasters and publishers understand better how to provide dates that work well for Google as well?

Question 42:10 - When it comes to categorizing content Adsense is classifying some of our pages as adult and after a manual review lifting this restriction this Adsense feed into or is it linked to the search categorization or the do the two platforms use the same algorithms or talk to each other?

Answer 42:30 - So as far as I know Adsense does a lot of these classifications completely differently from search they use their own systems for this part of that kind of makes sense because they have different policies so when it comes to search we might choose to show things in one way but Adsense because they're focused more on the advertising part of the kind of set up there, they they might have more restrictive policies where they say well this type of content is not something we'd like to place ads on or they just might have different different policies then we would have in search overall. So just because you're seeing something happening from the ad side doesn't necessarily mean that the same thing would be applying from the search side.

Question 43:22 - When will structured data testing tools start showing schema injected through tag manager in JSON-LD?

Answer 43:30 - I don't know. I have seen that question pop up again on Twitter so I'll definitely bring that up with the team as well to see what we can do to make that a little bit easier. In general using the the tag manager to inject things like structured data or to inject other kind of search related functionality into the page is something that you can do. It's something that we often pick up but it's something that's a lot harder to diagnose and it's a little bit fragile. So that's something where I would recommend if if at all possible to make sure that you can inject the structured data directly on the page. That way you can use all of the testing tools out there to determine that it's working correctly and you can be sure that Google search is always taking that into account. Whereas if you use tag manager for some of these things we can pick that up when we render the page it takes a little bit longer to get there and if anything happens to kind of subtly break along the way towards rendering that page then it might happen that we don't make it and it probably will happen that other search engines won't be able to pick that structure data up either. So I'm I'm okay with using tag manager it kind of has a stopgap solution where until you can actually change those pages but I would really recommend it in the long run to make sure to put that structured data directly on the page so that you don't have this kind of unclear situation.

Question 45:15 - When website rolls out a new tech stack progressively and Googlebot sees some sections of the site and an old stack and some on a new site stack. Is this scenario something crawlers and users will be routed to what should be monitored to ensure that all go smoothly and organic search isn't impacted?

回答 45:40 - 所以我認為最後一部分是您需要意識到的，如果您在網站上進行更大的更改，則基本上不可能保證自然搜索不會受到影響。 那裡有積極和消極的方面，一方面您可能會在您的網站上進行更大的更改，特別是因為您希望自然搜索受到影響，因為您希望排名更好，所以這是我們應該能夠接受的。 另一方面，你很有可能推出一個新的技術堆棧，它打破了許多過去在搜索中運行良好的東西。 所以我想說的是，每當你對網站進行更大的改造時，你必須假設這會影響搜索，並且值得從 SEO 那裡獲得幫助，從其他人那裡獲得開發人員的幫助，以便在事前仔細檢查事情時間而不是嘗試在之後進入並說，好吧，這沒有用，我們的網站從搜索中消失了我們現在做什麼，因為如果您事後試圖修復它，那總是會是一場更大的鬥爭。 這將需要更長的時間，而且如果你從一開始就得到了正確的幫助和正確的建議，那麼你可能真的會以一種具有長期影響的方式來破壞事情，而實際上需要更長的時間才能真正解決在他們推出之前。 顯然，有時日程安排會以糟糕的方式進行，有時合適的人沒有參與正確的步驟，就像事情發生了一樣。 所以你不能總是為所有事情做好準備。 關於逐步推出，我認為這是一個很好的方法，如果您不更改通常是理想情況的 URL，您可以看到搜索引擎如何開始抓取您提供的新堆棧。 然後您可以看到這些 URL 如何改變它們在搜索中的性能。 您可以看到在搜索控制台中對這些 URL 進行點擊和展示，如果您在推出期間給它一點時間來安頓下來，那麼通常您可以確保這一切正常，我可以採取同樣的方法一種設置並將其應用於網站的較大部分，並真正逐步推出。

問題 48:26 - 一個非常糟糕的博客會導致整個網站的排名下降嗎？

回答 48:50 - 一般來說，我們會嘗試從整體上查看網站，如果網站的重要部分非常糟糕，那麼這可能會對網站其餘部分的排名產生很好的影響。 通常當你有一個博客和一個電子商務網站的情況下，電子商務網站是每個人都關注的，而博客只是提供了一點額外的信息，然後如果博客有點糟糕的是，這並沒有真正影響電子商務網站的更大部分。 它可以發揮作用的一種情況，我認為這個問題是朝著這個方向發展的，即如果博客的設置方式在技術上很糟糕，並且 Googlebot 在抓取它時遇到了很多麻煩。 可能是因為訪問 URL 真的很慢，或者它返回了很多服務器錯誤，在這種情況下，這裡已經提到過，然後會發生什麼，我們將總體上減少對該網站的抓取。 因此，我們不一定會在排名中降低它。 網站上的不良頁面，例如從技術角度來看，如果它們不起作用，我們會嘗試刪除這些頁面，但如果從抓取的角度來看，我們在抓取該網站的重要部分時遇到問題，那麼我們將減慢抓取速度，因為我們希望確保我們的抓取不是該網站表現不佳的原因。

因此，例如，如果我們爬取博客並且看到很多服務器錯誤，我們可能會說，也許我們爬得太用力了，我們不想造成任何問題，我們會降低我們的爬取速度，如果電子商務網站與博客的設置相同，那麼我們還將減少對電子商務網站的抓取。 所以我們跟踪我們在主機級別上進行的抓取量，因此如果這兩個部分在同一主機上，那麼我們可能會嘗試以相同的速度抓取它們，如果其中一個非常糟糕並且我們不能在沒有很多服務器錯誤的情況下抓取它，那麼我們將減少整體抓取。

對於很多無關緊要的網站，我們仍然可以跟上我們網站上的大多數變化，即使我們不經常抓取一個可以發揮作用的大型電子商務網站。 特別是如果您的產品來來去去，而我們無法跟上這些產品來來去去時的抓取速度，那麼電子商務網站的搜索結果最終會變得有點陳舊，這可能是用戶將在搜索結果中看到。

因此，如果他們正在搜索我不知道的新手機，並且您的電子商務網站有該新手機，但我們還無法抓取這些頁面，那麼我們將無法顯示您的該新手機的搜索結果中的網站。 所以這就是我會看一看的地方，看看你能做些什麼來改進它，所以從質量的角度來看，如果網站的一部分不是真的那麼好，顯然它會影響它也是。 但特別是從技術角度來看，如果我們在抓取網站的一部分時遇到重大問題，我們將無法很好地抓取，這不是懲罰。 這不是我們要說的，哦，這個網站很糟糕，我們不會在那里花太多時間，這更多的是我們的算法試圖成為網絡的好公民，並說好我們想確保我們是不是這個網站有這麼多麻煩的原因。

問題 52:36 - Googlebot 是否遵循 robots.txt 文件中的站點地圖命令？

回答 52:41 - 我們確實在那裡提取了站點地圖文件，但 Googlebot 不會將其作為鏈接抓取，我們會在 XML 文件中單獨處理站點地圖文件，它們不是帶有鏈接的頁面。 因此，Googlebot 不會將其作為 HTML 頁面進行跟踪，而是將其作為站點地圖文件進行請求，並使用普通的 XML 處理來處理它。

問題 53:08 - 在一個媒體網站中，我有一個響應版本的主頁部分新聞，並且新聞也有 AMP 版本，您是否建議使用 AMP 版本的主頁和備用部分，以便 Google 找到阿姨版本的新聞第一。 它對索引速度有影響嗎？

回答 53:30 - 所以從索引的角度來看，我看不出有什麼理由需要這樣做請參閱我們關注的 AMP 鏈接，該鏈接也可以獲取 AMP 頁面。 但主要是我們爬取，頁面的正常或舊版本或響應版本我不知道你會怎麼稱呼它，我們會用非 AMP 版本來爬取它。 當然，如果您的整個網站都是 AMP，那麼顯然我們會抓取它。 關於主頁和部分的 AMP 版本，最終取決於您。 因此，如果您看到用戶訪問個別新聞文章，他們點擊那裡的主頁按鈕，然後您將他們發送到您的響應式主頁版本，這可能沒關係，也許這會讓用戶感到困惑。 最終這取決於你。 通常這些頁面不會顯示在我們確實選擇 AMP 內容的新部分中。 因此，這可能不是直接問題，而是間接和長期問題。

問題 54:52 - 您是否建議在 AMP 版本中為 URL 提供站點地圖文件？

回答 54:56 - 你不需要這樣做。 同樣的例外是，如果您的整個網站只是 AMP，那麼顯然這些就是您的頁面。

問題 55:53 - 我有一些客戶，他們在這個頁面的底部有文字，今天排名很好，你知道，我們有流量，有銷售。 但是你知道這篇文章不好，因為它是為機器人寫的，你知道，不是為人寫的可以整合這個文本。 你有什麼建議？

回答 56:26 - 是的，我認為這更像是一個中期或長期項目，以考慮如何將部分文本更好地整合到頁面的正常部分中。 因此，至少目前情況並非如此，我們會查看這些頁面並說，哦，這太糟糕了，我們應該為此降級網站，而是我們嘗試在那裡獲取額外的內容，在某種程度上我認為附加內容是有用的，但如果你不能把它擠到頁面的其餘部分，那麼試著考慮一下從長遠來看你可以做到這一點的方法。 特別是我建議做的是嘗試找到減少您提供的文本數量的方法。 因此，與其底部的這篇大型 Wikipedia 文章不如將其縮減為幾句話，這樣當用戶查看它時它仍然對他們有用，並且當他們查看整個頁面時仍然為搜索引擎提供正確的上下文。

所以這不是我要說的像一個你需要立即解決的關鍵問題，而是人們可能只是用它作為一種方式，我不知道，解決該頁面上的其他缺陷開始，也許從長遠來看，解決這些缺陷比繼續構建這些沒人閱讀的長文本更好。

問題 58:03 - 我們今天遇到的問題是，我們在此文本上有一些關鍵字，它與我們從 Google 獲得的排名相關聯的 50 個詞，我們認為如果我們為客戶、客戶寫一些有趣的文本，我們可以' t 使用相同的關鍵字會更好重新編寫嗎？

回答 58:32 - 我不知道，我會嘗試尋找可以使文本同時適用於兩者的方法，但我再次將其視為更長期的東西，而不是說，哦，我需要重寫今天的一切，否則谷歌會懲罰我，但我認為很多時候人們在這些頁面上專門為搜索引擎放置了大量文本，他們沒有意識到搜索引擎已經忽略了很多文本。 因此，如果您可以減少它以減少關鍵字填充，那麼它可能會更好地工作，但有時需要一些練習並找到正確的方法來確保您涵蓋人們正在搜索的內容以及提供人們在單獨查看該頁面時需要的上下文。

問題 59:24 - 我通常為我的俄語博客寫博客文章，我需要在任何圖片中使用大量替代文本，但如果我編寫分步指南，像這樣的信息，你知道，我使用了很多的截圖我需要把所有的都放在那裡，因為我不確定他們需要從谷歌圖片中獲得這個截圖的排名。

回答 59:52 - 這取決於你。 這完全取決於你。 因此，我將更多地看待這一點，因為人們如何在視覺上搜索到我的網站，而不是如何將盡可能多的圖像添加到 Google 圖片中。 所以從這個角度來看，如果你說這些屏幕截圖對那些頁面有幫助，但沒有人會去尋找這個屏幕截圖，那麼，為什麼要麻煩呢？ 顯然，對於具有替代文本的屏幕閱讀器而言，無需過多詳細說明，因此一些替代文本在那裡很有用，但是如果您知道人們沒有通過谷歌圖像訪問您的網站以獲取這些圖像然後你可以用稍微不同的方式來寫你的文本。 您不必擔心其中的搜索圖像搜索目標部分。