Daily Search Forum Recap: December 31, 2015

Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.

Search Engine Roundtable Stories:

Other Great Search Forum Threads:

Source: SEroundTable

Bing's Home Page For New Years Is Interactively Awesome

Bing New Years

So we covered Google’s New Years hatched logo but what about Bing, the second most important search engine.

If you go to Bing you may see a boxed up surprise where you can change up the home page for New Years. The animated GIF above shows me clicking on the various lights, frost, fire and more to dress up the home page for the New Years holiday season.

It is fun and cool.

Ask.com also has a nice home page, showing the ball drop:

Ask.com New Years Eve Ball Drop

Forum discussion at Google+.

Source: SEroundTable

Google Search Adds "View on Twitter" To Tweets

Google has made a small but significant change to the way they show tweets from Twitter in their search results. They added a blue clickable link to the tweet that reads “View On Twitter.”

Here is an animated picture of how it works now, notice the link:

Here is how it looked like when it launched in August:

I spotted this Dan Barker on Twitter.

Forum discussion at Twitter.

Source: SEroundTable

Google: We Don't Forward Retroactively Your Reconsideration Requests

We know that some old messages may show up in the Google Search Console around manual actions and their history. But Google doesn’t have a system to send you the old reconsideration requests and manual actions dating back forever.

A Google Webmaster Help thread has an SEO asking for the old messages because he has a new client that had some bad history in 2011 and he wants to be able to see the full history.

John Mueller of Google said it isn’t something they offer. He wrote in the thread “this is not something that we’d forward retroactively.”

Why? John said:

One reason the account might not have the older reconsideration request texts is that in the beginning we didn’t include the reconsideration request in the message. I don’t know when that specific change took place, but if you’re looking at a longer period of time, that might be a factor.

It would be cool to get the full history to have Google note what is resolved and what is not.

Forum discussion at Google Webmaster Help.

Source: SEroundTable

John Mueller: Fetch As Google Renders AngularJS But Cache Doesn't Currently

click for full size

John Mueller of Google answered two questions around AngularJS this week, one in the Google Webmaster Help forums and one in a Google Hangout on Tuesday.

The first was why does Google’s fetch and render feature in Google Search Console show the page rendered properly but the Google cache version shows nothing at all?

Google’s John Mueller said this is normal. He said “At the moment, that’s normal: the cached page shows the HTML page as it was fetched, not the rendered view.”

So do not worry if you see this for your AngularJS site in Google.

The second question in the hangout was is it okay to generate canonicals and the like through JavaScript in the body area, not the header, will Google pick up on it with AngularJS frameworks. John Mueller said it should work fine that way as Google should render it.

The question was asked at the 43:10 mark into the video:

In an angularJS site, is the generated <head> part considered by Google? So, for example, is it ok to generate the rel=”canonical” through JS? Or the render involves only the <body> part?

The answer:

Yes, that is fine. If you use JavaScript to update the head of your page, then as we render those pages we would pick that up and use that as appropriate.

Here is the video embed:

Forum discussion at Google Webmaster Help and Google+.

Source: SEroundTable

Spoiler Alert: Google New Year's Eve Logo Hatches A…

If you visit Google today, you will see their New Years Eve logo. It is a bunch of of birds with party hats on a branch, looking at an egg that is about to hatch. What will be found in that egg is the big question. It will hatch as the clock strikes midnight, on New Year’s Day.

The logo above is the Google New Year’s Eve Doodle.

Well, lucky for us, some locations already see January 1, 2016 and we know what hatched.

Ready for it? Here are the logos for Google New Year’s Day:

Yep, it looks like turtles, alligators and ducks.

Why turtles?

Forum discussion at Google+.

Source: SEroundTable

Daily Search Forum Recap: December 30, 2015

Here is a recap of what happened in the search forums today, through the eyes of the Search Engine Roundtable and other search forums on the web.

Search Engine Roundtable Stories:

Other Great Search Forum Threads:

Source: SEroundTable

Small Google Update Yesterday? Webmasters Reporting Positive Traffic Signals.

google update

I highly doubt Google did any quality update yesterday, as they said updates like Penguin aren’t happening until next year but with core search algorithms, those are constantly being tweaked.

The last update we saw was around December 16th and this was not a confirmed Google update.

Now I am seeing some chatter around a December 29th Google update. Here are some quotes from the ongoing WebmasterWorld thread:

I am not sure what happened but yesterday I got a small uptick in traffic (about a 8-10%) and a big boost in conversions (about a 40% increase). I normally see a small uptick for both right after Christmas but nothing like what I saw yesterday. Did anyone else see this?

Saw the same thing — had a good string of sales come through at about the same time. Guess this is the way it’s going to be from now on… I suppose the non-zombie day is somewhere around sunday-monday at the moment.

Our Google traffic has jumped sharply in the last few days, compared to the same days of the week earlier in December. Daily revenues are way up, too.

Ditto what EG said.

Xmas was nice, but it’s good to see intent ramping up again for what we sell.

Most of the automated tracking tools aren’t updated yet today but RankRanger does show a bit of volatility today. SERPs.com shows a drop off, which is unusual. But the rest seem pretty static.

Have you seen any changes this week in your Google traffic, outside of the holiday/new years stuff that is expected (of course it is hard to isolate patterns during the last week of December).

I did ask a few SEOs, especially Glenn Gabe who follows Phantom closely and he said:

Forum discussion at WebmasterWorld.

Source: SEroundTable

Google: Links Activated By On Hover Action Are Invisibile To GoogleBot

Google’s John Mueller said in a Google Hangout yesterday that if you deploy an on-hover event that will turn text on your web page into links, GoogleBot most likely won’t see those as links. Why? GoogleBot won’t be using it’s mouse to scroll over the text on your page and thus, most likely won’t trigger the on-hover event.

The question came up in the hangout at the 35:30 mark into the video where someone asked if they use jQuery to hide links from content stealers but wanted GoogleBot to see them, would it work.

The question:

Weâve tested reversed links with JQuery, would this be considered cloaking. Since when the link is hovered over by a real visitor, the real link is revealed.

John’s response:

Ah, okay, so kind of like, on hover and then it turns into a link.

What would happen in a case like that is that we would probably not pick up those links. Because GoogleBot isnât going to hover over every part of the page. It will pull out the page, render it once, like a browser, it is not going to interact with the page to see what is actually going to happen when you do physical things.

If you need those links to be found by GoogleBot, then make sure we can find them when we load the page. If you just want to make them available for users, then sure, I think that might be an option. I think in most cases you wouldnât want to do this. And if you are having problems with scrapers than Iâd try to find something different to kind of attack that more directly then to try to obfuscate the links like this, which could end up causing more problems for your web site in search, then the scrapers anyway.

So it seems you should not take this approach.

Here is the video embed:

Forum discussion at Google+.

Source: SEroundTable

Google: You Can Remove Mass Links From Your Disavow File

Earlier this month, we reported a case of someone removing all their links from their disavow file and then saying they saw a huge ranking benefit from doing so. Of course, there may have been other variables in that case, but still, it isn’t the first time I’ve heard of this.

In the Google Hangout yesterday with Google’s John Mueller, someone asked John if that is okay or are you setting yourself up for being reviewed as a spammer. The question was, can you safely remove links in mass from your disavow file. John said, you can do whatever you want, it is just a technical change and it doesn’t necessarily result in a manual review.

The question was at the 30:35 minute mark into the video:

If a great number of URLs (more than 1000 URLs and 1000 domains) was removed from Disavow file, can it be called as link boom? (Can it be understood by google as spam actions?) For example if the URLs were added by mistake more than a half of a year ago.

John Mueller responded short and sweet:

I donât see any problem with that. That is not something where I would say this would be a bad thing or a good thing. It is essentially just a technical change that you are making, you are telling us when we recrawl those URLs we should take those links into count. And those are normal good links then by all means let us take those into account.

So go for it, but of course, if those links hurt you, then removing them from the disavow file can cause some serious damage.

Here is the video embed:

Forum discussion at Google+.

Source: SEroundTable