In this post I will change the canonical URL in the <head>, just to see how Google and Googlebot behave between discovery of the URL discovered in the tag.
It’s normal, the idea is to check how Google SERPs behave with this slow page.
I’ve added a PHP code snippet to make this page to take at least 10 seconds to load using “Insert PHP Code Snippet” WP plugin.
FYI, it is how it looks in the UI of WP:
Well, I had to add content to make this test to work, so here it is !
To find this page during the test, he magic word is: drumblebassseo .
I’ve copied and past few sentences below, found randomly on the web, just to give to credibility to this page:
The classic editor does not solve this issue nor does the tinymce help. I’m embedding HTML from Amazon. Amazon gives HTML for products for their affiliates.
And also this one:
A few people were expressing their frustration with inserting Amazon compliant images in WordPress. The problem seems simple enough. Take an image from Amazon and put it on your website.
edit: I’ve removed the tag to slow down the website. I’ll check the results now !
I recently stated a huge difference between the traffic monitored in the Search Console and what I could find in the log files using Kelogs log analyzer. My first hypothesis is that Google Image could be at the origin of this difference, with a preload in background. Second hypothesis is that the first results in Google Web is preloaded if the page is usually too slow.
Protocol to check the first hypothesis:
I’ll try to get the image below indexed for this website, despite it is hosted on amazon, and I will live check the impact on log files when I search for it in Google.
Let’s come back in few days when Googlebot will have indexed this page and display the image in Google Image (I’ll use “site:quentinadt.com” to check it).
So here is the picture of someone swimming:
To check the second hypothesis, Ill make a page which is very slow but ranks on a specific unique keyword.
In this post, there is a background image. It is the picture of my 3 years old Macbook Pro 2016 which is already dying… The screen is sometimes not usable, and most of the time there is just one line, vertical.
The idea is to check if either of not Google will index an image which is accessible only from a background CSS call.
John Muller, from Google, in 2018:
And as far as I know we don’t use CSS images at all for image search.
If you’ve read my last blog post, you will see that it didn’t help to use the title of an image to rank in the SERPs.
So I decided to push the test a little bit further, until I manage to get the image indexed.
So here is the picture of a very rare – endemic – fish that you can found only in Croatian rivers. I’m note passionate about fish, but I thought it’s an ok picture for testing the ranking capacities of the title element.
So again, I’ve added a title, but this time, it contains what most probably is the name of this endemic fish.
I recently read that Google uses the title of the images to rank them in Google Images.
It would be kind of a little revolution, since it has never been considered as useful.
I decided to make my own test, just to make sure it works also for me.
So here is the picture, it’s a screenshot of a presentation shared on Linkedin. There are 34 keywords in the title. You can only find the keywords in the title.
This page will be updated with the results !
Edit 1: 3 days later, the page is indexed, but the keywords in the title aren’t findable in Google. So currently, the title has zero impact.
Edit 2: 2 weeks after, still no result when I search a keyword found in the title.
Il suffit d’une ligne pour augmenter la précision des rapports Google Analytics de web performance (timing utilisateur):
ga(‘create’, ‘UA-XXXX-Y’, {‘siteSpeedSampleRate’: 100}); // Théoriquement 100% des pages vues
Vous n’obtiendrez pas 100%, notamment car certains navigateurs ne sont pas compatibles avec la mesure du timing utilisateur. Néanmoins, vous devriez facilement dépasser les 25%.
You want to crawl millions of URL and make a super SEO Audit ?
Here are the best crawler for SEO on a large to very large website:
Desktop SEO Crawler (starts at more or less 200$ / year / unlimited crawl)
Screaming Frog (Linux / Windows / Mac OS) -> The big plus: native function to cross data from G.A., Search Console, MajesticSEO, Ahrefs… + You can cross with your log files ! +/- 60 GB of disk space for 1 million URL crawled. Read this post to setup Screaming Frog on Remote Desktop Ubuntu Cloud instance.
Sitebulb (Windows / Mac OS) -> pretty rich ! Interesting visualization of the internal links structure.
Hextrakt (Windows) -> URL Segmentation is a real + when it comes to analyze Big Websites. Hextrakt does the job !
Xenu (Windows) -> only for very basic checkup, like 404.
SaaS SEO Crawler (starts at +159$ / month / for 2 millions URLs crawled per month)
Kelogs (Im the founder, and we have the best price ;))
You would like to setup a remote desktop with Screaming Frog to crawl huge websites (+1 million pages) ?
You only need your crawler to run once a month ? (few hours or days)
You have some basic technical skills and want to discover the power of the Cloud ?
An Ubuntu Remote Desktop in a cloud instance in OVH offers a good price to performance solution. (1,5 € per day / 2$ or half this price if you take a monthly subscription )
