Welcome to the Q&A Forum

thanks for the thorough response. I was leaning toward leaving it alone for the time being and this helps affirm my decision. I don't think we are going to see much benefit from tampering with it to make it more Googlebot-friendly

Hi Corp Analytics, Alex has raised some important questions. Did you see his response? Let us know so we can help, thanks! Christy

Same Question: I know Google has a Structured Data Testing Tool here: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/ I don't think it works with Client-Side content, so just wondering if there is another way to test?

Hey there! I can't really take credit for this, but I found a Moz post from a while ago that might be helpful to you: https://moz.com/blog/how-to-allow-google-to-crawl-ajax-content Rob also links to a more recent article that he wrote on the subject that offered another solution. Hope that helps! Thanks! Mike

You have 60,000 pages that are not unique at all.  The question is not... "what will happen when we delete it"... Instead, the question is... "What will these sites have left after it's gone". If they are shells full of nothing... then your entire enterprise is not worth much.

Thank you Miriam! This helps clarify some things. I was leaning toward a format like this so I'm glad to have a second opinion! Now I just need to back it with some empirical evidence!

Much similar to many of the rules and guidelines by which Google calculates search rankings, they don't openly provide that type of information to the general public, because obviously their users would take advantage of it and manipulate the crawlers for the purpose of altering their rankings. If you wanted to know something like that for sure, you would probably need to conduct field research doing something extreme like having 100% javascript content in one segment of your site and 100% HTML on another and track which IPs and user agents hit the pages. However an educated guess of mine believes this: The bots that crawl HTML also crawl Javascript. To make separate bots to do individual tasks would be stupid. there would be absolutely no benefit nor would the sanitation of the data the crawlers obtain be increased using seperate bots. Because it can be clearly concluded the difference between html and Javascript, and at an automated level as well.

That would be the first step--push it onto HR's plate and have them write new ads and job descriptions. : )  But it's hardly likely that it would be sufficient, anyway, I mean your company may have authority in organic rankings for whatever it is your company does or makes and the likelihood that Google's going to push a page up for what is essentially a barely related topic (the job description) may be overly optimistic on the boss' part. If you can show that at least the job ad comes up for the job title and company name, at least that might be something they can latch onto.

Have you tried consolidating the tags as much as possible? Custom variables may help to do this: https://support.google.com/tagmanager/topic/7683268?visit_id=0-636607210631473682-3757403381&rd=1 From what I know, if you can avoid multiple containers it’s better. However I’d recommend checking out this for more info: https://developers.google.com/tag-manager/devguide?hl=en#multiple-containers I hope that helps

Yes I'm currently doing this for a number of sites An audit would be testing the current implementation Identifying new itemprops to add as you say. And identifying the snippets and serp features that the site has the potential to compete for.

Thank you! The redirect was my suspicion as well. It's the last issue that could be causing this, thank you for affirming.

What you are seeing is google showing you specific papers on cancer trials and how many other papers have cited these trials. It is an organic listing. It is part of the Google Scholar search engine https://scholar.google.com/schhp?hl=en&as_sdt=5,31&sciodt=0,31 You can read more about google scholar here https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/about.html Thanks, Don

Hey there, Since you are basically disabling the subdomains, there won't be any future data in GCS for them anymore. I'd recommend to set up separate folders in GSC in the same way as it used to be for the subdomains. Then, you will be able to track each folder separately like before. Cheers, Martin

Yes Nikki, great addition about avoiding redirect chains! Redirects are useful and difficult to avoid in most cases but redirecting to a redirect should always be avoided for the sake of Page Speed and common sense Cheers!!

Donald is right, here's an article on the Search Engine Journal website that might be helpful in getting you started, it was published about a year ago but should still hold true. It talks mainly about the potential secondary benefits of adopting IA, in terms of having a cleaner setup and therefore potentially ranking better, but those improvements also give some clue as to the hoops you may need to jump through.

Yes, unfortunately, what the agency is suggesting is like a recipe from a duplicate content cookbook. They are trying to offer a shortcut to doing the actual work that should be involved in publishing hundreds of websites. Has the business ever considered consolidating everything into a single brand with a single site? That way, they could have 1 page for each city and 1 page for each service, redirecting all the old sites to the new one, and never having to worry again about creating content for hundreds of microsites.

Mememax,  thank you.  I did not know this. Have you tried the Custom 404 Widget?

One person's 'mostly unique' and another person's 'duplicate' are two different things. Without knowing the domain(s), it felt like a good idea to cover that angle - just in case. Though I would be inclined to agree in regard to unrelated links in many instances.