mirror of
https://git.sr.ht/~seirdy/seirdy.one
synced 2024-11-10 00:12:09 +00:00
syndicate
This commit is contained in:
parent
1163e0d311
commit
4ee4730cb8
1 changed files with 5 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -7,6 +7,11 @@ replyType: "NewsArticle"
|
||||||
replyAuthor: "Gizmodo"
|
replyAuthor: "Gizmodo"
|
||||||
replyAuthorType: "NewsMediaOrganization"
|
replyAuthorType: "NewsMediaOrganization"
|
||||||
replyAuthorURI: "https://gizmodo.com/"
|
replyAuthorURI: "https://gizmodo.com/"
|
||||||
|
syndicatedCopies:
|
||||||
|
- title: 'The Fediverse'
|
||||||
|
url: 'https://pleroma.envs.net/notice/AYlCIhRRPwoFEDB0dM'
|
||||||
|
- title: 'The Mojeek Discourse'
|
||||||
|
url: 'https://community.mojeek.com/t/cnet-didn-t-have-to-delete-old-articles/703'
|
||||||
---
|
---
|
||||||
CNET actually didn't have to delete old articles to improve ranking. If CNET simply removed those articles from its sitemap, used [WebSub](https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/) to inform Google (and IndexNow to inform Bing, Seznam, and Yandex) of new higher-priority pages, and maybe used `robots.txt` to disallow crawling of stale pages: CNET could keep old content but prioritize the crawling of recent content. Nothing I just described is Google-specific; these are all agreed-upon standards that work across several search engines.
|
CNET actually didn't have to delete old articles to improve ranking. If CNET simply removed those articles from its sitemap, used [WebSub](https://www.w3.org/TR/websub/) to inform Google (and IndexNow to inform Bing, Seznam, and Yandex) of new higher-priority pages, and maybe used `robots.txt` to disallow crawling of stale pages: CNET could keep old content but prioritize the crawling of recent content. Nothing I just described is Google-specific; these are all agreed-upon standards that work across several search engines.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue