Support has been upgraded!
The Support Forum is closed. Not to worry! Providing the top quality support you expect and we're known for will continue! We're not ending support, just changing where you submit requests. This will provide you with the best experience possible.
Premium Support
Have you purchased an addon for Connections such as one of our premium templates or extensions with a valid license and you need help?
Please open a Support Ticket in your user account.
Free Support
Are you using the free Connections plugin? Don't worry, you are still very important to us! We are still providing you with the same high quality support that we're known for.
Please open a new support topic in the WordPress support forums for Connections.
- This topic has 7 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 8 months ago by
Steven Zahm.
-
AuthorPosts
-
11/23/2015 at 2:32 pm #356084
Scott Stoddard
ParticipantWhen performing a site search of our site for a staff member by name, we get a proper result for the contact card in the generic directory, however, we also seem to get a card for them with a link pointing to the academic department “Religion” even though we do not identify those people in the shortcodes on the religion page and when you visit that faculty page, only the 6 people that are supposed to be in Religion show up there.
See here: http://droplr.ubishops.ca/1bkQY
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Scott11/23/2015 at 3:23 pm #356092Steven Zahm
Keymaster@ Scott
My best guess is that those entries did exist on that page at the time Google indexed the page. I would assume since they are not present now, when Google reindexes the page, those incorrect links will be removed.
The entry is being shown, even though it is being excluded by the shortcode is because when an entry is queried directly it’ll be displayed. I’m thinking maybe I should add a filter which does a 404 when an entry is being requested that should be excluded based on the shortcode attributes. I added this to my issue tracker.
Back to the issue on hand, like I said, I do believe these results will be removed the next time Google indexes the page. I think the page can be requested to be indexed thru the Webmaster tools.
I’ll leave this issue open for now, let me know if these link do not get removed in the next couple weeks.
oh… just remembered, in Webmaster tools there is an option to remove links from the index… maybe you can remove the invalid links?
11/26/2015 at 11:20 am #356363Scott Stoddard
ParticipantUnfortunately, I wish that were true. ;)
I thought it might be a possibility because one of the first sets of pages we designed was the Religion pages and when we incorporated Connections, we might have (although likely only for a day or two) listed all of the people on that page. That was in August.
So, then I took a new faculty member whose account was only created last week (Nov. 19) and searched for it “Arbery”. Unfortunately, still found as existing on the Religion faculty page!
http://droplr.ubishops.ca/FNU4
So weird, I can’t actually see how this is happening, but it is definitely reproducible with all new accounts.
Scott
11/30/2015 at 11:27 am #356584Steven Zahm
Keymaster@ Scott
Looking at the Custom Google Search results… I noticed this page:
It seems all entries are listed on this page and browsing the site manually, it does not seem this page is being used. If I go to the Religion Department / Faculty page the individual entry details show on this page, not
/faculty-profile-details/So, I’m guess that unused page is in the sitemap which gets indexed by Google and because all entries are one this page, this somehow generates the search results you are seeing.
I guess my next suggestion, make sure this page is truly unused and trash it. Then wait to see if the search results are corrected after Google reindexes the site. If it does not, that would be a head scratcher because why this one page… other instances where you are using Connections on this site are not being indexed like this… must be something unique with this page, hopefully this unused page is the cause.
12/02/2015 at 9:45 am #356839Scott Stoddard
ParticipantThank you very much! This issue is now fixed.
12/02/2015 at 10:24 am #356847Steven Zahm
Keymaster@ Scott
So, the cause of the issue was that “rogue” page?
12/14/2015 at 1:14 pm #357960Scott Stoddard
ParticipantYes the cause was the rogue page. My fault for completely forgetting I had created it!! :-)
Julie
12/14/2015 at 1:56 pm #357984Steven Zahm
Keymaster@ Scott
Great to hear we figured out this why this was happening!
-
AuthorPosts
You cannot reply to this support topic. Please open your own support topic.
