AMPXF - AMP for Xenforo 2

AMPXF - AMP for Xenforo 2 [Paid] 1.4.9

No permission to buy (€50.00)
It is the Paypal provided code.

Code:
<form action="https://www.paypal.com/donate" method="post" target="_top">
<input type="hidden" name="hosted_button_id" value="KYRVD3CEVMGBC" />
<input type="image" src="http://cafesaxophone.com/x-pic/pp-donate.png" border="0" name="submit" title="PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!" alt="Donate with PayPal button" />
<img alt="" border="0" src="https://www.paypal.com/en_GB/i/scr/pixel.gif" width="1" height="1" />
</form>
There's a git issue where someone converted it into a link for amp:
 
This thread view and get this Error via google webmaster tools for only one thread URL. Enabled Remove custom font-colors and -sizes from posts option then Google AMP Validation Started. Do we still need open a support ticket for this issue?

View attachment 244801
I think you should disable that option if it is only one single thread :)
Please create a support ticket with the url included and I can have a look 👍
 
I think you should disable that option if it is only one single thread :)
Please create a support ticket with the url included and I can have a look 👍

Done but I am does not think this will be happened only once page Because Google webmaster tools still Checking all forum URL. So happening will be more URL.
 
Oh how I love seeing stuff like that! :)
Realy? :D

Here is a GSC graphic of the increase in AMP clicks and impressions since the start of the add-on.
The increase should increase even more when I have eliminated all the old errors in the pages and Google is done with the re-indexing of the fixed pages that are currently "excluded". (round about a million items)

1611599595392.webp
 
@mazzly Does AMP addon check new thread content are AMP Validator? If not then should add support AMP Validator check before submitted new thread/reply and let user inform about there content are not Valid for submit. So we are not get any issue in future about AMP error.

AMP Validator check:

  • Invalid URL link
  • Invalid IMG URL link (
    )
  • Unnecessary BB Code/Color/Text size)
  • and So more for AMP validation checker
 
For some time, I have been receiving this type of error. I can get around 500 a day and it's a bit of a hassle. How to do?
  • ErrorException: [E_NOTICE] Uninitialized string offset: 0
  • src/addons/MaZ/AMP/Pub/Controller/AMPRobot.php:40
#0 src/addons/MaZ/AMP/Pub/Controller/AMPRobot.php(40): XF::handlePhpError(8, '[E_NOTICE] Unin...', '/home/enzityz/w...', 40, Array)
#1 src/XF/Mvc/Dispatcher.php(350): MaZ\AMP\Pub\Controller\AMPRobot->actionIndex(Object(XF\Mvc\ParameterBag))
#2 src/XF/Mvc/Dispatcher.php(257): XF\Mvc\Dispatcher->dispatchClass('MaZ\\AMP:AMPRobo...', 'Index', Object(XF\Mvc\RouteMatch), Object(MaZ\AMP\Pub\Controller\AMPRobot), Object(XF\Mvc\Reply\Reroute))
#3 src/XF/Mvc/Dispatcher.php(113): XF\Mvc\Dispatcher->dispatchFromMatch(Object(XF\Mvc\RouteMatch), Object(MaZ\AMP\Pub\Controller\AMPRobot), Object(XF\Mvc\Reply\Reroute))
#4 src/XF/Mvc/Dispatcher.php(55): XF\Mvc\Dispatcher->dispatchLoop(Object(XF\Mvc\RouteMatch))
#5 src/XF/App.php(2300): XF\Mvc\Dispatcher->run()
#6 src/XF.php(488): XF\App->run()
#7 index.php(20): XF::runApp('XF\\Pub\\App')
#8 {main}
array(4) {
["url"] => string(46) "/amprobot/4ff7c779-fe63-49f5-baee-bf50c8df897c"
["referrer"] => bool(false)
["_GET"] => array(0) {
}
["_POST"] => array(0) {
}
}
 
For some time, I have been receiving this type of error. I can get around 500 a day and it's a bit of a hassle. How to do?
Hmm, seems like the addon triggers that error when the AMPRobot is communicating with it.. I'll check into that asap and see what might be the problem. Could you open a support ticket about this on ampxf? then it is a bit easier to track version etc :)
 
OK, I have purchased and installed this add-on and will be giving a completely unbiased review in exactly one month from now, complete with traffic figures.
I assume all the reviews so far are unbiased, including beta testers. If anyone is incentivized to give biased reviews, well, that would be good to know.

I'm 2.5 weeks in, a small site, and I'm seeing results.

The good:
  • I now have AMP results in GSC (started after a day or two)
  • AMPbot is more proactive/aggressive than GSC and is very helpful as a "site doctor" to discover problematic content, and it provides ample info to pinpoint the issue and resolve. Thankfully, my issues have been manageable (much less than 1% of scanned pages have needed fixing).
  • Like others, I am seeing some moderate improvement in page views, visitors, ad revenue. for sure. However, so far, it's hard for me to discern whether that is seasonal, or a direct relation to this feature, or what.

The maybe-not-so-good:
  • still unsure of the implications of this (i.e., how best to interpret the true impact)
  • Google spiked recognition of my AMP pages in the initial days, but then stalled out, and I'm not sure why. Just under 2% of my AMP-enabled pages are being recognized by Google, while my standard sitemap content (canonical) remains almost entirely indexed.

To that latter point, @mazzly, would it make sense to include ?amp=1 in the sitemap, or am I missing the plot?

Amp Errors, Valid, Impressions

1611664335458.webp
All-in data on Clicks, Impressions, CTR, Position:

1611664455943.webp

As more pages get indexed, I assume that could pull down my Position score (i.e., newly indexed, but not necessarily placed high, so it will pull down that score).

All in all, this is a worthy purchase for me as a very old small site with a lot of historical content. I will continue to monitor progress, but without this add-on, I'd have nothing new to monitor to begin with! Worth it.
 
That is because that Paypal button seems to have some things that are not according to spec..
So would it be possible to just remove the paypal button from the amp page?

Or, in this case the button is in a notice, to remove notices from amp?
 
So would it be possible to just remove the paypal button from the amp page?

Or, in this case the button is in a notice, to remove notices from amp?
This is possible, Open the notice, and under "page criteria" set "Content template is NOT:" to "amp_thread_view" :)
 
still unsure of the implications of this (i.e., how best to interpret the true impact)
Well your GSC stats also show the nice improvements in clicks, so the amp-linker not being implemented shouldn't "inflate the number" much really..

The amp-linker itself is easy to add to the addon, it is the configuration after that the user will have to do that doesn't seem so straightforward, and it differs depending on what type of Ganalytics code you use in your normal site..
I've looked at enabling it for my own site, and can't really figure out "an easy solution".. And I want to be able to help my customers set it up easily and not have to read through tons of documentation and add custom dimensions in ganalytics etc etc :D
Google spiked recognition of my AMP pages in the initial days, but then stalled out, and I'm not sure why. Just under 2% of my AMP-enabled pages are being recognized by Google, while my standard sitemap content (canonical) remains almost entirely indexed.
This is a bit weird... But I'm seeing the same for my own site..

Wondering if this has to do with pages that have "thin content" or similar.. but the 2% number really sounds really small..

To that latter point, @mazzly, would it make sense to include ?amp=1 in the sitemap, or am I missing the plot?
Well according to amp.dev docs they don't mention adding it into the sitemap, and a quick google about it also gave me the following result:
https://www.seroundtable.com/google-amp-pages-sitemaps-22848.html (slightly "old", but I think it still holds)

So I would say no.. Also you can look at how quickly googlebot realized those AMP pages existed after installation :)

All-in data on Clicks, Impressions, CTR, Position:

1611664455943.png
The "initial clicks bump" seem to be very common trend, and the important part is that the line after the bump stays higher than what it was before the bump :) (which it is in your case also 👍)

Could you estimate how much higher the average daily clicks is after installing compared to before? It is slightly hard to tell the scale from that image :D
 
Top Bottom