Google's latest complaint

djbaxter

Well-known member
Yeah I had a look at that too. Looks like another BS failed Google feature to me.

Google's site speed metrics are getting more out of line with every other speed test site, most of which measure response in the real world and not some dubious algorithmic metric dreamed up by Google engineers.

Use these:



 
Last edited:

Alpha1

Well-known member
I don't have Google ads and we have the same issue in threads and media. We have 30k such URLs.
Its mostly Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) and some issues with Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) for mobile.

Did your google ranking plummet in early May with the May Major Google Update?
 

rickhz

Active member
I don't have Google ads and we have the same issue in threads and media. We have 30k such URLs.
Its mostly Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) and some issues with Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) for mobile.

Did your google ranking plummet in early May with the May Major Google Update?

Yep, they sure did. First the COVID dip in March, then the double whammy of the big update on May 4th.:mad:
 

rickhz

Active member
Yeah I had a look at that too. Looks like another BS failed Google feature to me.

Google's site speed metrics are getting more out of line with every other speed test site, most of which measure response in the real world and not some dubious algorithmic metric dreamed up by Google engineers.

Use these:




I have been using a couple of these for some time. Unfortunately it's Google that matters since they are the one who is responsible for my largest monthly paycheck.
 

briansol

Well-known member
I hope xf 2.2 addresses some of this. It's been a major hit to my site. It may not be accurate, but google is all about it which means if we want traffic from them, we need to comply.

There's one major area i know of, attachments and other images do not have explicit image dimensions in all cases which causes some shifting.

my mobile score is pathetic.
worse, my desktop urls all went from intermediate to poor right during the algo switch, so clearly, these elements ARE a critical part of rankings.

The number of urls keeps going down. They are indexing less and less for no reason.

CLS < .1 is a new target that must be addressed in the core forum. This thread scores a 0 (perfect) before this post. my site has 0 urls meeting this, which doesn't make sense. My theme is basically stock with color changes.


good vs poor urls.png
 

djbaxter

Well-known member
It's not at all clear that any of this is related to ranking, though. In fact, I think it was John Mueller who said recently that page load speed has been devalued as a ranking factor. Not unimportant but only a small factor in ranking - probably because at this point virtually everyone by now has improved page load speeds and mobile visibility.
 

GPA-R

Active member
Yeah I had a look at that too. Looks like another BS failed Google feature to me.

Google's site speed metrics are getting more out of line with every other speed test site, most of which measure response in the real world and not some dubious algorithmic metric dreamed up by Google engineers.

Use these:



Even though I do agree that these sites are way more accurate, the problem is that if you care about Google rankings then you cannot ignore Google's warnings. Not only that but many times their system gives out false alerts. Numerous times I was sent a warning about something and all I had to do is re-validate without making any changes.

Of course Google will push their agenda, whatever that is at any given time.
 

djbaxter

Well-known member
Ask yourself this:
  1. Does it affect Google ranking?
  2. If the metric is inaccurate, does it affect traffic, especially mobile traffic?

Barry Schwartz said:
Google has confirmed that the site speed ranking signals are a small, even "teeny tiny" ranking factor in Google search. Gary Illyes from Google said on Twitter "ranking wise it's a teeny tiny factor."

He equated it to the HTTPS ranking factor, saying it is given almost the same weight of the HTTPS signal. He said "very similar to https ranking boost" in terms of how important it is to ranking.

Barry Schwartz said:
Of course, site speed is important to your users and your conversions - but for Google ranking, it is small.

We said in the past that only super slow pages would be impacted. But John Mueller said recently Google might look to make the speeds more granular. But would that change anything?
So yes speed matters but primarily to your visitors. If the UIX from your visitors and other speed sites are all saying your page load speed is okay, and Google admits it's only a "teeny tiny" ranking factor, I would not kill myself worrying over that one metric.
 

Mr. Jinx

Well-known member
CLS < .1 is a new target that must be addressed in the core forum. This thread scores a 0 (perfect) before this post. my site has 0 urls meeting this, which doesn't make sense. My theme is basically stock with color changes.
I'm trying to figure out why the CLS score is not good. Although it may or may not impact search results, I want to know why this value is too high. Apparently, large parts of the content are shifted during the page request. However, it is not visual for my.

I tried this with default layout, no ads and notification turned off. There is a big difference between desktop and mobile. CLS is ok for the mobile view.

DESKTOP:
1594274964113.png

MOBILE:
1594275128897.png
 

Anatoliy

Well-known member
Avoid large laout shifts is suggesting to look at: <div class="p-body"> which is basically the complete page :)

that's probably some custom template modification by you is popping up. xF original <div class="p-body"> is ok.
 

Mr. Jinx

Well-known member
Ah found it.
If you add a custom logo, there is no way to add proper dimensions in the control panel.
This is causing the shift.. this should be optimized in XF I guess:

1594310436131.png

Once I revert this to the original logo, the CLS score is 0!

edit: After adding width/height properties to the img logo tag in PAGE_CONTAINER, the CLS score is fine again.
 
Last edited:

rickhz

Active member
Ah found it.
If you add a custom logo, there is no way to add proper dimensions in the control panel.
This is causing the shift.. this should be optimized in XF I guess:

View attachment 230125

Once I revert this to the original logo, the CLS score is 0!

edit: After adding width/height properties to the img logo tag in PAGE_CONTAINER, the CLS score is fine again.

Could you please show where you added the width and height in the template?
 

Mr. Jinx

Well-known member
PAGE_CONTAINER:
Code:
            <div class="p-header-logo p-header-logo--image">
                <a href="{{ ($xf.options.logoLink && $xf.homePageUrl) ? $xf.homePageUrl : link('index') }}">
                    <img width="...px" height="...px" src="{{ base_url(property('publicLogoUrl')) }}"
                        alt="{$xf.options.boardTitle}"
                        {{ property('publicLogoUrl2x') ? 'srcset="' . base_url(property('publicLogoUrl2x')) . ' 2x"' : '' }} />
                </a>
            </div>
 

sandokloud

Active member
i have latest version of xenforo, i try to add this code but when i check my site got 2 logo visible , please any deal for fix this issue?
 

sandokloud

Active member
what i need change and add here:

<head>
<meta charset="utf-8" />
<meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=Edge" />
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, viewport-fit=cover">

<xf:set var="$siteName" value="{$xf.options.boardTitle}" />
<xf:set var="$h1"><xf:h1 fallback="{$siteName}" /></xf:set>
<xf:set var="$description"><xf:description /></xf:set>

<title><xf:title formatter="%s | %s" fallback="{$xf.options.boardTitle}" page="{$pageNumber}" /></title>

<xf:foreach loop="$head" value="$headTag">
{$headTag}
</xf:foreach>

<xf:if is="!$head.meta_site_name && $siteName is not empty">
<xf:macro template="metadata_macros" name="site_name" arg-siteName="{$siteName}" arg-output="{{ true }}" />
</xf:if>
<xf:if is="!$head.meta_type">
<xf:macro template="metadata_macros" name="type" arg-type="website" arg-output="{{ true }}" />
</xf:if>
<xf:if is="!$head.meta_title">
<xf:macro template="metadata_macros" name="title" arg-title="{{ page_title() ?: $siteName }}" arg-output="{{ true }}" />
</xf:if>
<xf:if is="!$head.meta_description && $description is not empty && $pageDescriptionMeta">
<xf:macro template="metadata_macros" name="description" arg-description="{$description}" arg-output="{{ true }}" />
</xf:if>
<xf:if is="!$head.meta_share_url">
<xf:macro template="metadata_macros" name="share_url" arg-shareUrl="{$xf.fullUri}" arg-output="{{ true }}" />
</xf:if>
<xf:if is="!$head.meta_image_url && property('publicMetadataLogoUrl')">
<xf:macro template="metadata_macros" name="image_url"
arg-imageUrl="{{ base_url(property('publicMetadataLogoUrl'), true) }}"
arg-output="{{ true }}" />
</xf:if>

<xf:if is="property('metaThemeColor')">
<meta name="theme-color" content="{{ parse_less_color(property('metaThemeColor')) }}" />
</xf:if>

<xf:macro template="helper_js_global" name="head" arg-app="public" />

<xf:if is="property('publicFaviconUrl')">
<link rel="icon" type="image/png" href="{{ base_url(property('publicFaviconUrl'), true) }}" sizes="32x32" />
</xf:if>
<xf:if is="property('publicMetadataLogoUrl')">
<link rel="apple-touch-icon" href="{{ base_url(property('publicMetadataLogoUrl'), true) }}" />
</xf:if>
<xf:include template="google_analytics" />
</head>
 

Mr. Jinx

Well-known member
You should not copy the exact code, this was just an example to show people where to add the dimensions.
First remove your change so you have an original PAGE_CONTAINER.

In PAGE_CONTAINER find:
Code:
<img src="{{ base_url(property('publicLogoUrl')) }}"

Replace with:
Code:
<img width="###" height="###" src="{{ base_url(property('publicLogoUrl')) }}"

And replace ### with the correct dimension.

You can also use this add-on, it does the same plus more:
 
Last edited:

Kirby

Well-known member
HTML:
<img width="###" height="###" src="{{ base_url(property('publicLogoUrl')) }}"
px is only being used in CSS, not when specifying width/height via legacy attributes
 
Top