Closed (fixed)
Project:
Nodewords: D6 Meta Tags
Version:
6.x-1.x-dev
Component:
Code
Priority:
Critical
Category:
Bug report
Assigned:
Issue tags:
Reporter:
Created:
22 Jun 2010 at 23:31 UTC
Updated:
26 Jun 2011 at 05:14 UTC
Jump to comment: Most recent file
Comments
Comment #2
powery commentedsubscribing
Comment #3
summit commentedHi, I think this is duplicate of: http://drupal.org/node/774652.
Will try tonight (thanks to Druppy :):
But it would be great to have a structural solution!
greetings, Martijn
Comment #4
powery commentedThis solution #3 did not solve the same problem for me
Comment #5
summit commentedHi Kiam, as stated on: http://drupal.org/node/786270#comment-2929824 you "attacked" a different function to get this working.
Was this the change you referred to: http://drupalcode.org/viewvc/drupal/contributions/modules/nodewords/node... ?
I can't go to latest .dev of nodewords, because I did this yesterday, and then no metatags are shown on my node-pages anymore (off course did update.php). So I would very much like the 90% working 1.12-beta9 to improve with only this issue.
Thanks a lot for all your support so far!
greetings, Martijn
Comment #6
summit commentedPowery, can you check whether this solution works? I am not behind a pc on which I can change code.
Thanks! greetings, Martijn
Comment #7
powery commentedAnd shall I try patch from #3 and patch from #5? Or from #5 only?
Comment #8
powery commentedI think, that only #5 works. But "Meta tag ROBOTS for lists" can not be saved to others then INDEX, FOLLOW.
Comment #9
summit commentedFor me sufficient! Thanks. Will try patch #5 also when I am home.
EDIT: Yes patch #5 worked for this issue!
greetings,
Martijn
Comment #10
powery commentedAnd can you change "Meta tag ROBOTS for lists"?
Comment #11
summit commentedWhy should I use that please?
Comment #12
powery commentedAs is written as help under Meta tag ROBOTS for lists:
The value to use for the meta tag ROBOTS for the pages that use a pager; this setting is not used for the first page of the list, or when the option to repeat the meta tags for all the pages in the same list is selected.
If you don't want to index pages with url like
example.com/something?page=4, you can choose NOINDEX, FOLLOW for these pages a index only pageexample.com/something.Comment #13
summit commentedHi,
And that is not working with patch #5?
greetings, Martijn
Comment #14
powery commentedYes. I can not save other value.
Comment #15
summit commentedI think would be best to search through the commits, or place a new issue for this, right?
greetings, Martijn
Comment #16
powery commentedok
Comment #17
Mike Kennedy commentedHonestly this was driving me absolutely crazy, I couldnt get the metatags to say robots "index,follow" which I feel is an important part of metatags. I even thought about switching back to the old node words. After a week of searching I finally found this "hack". I dont know if it is the correct way to fix this problem, as I am not a php guy but it was simple to do and worked for me. Here is the link good luck http://www.answerflip.com/how-fix-missing-metatags-robots-index-follow-n...
Comment #18
czeky commentedHi, on my instalation, robots changed in node edit are not saved..
Comment #19
wheelercreek commentedI was able to correct the issue partially by using #3 and #5 above, but I found that the string was output as "indexfollow" without the comma.. I tried searching up the code stream to see how this was happening, but in the end I just added an if statement to correct that line and rewrite it. It's at line 297, in the function "nodewords_basic_robots_prepare":
I did find that the value, by the time it gets to this implode statement, is already a string instead of an array.
Comment #20
trentharlem commented"How to write a Robots Meta Tag
Where to put it
Like any tag it should be placed in the HEAD section of an HTML page, as in the example above. You should put it in every page on your site, because a robot can encounter a deep link to any page on your site.
What to put into it
The "NAME" attribute must be "ROBOTS".
Valid values for the "CONTENT" attribute are: "INDEX", "NOINDEX", "FOLLOW", "NOFOLLOW". Multiple comma-separated values are allowed, but obviously only some combinations make sense. If there is no robots tag, the default is "INDEX,FOLLOW", so there's no need to spell that out. That leaves:
"
-From: http://www.robotstxt.org/meta.html
If I'm reading this right, if i want my page to be "INDEX,FOLLOW", I should uncheck the "ROBOTS" meta tag in the "meta tags to output" section at /admin/content/nodewords...
YES?
Comment #21
wiredescape commentedThe 'no comma' problem is a different issue.
See #785654: Commas missing in ROBOTS tag for previously created nodes for more info.
Comment #22
laura s commentedJust had a friendly reader report to me that "NOINDEX,NOFOLLOW" was on all of my blog posts, even though the module is set for INDEX,FOLLOW. I disabled the field in the module. Rather unfortunate SEO impact on an SEO module.
Comment #23
AlexisWilke commentedHI guys,
This is a really bad one! Making all those websites NOINDEX and NOFOLLOW. You should have fixed that the day it was reported!!!
There are two patches.
#3 was not sufficient since you had another place with the same wrong defaults.
There is a patch for #20 although that's much less important to not issue the tag if just and only "index,follow". Up to you whether you want to apply that one.
Thank you.
Alexis
Comment #24
mjohnq3 commentedAre the patches in #23 against 6.x-1.12-beta9 or the latest dev version? I'm assuming beta9.
**Applied to 6.x-1.12-beta9, seems to fix the problems.**
Comment #25
AlexisWilke commentedmjohnq3,
I have 6.x-1.x-dev. So not beta9, but the line numbers should be very close and from what they are describing it feels like it is the same.
Thank you.
Alexis
Comment #26
danny englanderSubscribing
Comment #27
dave reidOn it, committing tonight.
Comment #28
damienmckennaTagging this so we can ensure it gets fixed before the next release.
Comment #29
dave reidComment #30
dave reidHad a good chance to review, test and commit this to CVS. Thanks everyone!
http://drupal.org/cvs?commit=443992
Comment #32
damienmckennaDoes this need to be re-examined, given the 6.x-1.x code shakeup?