I keep GSC notifications on for crawl errors but still feel like I'm missing stuff until it's been broken for days. The alerts catch the big things, but subtle issues like gradual increases in 404s or weird bot behavior don't always trigger anything. For a site under 10k pages, how deep do you actually go into raw server logs and how often? Do you have a threshold where you bother pulling them at all?

I've noticed some sites have /blog and /blog/ that will both work. Other sites, if you put in /blog it will redirect to /blog/ and others will do the opposite.

Which is best for SEO?

Having both page versions available? No trailing slash and trailing slash? or redirect one to the other?

In other words, if your website is mywebsite.com, is it better to have mywebsite.com/faq and mywebsite.com/faq/ both render, or forward one to the other?

I was onboarding a new client last week and noticed their site had three different SEO plugins installed, two of which hadn't been updated in over a year and one that was phoning home to a domain I couldn't verify. It got me thinking about how little scrutiny we sometimes apply to the tools we just assume are safe because they have decent reviews or a familiar name

Do you have any kind of vetting process before adding third-party SEO tools or scripts to a production site, or do you mostly rely on community reputation and star ratings? I'm talking plugins, crawl tools, schema generators, rank trackers with site-side snippets, anything that touches the codebase or has access to analytics data

For those managing multiple client sites, does your agency have a formal approval process, or is it more of a gut-check situation? I've started doing basic domain lookups and checking data destinations before installing anything, but I'm wondering if there's a more structured way others are handling this, especially given how much sensitive traffic data these tools can access

Hi guys...

I am from a marketing agency, and the traffic for this month is down by 400. And drop in traffic will result in loss of the project and my job.

I kindly request people here to go on good and search " best international school in pune"

And click open the 3rd result in the yellow black logo.

I've spent the last few months auditing how our content actually shows up in ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini, and I need to vent.

Every week someone on LinkedIn announces they're now a "GEO specialist" and their playbook is literally: write good content, use clear headings, add FAQ schema. That's just SEO. We've been doing that since 2015.

The parts of GEO that are actually different almost nobody talks about. How LLMs weight source diversity when synthesizing an answer. The fact that being cited by Perplexity has almost nothing to do with your Google ranking on the same query — I've seen pages ranking position 8 get pulled as the primary source while position 1 gets ignored. The role of being mentioned on third-party sites the model trusts, even when those mentions carry no backlink. The weird preference some models have for forum content and structured comparison pages over polished marketing copy.

And measurement is still a mess. There's no Search Console for LLMs. You're stitching together brand mention monitoring, manual prompt testing, and referral traffic that's mostly invisible because most LLM clicks come through with no proper referrer.

My honest take: GEO is real, it's a legit channel, but it's maybe 20% overlap with classic SEO and 80% new territory that the people selling it haven't actually explored. If your "GEO audit" deliverable looks identical to an SEO audit from 2022, you got sold something.

Curious if anyone here is actually tracking LLM citations seriously and what stack you've landed on. Everything I've tried so far has gaps.

So Google rolled out a much more agentic version of Search today. It's now able to narrow down recommendations based on the user's actual requirements, explain why one is a fit, and in some cases offer to call on the users behalf.

These are some tests I did for my clients who run home services.

1. Is the site legible enough for Google's agents to read, summarize, and act on?

Ranking still matters, sure. But does the site gives the system enough specific material to work with? Can it pull proof, claims, pricing logic, process details, service commitments, service area, etc?

2. When the agent builds a recommendation for the user, filtering by budget, timeline, service type, does the business survive the narrowing?

This part is important. The system keeps filtering even after a business has been cited. Generic positioning got dropped. Specific claims like “Manual calculations,” “fixed price quotes with no hidden fees,” and “same-day {activity}” are the kinds of things it kept and used.

That means stuff like:

• are you actually open 24/7
• what jobs you do and don’t do
• who you serve
• what extra proof or guarantees you offer

all matter more now, because the system is using those details to decide whether to keep you in the result.

3. When the agent offers to call and book, is there a clear conversion path?

When the agent gets closer to booking intent, the path matters. Sometimes it surfaced the right service page. Other times it pushed people toward a generic contact page. For this business, item-intent prompts lined up with the item page, which is what you want. For others, the path was much "looser".

A site can still be a billboard, but it seems now it also has to work as a source material for a system that is actively trying to qualify, compare and route these buyers. Much different than just having some pages and a phone number.

Hello SEO'ers of Reddit

For my company [can disclose on request] we have a long standing SEO issue that you can hopefully help me fix.

The situation sounds simple, the solution appears difficult.

1. We are a Dutch company with 80% Dutch speaking clients
2. We have an English brandname
3. If people search our brandname, >50% of the time (last 7d) our English page (/en) hows in the results
4. This should not happen because maximum of 10-20% of the searchers are non-Dutch language searchers.
5. We need the Dutch version of the site to show up 80-90% of the times because now Dutch natives get an English website and dont convert as well.

Thanks a lot in advance. To show you we tried, here is our backlog of actions we took.

What have we tried (in chronological order):

- Shortening URL's
- Removed Country codes from hreflang

- Updated privacy statement

- Removed X-default
- Moved hreflang to top in >head?

- Hide default collections/all from search

- FAQ fixexs

- Added x-default to hreflang tags

- Buyback PDP tag hide-from-search

- Removed extra (last) trailing for hreflang (example: (can share on request)

- Added extra (last) trailing for x-default ((href=can Share on request)

- X-default dynamic for all URLs
- Added /en/ to x-default for EN homepage

- Country code NL added to nl hreflang ((href="can share on request)
- Enabled "Language - Displays the language that matches a visitor’s browser, when available"
- EN site: point FAQ footer url to EN FAQ version (instead of NL)
- Enriched json u/Product data: product name, description, price_valid_untill, organization/sameAs, etc.

I built out functionality in Canonry to monitor ALL traffic to a site using server side logs.

For wordpress, I built out a extension you have to install on your site once. For google cloud run and vercel, all you need is auth keys (more platforms coming soon).

Agents can set it up for you. This along with GSC, GA and LLM search you can get a holistic view on how your site actually performs and map out specific events to outcomes!

I'm working on a site with over 50,000 pages and the internal linking structure is a mess. Lots of orphaned pages, deep content that only gets links from blog posts nobody reads anymore, and category pages pointing to products that redirect somewhere else. I know the theory of spreading link equity and using internal anchors wisely, but actually auditing this at scale feels overwhelming. I've tried screaming frog's internal link reports, but sifting through thousands of rows just shows me the problem without telling me where to start fixing things. For those who deal with enterprise level sites regularly, how do you prioritize which internal links to fix first? Do you focus on pages with high external backlinks but poor internal support, or do you start with deep content that has zero internal references? I'm also curious if anyone uses a scoring system or has built a dashboard that actually helps triage this stuff. I don't need perfection, just a repeatable process that moves the needle without burning weeks of time. What actually works when you can't manually review every page?

Hi,

Am working on SEO for an AI SaaS company, partly hit after the March Google update.

There's a specific case that I am seeking help for: their design template page: ~60 English template pages. Each page has 6 translations; and all are machine-translated .

English pages, of course, perform far better (3x clicks, 6x impressions) compared to non-English versions in the last 3 months. But now most non-English pages are under 'crawled but not indexed'.

Although I plan to revamp these pages with useful content and interlinks... but it'll take time and some experiments. Long story short, now am thinking how can we salvage the non-English pages that are removed from Google index?

I'm considering -- 301 redirecting all non-English pages to their English counterparts.

Has anyone recovered rankings/indexing by consolidating thin multilingual pages this way? Any other suggestions in this regard is also welcome?

Thanks in advance 😄

Hi,

I have posted a blog in medium, It's not been indexed for long days, For this can I use any Free third party indexer tool

If I use that,

1. Will my blog get indexed
2. is there any issue if I use method
3. Will my medium account get banned?

On May 14, 2026, Google finally spoke up. A new page appeared on Search Central — the official guide to optimizing for generative AI features in Search. It’s the first public document where the company directly explains how to land in AI Overviews, AI Mode, and other AI-generated answers. Spoiler: “GEO” as a separate discipline doesn’t exist — it’s the same SEO with a few new emphases.

We read the guide for you, analyzed the official positions of the other AI giants (OpenAI, Anthropic, Perplexity, Microsoft), and put everything into one practical brief. No fluff, no marketing myths — only what Google has officially confirmed.

From u/lilray on X (via GlennGabe) - thanks for sharing

As of May 7, 2026, FAQ rich results are no longer appearing in Google Search. We will be dropping the FAQ search appearance, rich result report, and support in the Rich results test in June 2026. To allow time for adjusting your API calls, support for the FAQ rich result in the Search Console API will be removed in August 2026.

As this sub and many of our related experts that we share, like u/jakehundley - Mod of r/agency - a great sister sub to r/SEO and r/SEO_Digital_Marketing - this isn't surprising.

As we said - Google doesnt actually read FAQ Schema anyway - because less than 0.001% of site qualify

I'm trying to get domain metrics (authority, backlinks, organic keywords, traffic estimates, etc.) in bulk via an API.

I tried DataForSEO, but their API at $100/mo is out of my budget. I also tried the Bishopi API via credits, but it consumed almost $15 worth of credits for about 100 domain checks. Are there any affordable alternatives? I'm looking mostly for pay-as-you-go options since I only run these checks occasionally, but I'll pay (and use) more for the right tool.