20 feed-back points for the The SEO Framework Plugin

Below, some feed-back for the The SEO Framework Plugin.

1. I would have considered hiding the settings of the plugin in either „Tools” or „Settings” menu. There are just too many plugins nowadays which show the menu in the root of the menus in WordPress, making it a bit difficult to navigate. Just a small hint, you can ignore it, also.

2. I would explain a bit better what the pixel counters do. Right now the explanation is a bit unclear.

3. I would love to have some advanced options of mass editing the Titles / Descriptions, based on:
a. For the titles, the option of editing the prefixes / suffixes for individual elements, like categories, tags, etc.; So, all the categories to have a certain title;
b. For both titles and description a checkmark to consider to NOT add the prefix / suffix if the title/description reaches the maximum recommended length for titles/descriptions;
c. An option to manually edit the maximum allowed pixel width / character number of titles / descriptions;
d. An option to take not a single prefix/suffix from just an option, but a larger number of options; so, I could define 10-20 prefixes, and the plugin should automatically take one of those for each title / description;
e. I would prefer for the point above if you wouldn’t use random generators, as this would mean that each time the page is generated, there is a new description, title; instead, use the hash of the current URL to get the title or description (based on the slug of the post / category / page, generate a number and divide that number to the number of elements in the bucket; the module of that operation should be the element taken); I describe this in this article about meta descriptions: Meta description tag for large web sites | Olivian.ro – by Olivian Breda.
f. How about allowing regular expressions in meta titles / descriptions?

4. I would explain what is the advantage of using your plugins for schema.org, instead of using a dedicated plugin.

5. You seem to offer schema.org just for breadcrumbs / sitelinks searchbox; how about each blog post to be either blog post or news article, based on schema.org? And for web sites which have an ecommerce plugin, to add schema.org for those.

6. „When adding your website to Google, Bing and other Webmaster Tools, you’ll be asked to add a code or file to your website for verification purposes. These options will help you easily integrate those codes.”
How about teaching the webmaster how to upload HTML files to the root folder, via FTP? At some point, the web masters may decide to disable your plugin, thus making the verification in Google Search Console obsolete.

7. Google Webmaster Verification Code
I would mention that they’re now called Google Search Console.

8. I would explain what Yandex is, and why is it worthy to connect your web site in there.

9. For each field in which you ask the user to give a verification code, I would consider adding a link button, and when clicking on it, the user would be prompted to create a GWT / BW / YW account. It’s much simpler like this, than imagining the user to Google for „Yandex”, then find out about the Webmaster Tools, etc.;

10. „Another active sitemap plugin has been detected. This means that the sitemap functionality has been replaced.”
By this, I understand that you have replaced my sitemap functionality with yours. But you actually seem to have ignored your sitemap functionality, and allow the standard one.
My suggestions:
– Clearly state the message, so that it’s clear that you have disabled your own sitemap, favoring that of the plugin;
– Give a message with instructions on how to disable the other plugin, and let only yours live; I think it’s better to have a single plugin doing more things, than more plugins doing various tasks;

11. I have a schema.org plugin, but you don’t seem to have detected it correctly.

12. In the settings page, you have a tabbed interface with 4 tabs, then, beneath it, you have a very long list of options which are not tabbed; it’s an unnatural use of a dashboard; I would expect a tabbed interface to show me all the information divided in 4 tabs, not the way you do it currently;

13. „Query Alteration Settings”
I didn’t understand what does this refer to.

14. When I edit my blog post, I see you offer the option to edit the meta title. What I would do, if I were you, would be to either allow the user to edit the text in place (so, instead of offering the user an empty box, offer him an option to edit the current title), or to copy & paste from a place above the text box.

15. You offer, in the blog post editing options for titles / description, a red bar showing me information about the text which is inserted; what I would do better?
– Give me the exact character count of my title;
– Put a small „live” preview of how you would expect my title / description to appear on Google. Same font, same colors, same length. Example » (except that for this web site it isn’t „live”, as I suggest you to implement).
– Allow me to create a few general sentences, and either add them as a bucket, for example, I would add in the settings 10 texts for product delivery („Free delivery for 30+$ orders”, „Delivery via UPS”, „Delivery in 48 working hours” etc.), and name the bucket [delivery], and each time I type [delivery] in the title or description, you would use one of those texts for me;
– I would love it if you would automatically take the first three sentences you see in the article, and allow me to add them via a button to the description, each sentence with an individual button.

16. How about allowing the user to save the title & description not in your own plugin database, but in a database he chooses, so that if at some point the user decides not to use your plugin, or you don’t update it anymore, the user could uninstall your plugin and still use the database with a different solution?

17. You have a very poor explanation of „Apply nofollow to this Post”. Why should a user apply that setting? What are the pros/cons of doing it?

18. „Custom Social Image URL”. Shouldn’t there be an option to add different images, for various social networks?

19. In my opinion, the most important og:graph tag is og:image. Facebook usually takes some images from the page, if they don’t see that tag.
What I suggest you to do:
– In case the user doesn’t add an image to a certain blog post / page, you should ask in the settings page for a default image, for all the blog posts which don’t have an image.
– Allow the user to mention in the settings that he wants to use images in either Featured Image setting, or as a custom field, in WordPress.

20. About your future options – I don’t like automated options of checking for things like:
– Does the metadata match with the input data?
– How’s the code quality?
– How’s the page performance regarding to load time?
– Is there an AMP version?
– Is it indexed in Google, Bing, etc. yet?
– Is it found in the sitemap?
– Is there a sharing button?
– Has the post been shared on Facebook or Twitter?
, because they can give you the wrong idea on what needs to be done.
I would rather prefer you create something like this », and allow the user to check manually for much more things.
You can put in words things which can’t be automatically evaluated. „Would you say that this page reflects well the user intent? Would the user share this page? Would it consider it written by authority?” These are questions which are much more important than what you can deduce automatically. If you would create a half-automated system for getting me the information (a long checklist, held on your web site, with links for each element you talk about), allowing the user to evaluate the problem by themselves, this would make me much happier.

Share on WhatsApp

4 comentarii la „20 feed-back points for the The SEO Framework Plugin”

  1. Great list, Olivian! This is a thanks message for you and hopefully a useful read for devs (watching the Github repo).
    I would suggest another important item to your list if you don’t mind. Meta description has now grown to around 300-320 characters. The solution should not be a character counter, as shown now, in my opinion, because the length might change overnight. AND I have the feeling the actual length will change pretty soon.
    This rather long description, comparing it with what we’ve had in the past (155-160 characters), might be subject to abuse, as everything new shown as snippet in SERPs. I would modify the character counter with a simple statement (recommendation) above the input box.


Lasă un comentariu

Rules for commenters »

Puteți folosi Gravatar pentru a adăuga avatar (imagine comentarii).