Let's weigh in opinion

[Cshark]

@BassTrackerBoats, @Leith and all of you folks, please chip in.

I need your opinions on this post{ Link Removed}

I checked this post manually but a friend is of the view that the post is " NO FOLLOW" " NO INDEX". While I checked manually the HTML clearly suggests it is not any of that but just to satisfy my friend I will weigh in the opinion of all you fine peeps.

Please chip in with your comments.

 

[Leith]

.in version of that post is DF and indexed, not .com.

 

[lablinks]

I thought it was ******** too, until I checked the full html source. Please, check the head section and you will see meta robots nofollow directive.

 

[nikchaing]

Link appears to be d.follow and indexed.

or is it??

 

[authorityjourney]

Look the first line , maybe there is an error in code and google didn't see it.

 

[seo popularity]

Does it mean the links are nofollow? even if they show ********? The links themselves on that page are ********, just not indexed by google?

Properly explain please.

 

[SEOMemj]

I work with some Huff Po writers and was told there's

"A new platform which doesn't require editor approval but all posts are no indexed and links are no follow"

 

[Hawkster]

<meta content="noindex, nofollow" name="robots">

<title>Excellent Tips On How To Pick The Perfect Analytics Training</title>

 

[lablinks]

OK, so it appears there is a copy on huffingtonpost.in that is actually indexed and follow, but the one on huffingtonpost.com is no follow.
I know what's happening here. Your IP address may redirect you to .in version if you are not in the US and it will make you think like it's ********, but it isn't for the real site.

 

[Leith]

OK, so it appears there is a copy on huffingtonpost.in that is actually indexed and follow, but the one on huffingtonpost.com is no follow.
I know what's happening here. Your IP address may redirect you to .in version if you are not in the US and it will make you think like it's ********, but it isn't for the real site.

this ^.

I was referring to the .in version that was DF and indexed. Opposite story for the .com.

 

[lablinks]

Author claims that .com version will still get indexed. Please, somebody educate this person. I'm running out of patience.

 

[Cshark]

@Leith, are you saying it will not get indexed with .com, although it got indexed with .in?

this ^.

I was referring to the .in version that was DF and indexed. Opposite story for the .com.

 

[lablinks]

Yes, huffpost.com link version of the article will not get indexed.

 

[Leith]

@Leith, are you saying it will not get indexed with .com, although it got indexed with .in?

The .com won't get indexed and the links on the post are NF.

 

[Cshark]

the .com version is coded as the canonical, but it looks like the india version is the only one indexed, very strange.

And I suppose both the posts mention " NO follow, No index"?