Alexander Guskov
Forum Replies Created
-
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Query Monitor] The transparent background color of the QM windowI have downgraded QM to v.3.20.4 and all works well.
Even Chrome Dev.tool returns to work well (QM broke it functionality but I was not sure that it was die to QM)
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Query Monitor] The transparent background color of the QM windowScreenshot: https://ibb.co/ycKqR1yt
I’m afraid, I can’t change theme for the site in production.Hi,
I met the similar issue (v.2.4.2.) but it seems that it comes from another root:
1) if the wp_head() you call get_the_ID() that in some cases return FALSE(for example for any post-list page) then you call get_post_meta() that returns FALSE too, but later you check this value ” !== $shfs_post_meta that is true and then refer to a array item that generate php error.
It would be much better to change ” !== $shfs_post_meta to isset(shfs_post_meta[‘synth_header_script’]) because it checks for NULL. BOOL, ARRAY and existence of array item.
2) Since recently, get_post_meta() in wp_head() returns FALSE for some normal code that was saved a long ago (for a page). So there are some codes that can’t be read or saved again. I found and managed to re-save it with some manipulations. But it was read just once and then the problem returned back.The example of the code that can’t be saved or read any more:
<style>
#content .post-page-content .tab-wrapper,
body.smartphone.portrait #content .post-page-content .block-slider {
width: calc(100% + 20px);
margin-left: -10px;
}
#content .post-page-content .tab-content { padding: 10px !important; }
</style>- This reply was modified 3 months ago by Alexander Guskov.
- This reply was modified 3 months ago by Alexander Guskov.
Hi,
It’s very strange behavior for WordPress that the <title> tag must be requested separately and isn’t activated by default, but it’s even more questionable behavior for a plugin that disrupts the theme’s logic. There are always a million unexplained reasons why someone would do something that doesn’t make sense at first glance.
Hi,
it seems that there is one error more with <title> tag.Independently of if a theme supports title-tag the plugin adds <title> tag in registerTitleHooks():
1) if a theme supports title-tag the plugin change <title> through pre_get_document_title (and wp_title) hooks (it’s ok)
2) if a theme doesn’t supports title-tag but adds <title> by another way – the plugin change <title> through hooking startOutputBuffering() (it’s ok)
3) if a theme doesn’t supports title-tag and doesn’t adds <title> by another way – the plugin anyway adds <title> through hooking startOutputBuffering() (it’s doubtfully behavior !!)- This reply was modified 3 months, 2 weeks ago by Alexander Guskov.
Thank you for the co-operation!
At least Telegram use Open Graph well but I believe this list can be extended.
But the more important that the subject of OG settings is a post, not a site so it expectable to be at the post types settings. As well it’s useful to manage different OG settings to different Post Types as we can do it with other meta settings.
Hi,
Sorry for the delay with response.
I have found the settings you mentioned.
They are at the slightly unexpectable place of the plugin settings.
Actually they are related to the posts or at least to the post-type but placed not at the post-type SEO settings but with general facebook settings (although Open Graph is the SEO protocol used much wider then facebook only).
Why not to more them to an additional tab-page to the post-type SEO settings?Many thanks for clarifying this difference. I was sure that these 2 meta values are the same and I haven’t noticed their values are different.
So now I have to ask how I can manage the article.tag by adding only tags or only categories (actually I need to exclude categories from the article:tags?
What’s about if you would consider to synchronize these 2 lists and adjust them to the same settings?
Yes, I’m warring about Yandex. As well noone can be sure that Google haven’t returned to use keywords back especially now, when using AI turned articles to the complete inunderstandable chaos.Thank you/ It’s fine!
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Broken Link Checker] 37 false positive to 1 really broken linkHello Nithin,
From the screenshot we see that the plugin reports that it received code 403, 404 or 400 and don’t explain why.
From any browser we can see code 200 from the same sites.
The difference only in the requester: BLC or a browser. Probably all browsers do something wrong to receive code 200 instead of correct code 403 that BLC receives.
Maybe something wrong with BLC that the most of world important sites refuse it’s requests? It’s just a question. Sorry for reporting the plugin’s problems.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Broken Link Checker] 37 false positive to 1 really broken linkHi John,
I am afraid we do not communicate through WhatsApp. Could you please upload the screenshots to a cloud service like Google Drive and share the URL here so that we can take a closer look at the issue?
I was really confused when someone referring to you found me in whatsapp. It means that you are popular enough to be in the focus of scammers. But it doesn’t matter.
https://snipboard.io/v2r7pc.jpg
https://snipboard.io/DGzVj8.jpg
As you see the most of the errors comes from dynamic links but you will find a lot of static links with bad response.
Maybe it helps that my website server places in UK.
These are errors that I reported in another thread:
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Broken Link Checker] 37 false positive to 1 really broken linkHi,
I sent you 6 files of screnshots and data by whatsapp.Rewrite the plugin.
You need to catch the final output that go out to request, store it and analyze. To analyze unberthed pieces is a wrong way.
And change user-agent to a chrome one.Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Broken Link Checker] Dynamic links faultAs well I advise you to check php errors of the plugin:
(All errors starts from your plugin (one error tree I expanded to show it)Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Broken Link Checker] Dynamic links faultHello, I’m sorry for delay with the responce.
I didn’t want to pickup the subject with the Cloud version of the plugin but as you insists:
1) When the v.2 of the plugin released I turned to Cloud version created an account on your site.
2) the Cloud version overloaded my site. It almost stopped to work.
3) I started to receive tonnes of spam from your site.
4) so, I had to delete my account on your site but even after that I have being receiving spam from you (but les and less). So I understood that it’s a fishing site spreading under plugin’s umbrella. No I see that it’s not. But, it rise other question to you, how you store email when user ask to remove his data.
5) The local version works quite fine although it produce quite good amount of false negative reports but it’s acceptable if not to pay attention at it reports at all.
6) I can’t say that the plugin is really useful – it hasn’t found a one really broken link during many years but let’s work.
7) How it is currently searching link – it makes the plugin useless. All that is necessary to do – just to add 1 line of code to satisfy of the coding idea of WP. Actually I can hack it by myself following the licence.
8) The cloud version is danger, so I definirte won’t turn to it.I’m sorry that re bug report turned to something wider you you requested it. Sorry.
Forum: Plugins
In reply to: [Featured Image Thumbnail Grid] Some necessary code improvementI’m sorry Adrian, but it seems that I examined version 6.8 (I downloaded v.6.9 but it was v.6.8)
Version 6.9 has too many errors: literals and sanitize functions doesn’t need and at least they works incorrectly. So the plugin almost doesn’t work at all.
I found a quite good amount of errors and give up to force to work it. So I roll back to v.6.6.1 + my corrections.
