Hi KenW,

With 1,000 glossary terms along with embedded videos would make for a very long page.  This might crash some user's browsers, let alone take a long time to load.

I would opt to break it down into multiple pages. Not sure about a separate page per letter.  Definitely add quick links on each page so that the user can easily find the letter/word they are looking for.  At 1,000 glossary terms a custom search function might also be beneficial.

Regards,

Kevin

Yes, the link juice will be moved back if you reverse back the canonical urls to their original urls.  Once you add the rel canonical tag to a web page, you are essentially telling Google which page to emphasize.

https://moz.com/blog/canonical-url-tag-the-most-important-advancement-in-seo-practices-since-sitemaps

Hi Brandon Pagan,

Yes, the Meta Keywords tag is ignored by Google.  If you do list them it might have a negative impact.  Not for the search engines but it might actually tip off your competitors to what your SEO strategy is, so that is a big negative.  It is best to not even list it in your head section anymore.

Regards,

Kevin

Hi Michael Johnson,

I am guessing that your client wants the .io since the keyword's .com version was already taken?  It is always preferred to go with the .com version of course.

A .io domain extension is an odd choice, but I have seen it being used on several  tech startup sites recently where they were creating a brand around the base keyword.  In terms of rankings and seo factors to consider with an .io extension, I would personally avoid them and I have worked on any websites with that extension, but since all of these well funded startups are using them then perhaps they are on to something.  I know of one startup that went from their .io extension to the .com version, but it cost them a pretty penny.

Not sure if this helps at all.

Hi Allie McFadyen,

I am not familiar with using express.js and Angular, but since it is JavaScript based then historically Google has had issues with JS in the past.  Now, Google says they can now crawl JS, but still there are issues that might arise that can hinder your sites SEO if not done properly.

It seems like the test you have done has shown that it is not crawlable and viewable, but have you tried creating your own test page and then using the "Fetch as Google" tool within Google Search Console?

Even if the test comes back and it is crawlable, I would always be cautious using a technology that has questionable SEO results.  To this day I am still cautious using JavaScript in certain sections of a website, even though Google says they can crawl it.

Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,

Kevin