Banter and general comments, page-2737

The date displaying in the Google search result page does not always equate to the date of publication or page creation. Most of the time it does equal the publication date, but if basic meta data on a page (or document) is missing or is incomplete, the Google bots search the page / document for a relevant, most plausible, indexable date.

Looking at the meta tags of the cached html page you can see the Creation Date and Modification Date in the source PDF file is non compliant with Google algorithms for indexing. These non conforming tags and the lack of a publish_date tag means Google bots were forced to churn through the document body to identify a meaningful date.

Because the document title, from an html header perspective, does not contain a DD-MM date (rather it contains "July"), the bots were given free rein to determine an appropriate indexing date. There are 10+ dates in the first 2 pages of the document and even Google bots struggle when faced with such numerous, conflicting, non conforming dates.

Long story short - the first date in parentheses in the document is the 16th July and was identified by Google as the most plausible date for indexing purposes.

Thats not to say the information contained therein was not out in the ether, but I'll bet the entirety of my small parcel that I'm right on the Google dates.

Regardless, looks like good times ahead for holders.