GarnetHGB

Add me to the list of users unable to log in through the plugin AND directly at the website ─ and I have had an account for possibly a couple of years, so my password did pass muster before. It is comprised of a blend of upper case (2) and lower case (9) letters, three numerals, and one keyboard character.

I will try further over the next few days; but if I am not going to be able to log in to amend any settings ─ which actually seems to be a truly unnecessary requirement ─ then the plugin will be virtually useless to me, claiming as it does that I have failed three of the four categories in the Compliance check.

Well, that worked!

Even as I was trying it out, the method seemed to defy logic in that I just could not accept that there did not need to be a second set of footnote codes at the base of the article, so I wasn’t really expecting to see a successful result.

What annoys me now is why everyone before me who used the plugin apparently immediately recognized how to use it, but I failed to.

Consider this issue resolved, Jason!

It doesn’t seem to matter even when I don’t supply my own footnote digit.

Even with the footnoted word or phrase marked like this (the word “Kalahome” in this case)

* The dignity of Kalahome[efn_note][/efn_note] is similar to that of Prime Minister.

I still end up with the actual footnoted text showing up in like my screenshot.

I even tried previewing the post in a browser that I do not ever use to access my website in. I prefer working in Firefox, but I’ve got an AVG Secure Browser that I once somehow got downloaded along with my Antivirus Free, and which I have never bothered to try and be rid of. The footnotes come out exactly as they do in the screenshot.

I promise that I never supplied my own numeral this time ─ I let the plugin do it all. I just used the two sets of [efn_note][/efn_note] code. The first set as shown in the blockquote; and the second set separated in order to sandwich all the text of my actual footnote.

This is how I have the footnote number itself appear in the working text, Jason:

* The dignity of Kalahome[efn_note]1[/efn_note] is similar to that of Prime Minister.

I of course placed the digit “1” between the open and closing bits of code.

Then at the bottom of the post where I wanted the reader to be sent to when the footnote “1” was clicked on, I placed the opening string of code in front of the very first word of the explanatory text like this:

[efn_note]From: Family Politics in Nineteenth Century Thailand* by David K. Wyatt

And at the very end of the long footnote explanation, I finished the last line of text like this:

…and there were three classes of distinction (i.e., Gold, Silver, and Regular).[/efn_note]

That concluded the actual footnote. And in this instance, the only plugin option I ticked was the one identified as “Insert Easy Footnotes Label”.

I had deleted the plugin since my first comment, so this was a fresh installation of it, and the result was the same as in my earlier screenshot.

Since I first made my original comment a week ago, I haven’t just been doing without footnotes. I did some research and found that I can use the following code to create the numerical footnote after whatever word or phrase I want to explain ─ I’ll use my example above:

* The dignity of Kalahome[1] is similar to that of Prime Minister.

And then I manually link to the footnote text by adding this at the start of the actual footnote:

[1]From: Family Politics in Nineteenth Century Thailand* by David K. Wyatt

I have to insert the digit “1” myself.

Then with every subsequent footnote, I just keep bumping the count one figure higher, and change every one of the digits in the code accordingly.

I haven’t been happy with just the tiny digit “1” to mark a footnote, so the procedure I have been using allows me to use whatever footnote indicator I like. I use “Note 1”, “Note 2”, etc. instead of just a digit, for it makes the footnote far more obvious.

It’s been working so far. Clicking on the “Note 1” or “Note 2” and so on that precedes an actual footnote text will throw the reader back up to where the footnote indicator is in the article ─ or at least, it brings the reader close enough to that starting point. It’s not perfect, but it is a far cry from forcing the reader to have to manually scroll all the way back to where he or she had left off.

I can live with this.

You have indeed cleared up a great deal of my misunderstanding and confusion, Sybre.

Basically, then ─ despite Google Search Console’s proclamations ─ the sitemap that SEO Framework created is functioning as intended, and I can merrily ignore the concerns that Google trotted out, for they are not specifically relevant where the sitemap is concerned.

I hope I am correct in speculating further that the reason I get a 404 error when I replace “?tsf-sitemap=base” with “sitemap.xml” is because SEO Framework never did create a sitemap ending with “sitemap.xml”. And that being so, of course no such webpage would display when I use that url.

That sitemap url would only exist if my permalinks had been “pretty” instead of “ugly”.

Since I don’t have an issue with my “ugly” urls, I don’t think that I’ll bother experimenting with WordPress’s “redirect_canonical” option. I happen to be exceptionally adept at causing trouble for myself, so I’m going to leave things as they are.

Bless you ─ and thanks for the rescue! You’ve given me a few things to familiarize myself with that I likely would not otherwise have zeroed in on.

An excellent and speedy reply, Sybre!

I had read that pretty permalinks were superior to ugly ones because the pretty ones help visitors remember the urls to specific webpages, or else at least help the visitor to recognize what subject matter the webpage offered.

In contract, an ugly permalink was utterly anonymous and gave no hint to a potential visitor anything at all about the webpage.

I always figured that if that was all there was to it, then I didn’t see pretty permalinks as that big a deal.

I never before twigged onto the fact that the pretty permalink was in itself an additional seo tool ─ this makes sense to me, now.

However, I am hesitant to try the “redirect_canonical” route you suggested ─ maybe my alarm bells are false, but trying that option when I have so many posts makes me fearful that it’s only going to be a magnet for a host of new problems.

However, Google Search Console (or at least, the URL Inspection Tool) insists that the sitemap ending in “?tsf-sitemap=base” cannot be indexed; and it also claims that indexing cannot even be allowed because “No: ‘noindex’ detected in ‘X-Robots-Tag’ http header” ─ whatever that means.

I guess for now I’ll just stew on this for awhile ─ a few days, or maybe even a few weeks. And maybe I won’t do a thing. After all, how important can it be if ─ with all of the 2,305 urls that my website has ─ only the sitemap is kicking up a problem?

The only problem with the old one was that Google Search Console said that it wasn’t mobile friendly and that the links were too close together. So what?

I don’t use a mobile for accessing the Web; but even with my desktop, I can’t ever remember wanting to visit a website’s sitemap. I doubt many people at all ever do.

So…maybe I should just stick with the old sitemap. At least Google Search Console recognized and indexed it.

Why is nothing ever easy?

Anyway, stay healthy in these nasty times, Sybre!

I was able to log in easily enough, James; but I don’t know if that was due to your manipulations, or if the login access simply proceeded without issue just as it did when I was able to gain entry as was reported in my second post here yesterday.

I’ll just hope that whatever adjustment you made will have removed any chance of the original login trouble striking again!

Nevertheless, thanks for taking that diagnostic and remedial look even though I did indicate my issue as having somehow been resolved on its own
.

Nearly five hours later, access worked.

I have now saved three additional IP addresses beyond the one that was already whitelisted by some sort of default that never had any direct input from me.

One of the extra three I saved is listed by Jetpack as being mine, but it does not display as such when I do an IP search ─ and so the two that DO display have also now been whitelisted to bring the total to four whitelisted IPs.

• This reply was modified 5 years, 8 months ago by GarnetHGB.

You were far more fortunate than I was, craftina2017.

I first heard from a gal who referred me to a link where she said I was to outline my problem; and if I had not heard back from anyone by something like the middle of the following month, I was to respond directly back to her.

Well, no one answered my query by her deadline; but when I E-mailed back the gal who had given me the link, she never got around to replying, either.

And then suddenly my Amazon.co.uk Associates account became inaccessible. Each time I tried to access it with either of the two E-mail addresses I had been using, the declaration came that neither address belonged an any known Associate.

So now I had to make a new enquiry ─ and that, too, was ignored. That had to have been at least three months ago.

I just gave up until about 10 days ago when I learned about Amazon’s new OneLink feature that will tie in Amazon.com, Amazon.ca, and Amazon.co.uk ─ provided that the Associate has an account with each of those Amazons.

I had to set up a new account at Amazon.co.uk and turn my back on the small balance I already had in my lost original Associate account; and I also had to apply for an Amazon.ca Associate account, for I never had one.

But oddly, once I had the new Amazon.co.uk Associate account, I discovered that the plugin now worked after I replaced my old Associate ID with the new one! Keep in mind that I had periodically tried out the Associates Link Builder plugin all along every couple or so weeks just to ensure that I was still out of the loop; and each time it had always claimed that my AWS Access Key ID was not registered as an Associate.

What is especially peculiar is that I never applied for a new Associates Access Key ID ─ the two showing up in my account include an original created back on December 5, 2009; and the most recent one created on December 18, 2016. This more recent one is the one I created in order to try to use the darned plugin!

So if I never had a previous Associates account, then why do I see these two old Access Key IDs when I have supposedly only set up an account within the past two weeks?

Something is really screwy at Amazon.co.uk

No, it still doesn’t work.

However, my U.S. Amazon account is now so screwed up where passwords are concerned that I have to log in twice to get to my Associates account.

I probably should not even bother trying to explain ─ it is too confusing to easily describe.

I can only log into Amazon.com using the NEWPASSWORD ─ the matching one I use at Amazon.co.uk. Yet if I try to get to my Associates account at Amazon.com once I have logged into Amazon in general, I am told that I have no Associates account. So I have to select the Login button that is there and then use my OLDPASSWORD that I had tried to change to match the U.K. account.

It seems all that it changed was what I need to do to get in to Amazon.com ─ not the Associates area.

If I attempt to make another password change to the NEWPASSWORD from the OLDPASSWORD, I am presented with the need to select my primary email address or the secondary one.

Well, I have never logged in with the secondary one ─ it is the primary address I have constantly used at Amazon.com. In fact, I am unable to log in to Amazon.com with my secondary email, whether I use the OLDPASSWORD or the NEWPASSWORD.

It’s all too, too bewildering!

Has it already been 11 days since I posted here?

Well, making my E-mail address the same for Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.com changed nothing ─ the plugin still declares that the AWS Access Key ID is not registered.

I think the sorry fact is that some of us just cannot use the plugin.

I agree, manuti ─ I don’t see how to add a secondary email address. In my case, it’s to my Amazon.co.uk account. The only option is to add a secondary user ─ that’s not what I think is intended.

But I am not registered with an Amazon account in my own country ─ Canada. I have one for the U.S., and one for the U.K. It is the U.K. account that I want the plugin to work for.

I’m probably going to just give up and delete the plugin. This is far too much trouble.

Jeremy;

I just wanted to add that I had ‘whitelisted’ my IP at least a week or two prior to the trouble ─ I did so as soon as I noticed that the whitelisting feature was being offered, and my IP was being quoted for my convenience.

So something is quite bonkers.

Incidentally, I wish I knew what other plugin or feature is jacking my WordPress Dashboard editor field all over the place every few seconds, relocating text or images to the very top or very bottom of the field at the very instant that I’m trying to insert them; or constantly forcing an immediate ‘undo’ of highlighting and other behind-the-scenes editing I might be involved in.

But that’s a whole other story, isn’t it?

Evidently not, costaricaguide.

I had just logged into my Dashboard on a website with no issues (I had worked on it this morning) to check my Jetpack viewer statistics for the day, and then logged out.

But then I thought that I saw a specific post page in those statistics that looked askew, so I attempted to log back into my Dashboard ─ and got that infernal math question that was not there the first time.

‘0 + 9’ always equals ‘9,’ but that wasn’t good enough, and I got the line of error code.

From then on, I could not access my Dashboard.

Note that I was using Firefox.

I tried Explorer with the same result ─ the enforced math question was imposed that resulted once again in the line of error coding.

Finally ─ not wanting to have to bother with the deep end of deleting Jetpack from my website’s database ─ I used Chrome.

As a browser, I rarely activate it ─ not even once a month. So it sits rather dormant on my computer.

But that proved the ticket to get into my WordPress Dashboard.

I was able to disable ‘Protect’ from the features of Jetpack that I had previously activated.

Jab, the darned same thing happened to me this afternoon. Fortunately, I gave your suggestion a try, and it worked for me.

I didn’t deactivate all of my plugins, because some of them are just too troublesome to reactivate — they require setting up once again, or submission of passwords or licences.

However, whatever plugin culprit was responsible DID happen to be one of those I deactivated.

The experience was troubling because a week or so ago while amending a post on each of two different websites, the Visual editor failed. It would display nothing in the post editor on either website. And each time I tried to preview my new edited content, only the old content would display.

Since a couple of my plugins are special graphic-rich extras that require the blog editor to be in Visual for the customized buttons peculiar to these plugins to display, I was in a desperate fix. Much of the content of my posts include the fonts and special graphics that these plugins provide. I thus need to work in Visual, switching back and forth constantly from Visual to HTML.

But with that new problem, I had discovered that if I switched from HTML to Visual to see if anything would show up there, my amended HTML would be gone when I returned to HTML — only the old HTML I was trying to amend would be there.

Thankfully, the Firefox Lazarus add-on saved me the few times I made that switching misjudgment, for I would forget and inadvertently make a Visual switch. It was conditioning, I guess.

At the end of a long and wildly frustrating day, all I could do was save my new edited content for both posts onto a Desktop document, and hope that things righted themselves the following day.

Well, the next day, those two posts on the two different websites were still screwed up, but I found that I could edit normally on other posts. Visual worked fine. Somehow, each of those two posts on separate websites had become frozen with whatever the problem was that had plagued them on the previous day.

And no other posts of either website were suffering.

I had read of a similar issue in an old forum thread a year or two old, and one member said that the workaround for him was to open up a new edit field as if he was creating a new post. He transferred the HTML he had saved into this new field, then switched the editor to Visual to do the specialized graphic changes on content that he wanted. When that was done, he then switched back to HTML.

After that, he copied that HTML, and pasted it into the troublesome post he had been trying to edit. Since he knew that the content was now exactly what he wanted — he had been able to preview it in the new fake post’s editor — he simply published it.

Thankfully, this worked for the sick posts on both of my websites.

With all of that trouble so fresh in mind, today’s tribulation had me inordinately disturbed. I appreciate that you posted about it, and included your method of recovery.