Removing Paginated URLs from Google Search I have a website running on Django, Python. I'm using django pagination so that users can click next &amp; see further content.  For example, my website is example.com, so when user requests new page it takes them to example.com/?page=2 &amp; example.com/?page=3 &amp; so on . . .  But, the problem is that google has indexed all the paginated webpages (?page=2, ?page=3, etc.) &amp; also showing the duplicate title error inside console.  So, I want to remove all the paginated webpages accept example.com from search results. I tried adding canonical tag &lt;link rel="canonical" href="https://www.example.com/" /&gt; &amp; then tried removing example.com/?page=2 page using console remover, but my request was denied &amp; the page is still there.  I was thinking about a solution, which is to add this code,  {% if not request.get_full_path is '/example.com/' %}     &lt;meta name="robots" content="noindex, follow"&gt; {% endif %}   But, this logic is not working as it should. The if statement is not working properly.  How we solve this problem? Thank You . . .
How to Remove URLs from Google Search Engine I have used so many things like url removal request and deleted the pages etc., but still the errors are shown in my webmaster tools.  How can I remove the urls completely from Google?
Get index of parent div from child divs Why does a lightsaber turn off when a Jedi dies or drops it? I rewatched the three newer movies and noticed that whenever a Jedi was killed, or let go of their lightsaber, it immediately turned off.  What was curious was that the lightsaber turns off right away, when a Jedi is killed, even before it leaves their hand (if it does fall out).  I could understand if the button needs to be held for it to stay on, but when a Jedi is shot and is still holding the lightsaber why would it turn off? Call java program from Node.js application How to use regex in String.contains() method in Java I stumbled across this relationship while I was messing around. What's the proof, and how do I understand it intuitively? It doesn't really make sense to me that the sum of odd numbers up to $2x + 1$ should equal $x^2$. How to fully delete a git repository created with init? Why images are blury when extracting image sequence from video clip? I have an issue when generating an image sequence from a video clip. Pictures 1,2,and 3 are three consecutive images from a video clip. Picture 4 is a close-up of the heel of one of them. The camera is on a tripod. As you can see there is no issue with the brick wall, but with any moving part there is. The camera is a Panasonic HDC-SD100. The clip is AVCHD 1920/1080. If I use VLC to extract the image sequence there is no issue. I use all the default settings except for the rendering resolution which I set to 100% and image compression to 0%. I have the issue with Blender 2.79b and 2.80. With this image issue it is impossible to do camera tracking. Any ideas what I need to do in order to solve this. Best regards. Prove that $\int f\ d\lambda = \int_{a}^{b} f(x)\ dx,$ for any $f \in \mathcal R[a,b].$ Theorem $:$ Let $f : [a,b] \longrightarrow \Bbb R$ be a Riemann integrable function. Then $f \in L_1[a,b]$ and $$\int f\ d\lambda = \int_{a}^{b} f(x)\ dx.$$  The proof given in my book is as follows $:$     At the fag end of the proof $f$ has been proved to be measurable which uses the completeness of the measure space $\left ([a,b], \mathcal L \cap [a,b], \lambda |_{[a,b]} \right ).$ Then it has been stated that $f \leq \Phi_n,$ $\forall$ $n$ and hence $f \in L_1[a,b]$ since $\Phi_n \in L_1[a,b]$ by the proposition $5.4.3 \ $(i) which states the following $:$  Let $f \in \Bbb L$ and $g \in L_1[a,b].$ If $|f(x)| \leq g(x)$ for a.e. $x(\mu).$ Then $f \in L_1[a,b].$  I don't know how to use this proposition to claim that $f \in L_1[a,b].$ Also I don't understand the way dominated convergence theorem used here. What I know about dominated convergence theorem is as follows $:$  Let $(X, \mathcal S, \mu)$ be a complete measure space. Let $g \in L_1(X)$ and $\{f_n \}_{n \geq 1}$ be a sequence in $\Bbb L$ such that $|f_n(x)| \leq g(x)$ a.e. $x(\mu).$ Let $f_n(x) \to f(x)$ as $n \to \infty$ a.e. $x (\mu).$ Then $f \in L_1(X)$ and $$\int f\ d\mu = \lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \int f_n\ d\mu.$$  From here how to conclude that $$\Psi_n\ \bigg\uparrow\ f \implies \int f\ d\lambda = \lim\limits_{n \to \infty} \int \Psi_n\ d\lambda.$$ Please help me in this regard. Thanks in advance. jsp:useBean scope I am carrying out research to look at differences in fish density and fish species richness when using two different underwater visual census methods. My data was originally count data but then typically this is changed to fish density but I have still decided to use a Poisson GLM, which I hope is right.   model1 &lt;- glm(g_den ~ method + site + depth, poisson)   My 3 predictor variables are method, site and depth which I ordered as factors when I input them.   My response variables are grouper species richness, grouper density and the same for other fish groups. I am aware that density is not an integer and it is numerical data e.g 1.34849. I am now however getting this error:      In dpois(y, mu, log = TRUE) : non-integer x = 0.037500   I've been reading up and many people suggest using an offset, is this the most advisable thing to do? How to compute the  formula $\sum  \limits_{r=1}^d r \cdot 2^r$? How to properly set up a PDO connection How much Valyrian steel is there that is unused for link making and why aren't people making weapons out of it? Parenthesis vs brackets for matrices When I first learned linear algebra, both the professor and the book used brackets like [ and ] to enclose matrices. However, in my current differential equations textbook, matrices are enclosed by parenthesis, and I suddenly realize everybody else are using them too.  So are brackets/parenthesis for enclosing matrices always totally interchangeable? Teenage girl in life-sustaining valley on poisoned Earth visited by another survivor Unable to set DYLD_FALLBACK_LIBRARY_PATH in shell on OSX 10.11.1 In shell scripts used for unit testing with dynamic libraries in a directory other than the typical @rpath, I have previously been able to set DYLD_FALLBACK_LIBRARY_PATH to set the directory containing the libraries. Under 10.11.1, bash seems to ignore attempts to set this environment variable:  $ sh -x testscript.sh + DYLD_FALLBACK_LIBRARY_PATH=/Users/something/testinglibs + export DYLD_FALLBACK_LIBRARY_PATH + exec printenv   and DYLD_FALLBACK_LIBRARY_PATH is not present in printenv's output.  Is this a security-related hack in 10.11's shell? I haven't been able to find this change documented in man pages or online. This is something I've been curious about since starting this whole 'meta' thing a couple years back.     Let's say a user posts a feature request.   Under what circumstances is the feature-request read by staff? If staff decline to do anything (I'd guess it's some sort of triage), under what circumstances is the feature-request reevaluated by staff?     Let's say a user posts a bug.    Under what circumstances is the bug tested? What generally determines whether a verified bug is actionable? (And/or what are the criterion for deciding what to do?)     For both of the above, would it be possible to see a general-but-relatively-detailed flow for what happens to these questions? I want to delete the record type which is default to the some profiles Record Type *Record Type Label    Sales Order *Record Type Name     Sales_Order  Namespace Prefix Description  Active        This record type Sales Order cannot be deactivated because the   following profiles use this record type as default.  This record type Sales Order cannot be deactivated because it is used by the following Objects.      Profiles- System Administrator, Standard User, CC_Customer Community   Plus Login Admin CC_Customer Community Plus Login User   CC_Marketing_Profile CC_Sales_Profile Chatter External User Chatter   Free User Chatter Moderator User Customer Community Plus Login User   Customer Community Plus User Deployment Manager Profile Read Only   Solution Manager Marketing User Contract Manager Pardot Sync User   Profile Objects CC_PO_Update Test_Utility   CC_CreateSalesOrderController_Test Geometric intuition of improper integrals I am aware that the area under the curve of $\frac{1}{x}$ is infinite yet the area under the curve of $\frac{1}{x^2}$ is finite.   Calculus and series wise, I understand what is going on, but I can't seem to get a good geometric intuition of the problem. Both curves can be shown to converge to $0$ (the curves themselves, not the area), and on the interval from $1$ to infinity, the two curves have nothing intrinsically different. Can someone please provide me with an good geometric intuition of what's going on? I can't find anything on the web, people seem to not want to explain it geometrically. Using proof by contradiction vs proof of the contrapositive