Rule: do not present "two waves of indexing" as a literal current model — Google itself has called it an oversimplification; use it only as a teaching aid for why JS content can lag

Rule: Do not present "two waves of indexing" as a literal current model. Google itself has called it an oversimplification ("Two waves of indexing" — Google's Martin Splitt now calls it an oversimplification; "pretty much every website, when we see them for the first time, goes to rendering" and the waves "play less and less of a role"). The waves "play less and less of a role" and "pretty much every website, when we see them for the first time, goes to rendering."

Use the model only as a teaching aid for explaining why JS content can lag, never as a precise prediction of timing.

Why: Quoting "second wave" as fact dates Candid's thinking to 2018-era SEO and undermines credibility with technically-fluent clients. It also primes clients to expect JS pages to "automatically" be indexed later, which is not how the current pipeline works.

How to apply: If you reference it, frame as: "Google used to describe this as 'two waves of indexing,' but they've since walked that back — what actually happens is that JS-heavy content can wait in the render queue, and there's no published timing."